The Biden administration is spending too much on SNAP and is unwilling to restrict access to food stamps, farm-state Republicans told Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack on Tuesday. They called for stricter work requirements for SNAP and said, without evidence, that millions of migrants might be receiving benefits. “Absurd,” responded Vilsack.
SNAP is a perennial lightning rod, especially with Congress due to overhaul farm and food policy this year. The Congressional Budget Office estimates SNAP will cost $120 billion a year, and the two major farm income supports— commodity subsidies and crop insurance—would cost $16 billion a year during the life of the farm bill.
During a House Agriculture Committee hearing, Republicans said “production agriculture,” meaning large-scale operators practicing conventional agriculture, would receive an unfairly small portion of farm bill spending compared to a growing share for SNAP. “Do you think less than 12 percent of farm bill spending should go to agriculture?” asked Rep. Austin Scott of Georgia.
The arguments illuminated a looming clash over SNAP in the 2023 farm bill. House Republicans tried unsuccessfully in the 2014 and 2018 farm bills to slash SNAP spending or enrollment. Senate Agriculture chairwoman Debbie Stabenow has said she will not accept SNAP rollbacks in the new farm bill.
“It’s too bad we want to penalize people for being poor,” said Rep. Alma Adams, North Carolina Democrat, referring to Republican proposals to rein in SNAP. South Dakota Rep. Dusty Johnson, an Agriculture Committee member, is the sponsor of a bill to expand the number of people facing a 90-day limit on SNAP benefits if they cannot prove they work at least 20 hours a week, and to eliminate state waivers of the 90-day limit because of insufficient jobs in a region.
The growing prominence of SNAP in farm bill outlays reflects divergent trends in the economy in the past couple of years, wrote Purdue associate professor Roman Keeney in January. Farm subsidy spending is down because of high commodity prices and record-high net farm income in 2021 and 2022. Meanwhile, SNAP enrollment rose during the pandemic and Congress approved an emergency increase in benefits, which expired this month.
“The performance of the economy and the increasing economic stress on households at the low-income margin in the past two years has changed the shape of the farm bill spending pie,” said Keeney.
The Republican focus on the share of farm bill money for farm subsidies obscured the generally strong financial standing of the sector. Production costs are forecast to be the highest ever this year, however, and commodity markets are volatile in part because of Russia’s invasion of Ukraine. Farmers received tens of billions of dollars in trade war and pandemic relief payments since 2019.
Republicans Scott DesJarlais of Tennessee and Barry Moore of Alabama contended that millions of people illegally receive SNAP benefits, although they acknowledged they could not prove it because they were waiting for federal data. “I think it’s fair to say 10 to 20 percent of SNAP benefits” go to migrants, said DesJarlais. Moore said the figure was 5 million people. They pointed to figures showing 5 million people illegally crossed the U.S.-Mexico border since President Biden took office. There are a dozen exceptions, including people seeking asylum, to the general ban on food stamps for non-citizens, so there must be millions of people receiving SNAP illegally, they said.
Vilsack said it was “absurd” to suggest 5 million of the 41 million SNAP recipients were illegal migrants. Undocumented immigrants are not eligible for SNAP. Asylum seekers are legal entrants and by law are eligible, he said. “We would know (if) 5 million” SNAP recipients are asylum seekers, he said.
The USDA says research found the SNAP participation rate among eligible non-citizen households was 51 percent compared to 67 percent among eligible households nationwide in 2008.
To watch a video of the hearing or to read Vilsack’s written testimony, click here.