After a two-week recess, Congress is set to continue budget reconciliation discussions in May 2025, with the goal of cutting $1.5 trillion in federal spending. One of the things Congress is considering is how exactly it will propose to cut basic needs programs, like the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The program provides monthly grocery assistance to households who cannot afford to put food on the table because they live on fixed incomes or are paid low wages, have lost jobs, or are experiencing health issues.
Despite the effectiveness of SNAP, one of the specific cuts that Congress is considering would require states to start paying a share of the cost of monthly SNAP benefits that go to eligible households. If the state cannot afford to pay its share and does not raise revenue to make up the funding gap, Florida’s only alternative would be to restrict eligibility, cut SNAP benefits, reduce funding for other important programs, or pass along the cost to towns, cities, or counties.
Cutting SNAP would be devastating to Floridians already struggling to make ends meet. Over 2.9 million Floridians participate in SNAP. Their benefits average a modest $6.12 a day, which — although a life saver — does not go very far to meet families’ nutritional needs. The people who would be hit hardest hit by cuts to the program are children and seniors, who respectively make up 41 percent and 25 percent of the state’s entire SNAP caseload; the 243,000 SNAP households containing a member who has a disability; and the 99,000 veterans in Florida who also participate in the program. Not only does the program protect Floridians from hunger — SNAP also keeps many people out of poverty. The program helps Floridians afford a more nutritious diet, promotes both short- and long-term better health, reduces health care costs, and supports workers in low-paying jobs.
In addition, cutting SNAP would hurt state and local economies. For every $1 that Floridians spend in SNAP benefits, more than $1.50 in economic activity is generated. (This “multiplier effect” helps support stores and farmers markets in neighborhoods where households buy their groceries, particularly after hurricanes or in recessions, when SNAP helps stabilize a distressed economy.) In 2023, Floridians participating in SNAP spent nearly $7.2 billion in benefits at over 15,148 local stores — including many small businesses — throughout the state.
Despite the effectiveness of SNAP, one of the specific cuts that Congress is considering would require states to start paying a share of the cost of monthly SNAP benefits that go to eligible households. If the state cannot afford to pay its share and does not raise revenue to make up the funding gap, Florida’s only alternative would be to restrict eligibility, cut SNAP benefits, reduce funding for other important programs, or pass along the cost to towns, cities, or counties. This is a radical departure from the way benefits are funded now. Since SNAP first started in 1964 as the Food Stamp Program, the federal government has always covered 100 percent of the cost of monthly grocery benefits that go to households, while states have only been required to pay half of the administrative costs.
Congress has not said exactly how much they may force states to pay for SNAP benefits; however, reports indicate that the House Agriculture Committee could consider phasing in a mandate that would require states to pay up to 22.5 percent of monthly SNAP benefit costs by FY 2026. For Florida, this means that the state would owe $1.641 billion by 2036 in order to maintain existing benefit levels.
A better economy and a healthier Florida depend on protecting and strengthening SNAP, not imposing unfunded mandates and insurmountable cuts.
Depending on how the cost-share requirement is structured, federal funding would decrease proportionally. For example, if the state could only afford to cover $1 billion of the cost, the state would be forced to make a 40 percent cut to SNAP benefits. If the state could only afford to put in $750 million, Florida would have to cut SNAP benefits by 55 percent, while a match of $250 million by the state would require it to slash benefits by 85 percent. (See Tables 1a and 1b.)
It is still too soon to know whether or not Congress will impose a cost shift of 22.5 percent (or more) or how it would be phased in. However, Florida will be hit hard no matter how much of the cost Congress decides to pass to states. Even if Congress implemented a cost share of only 10 percent of SNAP benefits, Florida would have to pay roughly $657 million in FY 2026 — which is more than what the state spent on affordable housing in FY 2024-25. Florida cannot absorb additional costs of this magnitude, as state economists have already predicted a $2.8 billion deficit by FY 2026-27.
Unfortunately, cost sharing is not the only cut Congress is thinking about making to SNAP. Some of the other proposals on the table include:
- Reversing the update to the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP) made in 2021 by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which resulted in a slight, yet much-needed, increase in SNAP benefits of between $12 and $16 per person per month.
- Expanding unnecessary work requirements to some of SNAP’s most vulnerable participants who experience significant barriers — such as seniors, veterans, youth who have aged out of foster care, and people experiencing homelessness.
With the rising cost of living, federal lawmakers should not be considering any cut to SNAP in the upcoming reconciliation bill, let alone a massive one. Instead, Congress should improve the program by preserving eligibility and increasing benefits to a level that allows SNAP recipients to put healthy food on the table for every meal. A better economy and a healthier Florida depend on protecting and strengthening SNAP, not imposing unfunded mandates and insurmountable cuts.
