The Big Beautiful Bill anything but when it comes to food aid

With less than three weeks until two key provisions of the Big Beautiful Bill kick in, there is considerable anxiety over their wisdom and likely effects.

Republicans have a solid case for letting pandemic era boosts in Affordable Care Act subsidies expire on Jan. 1, a provision emphasized by Democrats in 2021 when lobbying for the boosts. There is undisputed evidence that about one-third of the boosted subsidies have gone to people with incomes above 400% of the poverty level, and in some cases to households with incomes of more than $500,000. Because of how complex federal tax law works, these subsidies have supersized insurance company profits. In June, Bloomberg also reported on the illicit ways many insurance brokers are gaming the system, taking billions from taxpayers.

Contrary to the claim that allowing the subsidies to expire would hammer many of the 24 million people who use Obamacare, the federal government will still pay for more than 80% of the insurance premium for the average enrollee.

But the GOP case for pending changes in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is much weaker. Each month, nearly 42 million Americans rely on “food stamps.” While there is some waste in states which poorly administer SNAP, there is no evidence of fraud on the scale seen with Obamacare.

Nevertheless, such claims were used to justify major changes to SNAP eligibility, work requirements, benefit levels and administrative rules. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates the changes will lead to 2.4 million fewer people getting food aid in an average month.

But the estimate is based on an assumption that fairness will guide how the new rules are interpreted. This ignores the Trump administration’s determination to cut spending on unfavored programs by any means necessary. This has been on display with edicts on Medicaid eligibility, disaster aid, academic research funding, environmental grants and federal housing subsidies since Donald Trump returned to office in January. Will 2.4 million people lose food aid they rely on — or 5 million?

Because of what J.P. Morgan sees as the 35% chance that the U.S. will enter a recession in 2026, a point the Brookings Institution has made is particularly relevant. By tightening eligibility and reducing automatic benefit expansions, the changes will “greatly diminish or end SNAP’s critical role as a national automatic stabilizer [during] deteriorating or poor economic conditions.” In coming months, alas, we may find out if this grim prediction comes true.