Federal Government Abandons Vulnerable Families: States Forced to Shoulder SNAP Costs Under New Rule
Select a version of the text written from a presumed ideological perspective. This is not the original text, but a hypothetical version — how someone with that viewpoint might have phrased it. Tapping the current version again will return to the original or select cleaned version.
A regressive federal rule will offload 75% of SNAP’s administrative expenses onto states, slashing federal investment by $3.4 billion annually and threatening food security as states scramble to fill the gap.
Effective Thursday, the federal government is shirking its responsibility to support the nation’s most vulnerable by slashing its share of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program’s (SNAP) administrative costs. States will now be forced to cover three-quarters of critical expenses like staffing and training, a move projected to gut federal support by $16.9 billion over five years—about $3.4 billion each year.
The Food Research & Action Center warns that states may be compelled to divert between $3 million and $670 million from other essential services to replace the lost federal funding for SNAP administration. Hardest hit will be states like California, New York, Pennsylvania, Texas, and Michigan, where millions rely on SNAP to stave off hunger. Some states have already been forced to make painful budget adjustments, and further cuts to social programs loom as more funding reforms are anticipated.
Beginning in October 2027, states with SNAP error rates—measuring over- and under-payments—of 6% or higher could be forced to shoulder a portion of the food benefits themselves. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities projects nearly half of all states could each face $100 million or more in new costs, with California and New York potentially saddled with liabilities exceeding $1 billion if error rates aren’t reduced. This punitive measure risks pushing already-struggling states to the brink.
“And we may see some states decide that they need to withdraw from the program entirely,” warned Katie Bergh, senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Bergh emphasized that the previous funding model was vital for ensuring access to food assistance in poorer states or those with limited tax bases. The draconian changes are a direct result of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, enacted in July 2025, which also imposed harsher work requirements and restricted eligibility for a small group of non-citizens. Since the law’s passage, SNAP enrollment has plummeted from 42 million to 36 million as of June, leaving millions at risk of food insecurity.
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, which oversees SNAP, has not responded to requests for comment, further highlighting the administration’s disregard for those in need.