Trump’s ‘big, beautiful bill’ in jeopardy as GOP chairs refuse food assistance cuts

President Donald Trump’s ambitious “big, beautiful bill,” which includes tax cuts, immigration reform, and defense spending, is facing strong opposition from within the Republican Party, putting its chances of ing at risk. The main disagreement centers around proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps.

Key Republican leaders are refusing to legislation that would reduce SNAP benefits, which could disrupt the party’s larger budget plans. House Agriculture Committee Chairman Glenn Thompson, a Republican from Pennsylvania, and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman John Boozman, a Republican from Arkansas, have both clearly stated they oppose cutting SNAP benefits.

This position goes against the party’s goal of making large spending cuts, which are necessary to use a special budget process called reconciliation that would allow them to avoid a Democratic filibuster in the Senate. The Republican budget plan calls for $230 billion in savings, but Thompson has said his committee cannot reach that target by cutting SNAP.

House republicans propose significant overhaul of snap food aid in Trump mega-bill

While Thompson has rejected cuts to current SNAP benefits, he has suggested limiting the President’s power to expand benefits without approval from Congress. This idea, which could save $30 billion over ten years, is a compromise but still faces major resistance. A bigger disagreement involves President Biden’s 2021 decision to increase food assistance without Congress by changing the Thrifty Food Plan (TFP), which is used to calculate SNAP benefits.

Some budget-focused Republicans want to completely undo Biden’s change, which could save $274 billion over ten years, but Thompson and Boozman have also rejected this idea.

The conflict within the Republican Party goes beyond just the debate over benefit amounts. Some lawmakers have proposed restricting what people can buy with SNAP benefits. For example, some House Republicans have introduced bills to ban purchases of items like soda and candy.

However, Chairman Thompson disagrees with these measures, arguing that the government should not control how people spend their benefits. He points to research showing that SNAP recipients often use a mix of their own money and SNAP benefits, with SNAP funds going toward healthier choices.

The House Republicans’ proposed changes to SNAP go much further than just limiting future benefit increases. They are considering raising the age at which recipients must meet work requirements, which would affect able-bodied adults with children as young as seven years old.

This change alone could save at least $40 billion. They are also looking at shifting some of the financial burden to states, possibly requiring them to pay up to 25 percent of benefits over ten years, though a revised plan might phase this in more slowly and focus on states with higher error rates. However, this cost-sharing idea has faced strong pushback from some moderate Republicans who worry about the impact on their states.