Defunding SNAP Is a Thoroughly Stupid Move

The decision is economically ruinous, and the fallout will be disastrous

By Danielle Han  |  July 29, 2025 | 12:01pm
Photo: iStockphoto In DepthPolitics
Defunding SNAP Is a Thoroughly Stupid Move

It’s been less than a month since the Big Beautiful Bill slithered its way through Trump’s truckling trifecta on Capitol Hill–but essential welfare programs are already bracing for impact. Among cuts to Medicaid and healthcare, the legislation also reportedly includes the worst-ever setback to the country’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)–a devastating upset for the millions of Americans who face food insecurity. 

SNAP benefits began in 1939 as a way of tackling food surplus and rising unemployment. The program has since become a bipartisan effort: food stamps are widely used, with some 12.5% of the U.S. population relying on them in 2023. And, ahead of budget talks in February, 112 mayors drafted an open letter to congressional leaders pleading that they spare SNAP from their dogged anti-spend offensive.

Alas, the reconciliation bill has ripped its way into existence, and SNAP is set to be cut by a whopping 30%. Immigrants and refugees will be excluded from the eligibility list, and applicants will have to meet more stringent work requirements with tougher age limits. “At a time when food insecurity is rising nationwide, this legislation threatens to worsen the crisis,” said Feeding America CEO Claire Babineaux-Fontenot, at the time of the bill’s passing.

The new rules will also disproportionately affect women and single mothers, who make up about 55% of non-elderly SNAP recipients and nearly two-thirds of SNAP households, respectively. In a study published by Georgetown Law’s Center on Poverty and Inequality, the bill will “[amount] to one of the largest transfers of resources from low-income families to the wealthy in history, and it will hit women and children the hardest.”

The fallout will be messy, with changes impacting 22.3 million families, who are expected to lose some–or all–of their food-stamp privileges as a result, according to the Urban Institute. And those who face higher food insecurity may be susceptible to chronic medical conditions–as well as serious consequences to their health and well-being. 

The decision’s also economically ruinous. SNAP spending has, in the past, been revealed to increase GDP, create more jobs, and further generate farmers’ incomes. Every dollar spent on the program generates $1.54 to benefit local economies. But now, many of America’s small independent grocers who rely on SNAP (and, once, relied on Donald Trump) are having to anticipate a loss in profit, and retailers in rural counties are especially at risk.

While millions of Americans are worrying about their access to nutritious, fulfilling food, I’m compelled to compare their image to that of Donald Trump gallivanting across Scotland and promoting his golf course (whose restaurant’s cheapest main course, by the way, is ​​£42, or $56). And truly, I can’t believe how gross the disparity is.

Like what you just read? You’ve got great taste. Subscribe to Jezebel, and for $5 a month or $50 a year, you’ll get access to a bunch of subscriber benefits, including getting to read the next article (and all the ones after that) ad-free. Plus, you’ll be supporting independent journalism—which, can you even imagine not supporting independent journalism in times like these? Yikes.

 
Join the discussion...