The Trump administration proposal for stricter SNAP eligibility rules will “cut off millions of needy households from basic food aid” and should be withdrawn, said the American Medical Association, the largest U.S. doctors’ group, on Monday.
Fifteen Democratic senators, including all Democrats on the Senate Agriculture Committee, which oversees the food stamp program, also called for withdrawal of the SNAP proposal.
When he unveiled the plan in July, Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue said “some states are taking advantage of a loophole,” so-called categorical eligibility, to load SNAP rolls. Congress rejected stricter rules when it passed the 2018 farm bill. The USDA says its proposal is within the discretion granted by Congress for operating SNAP. Some 3.1 million people, or 8 percent of SNAP participants, would lose benefits under the proposal.
Monday was the final day for public comment on the SNAP proposal. Under the government’s rule-making process, the USDA is obliged to consider public comments as it decides whether to proceed with a proposed regulation. More than 75,000 comments were filed, according to regulations.gov. Besides changes to categorical eligibility, often called “cat el” for short, the administration has proposed more stringent enforcement of the 90-day limit on food stamps for able-bodied adults who do not work at least 20 hours a week.
“In proposing to curtail (categorical eligibility), the administration is trying to do by executive fiat what Congress rejected in last year’s farm bill,” said the American Medical Association in a two-page statement. “The proposed rule would significantly narrow this policy and cut off millions of needy households from basic food aid; children in families that lose their SNAP benefits would also lose access to free lunches and breakfasts as school, although the administration failed to include the impact of their proposal on such children in the proposed rule’s regulatory impact analysis.”
In briefing congressional staff workers, USDA officials said at least 500,000 children would lose access to school meals, said the Democratic senators. They said USDA’s analysis of the SNAP proposal is “seriously flawed,” in part because it does not consider the impact on children. When a household receives food stamps, its children automatically are eligible for free or reduced-price school meals.
When the issue arose in July, the USDA said it was modifying SNAP rules, not school meals rules. “The proposed rule does not in any way modify the school meals eligibility standards. It is Congress’s job to write those eligibility standards and USDA’s job to ensure they are carried out with integrity. Instead, this proposed rule ensures SNAP benefits go to those who meet the eligibility criteria as outlined by Congress.”
“Some states would see as much as 18 percent of its SNAP households lose access to food assistance,” wrote the senators in a letter to Perdue. “The proposed rule would impose new paperwork burdens on 69 percent of current SNAP participants and increase churn, or eligible individuals losing and regaining benefits in a short amount of time, by 26 percent, creating the risk that families in need will lose access to food because of paperwork errors or barriers.”
Forty states employ categorical eligibility, created during welfare reform in 1996 to streamline administration of social assistance programs. Under “cat el,” people who are eligible for social assistance automatically can be considered for food stamps. The usual assets limits for SNAP do not apply to these applicants, but they must have a low enough income under SNAP calculations to qualify for benefits. Critics, often political conservatives, say states find ways, such as handing out brochures or allowing high gross incomes, to qualify people for “cat el” without actually providing welfare assistance to them. “Too often, states have misused this flexibility without restraint,” said Perdue in July.
The administration would restrict “cat el” to those who receive substantial and ongoing welfare assistance. The threshold would be $50 a month, with aid guaranteed for six months. Three types of non-cash assistance would be accepted – subsidized work programs, child care assistance and work supports.
For a USDA summary of its proposal and related materials, click here.