Putting Tribal Sovereignty
WASGINGTON – The Senate Agriculture Committee released an updated Farm Bill text over the weekend that would delay new cost-sharing requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The Committee is marking up the legislation on Thursday.
Under the One Big Beautiful Bill Act (OBBBA), which was signed into law last year, states would be newly responsible for sharing the cost of SNAP benefits, beginning in Oct. 2027. The state’s cost-share percentage is dependent on the state’s SNAP payment error rates. States with an error rate of 6% or higher will pay 5-15% of the cost of SNAP benefits.
The updated Senate Farm Bill text includes a one-year delay of the SNAP benefits cost share. However, it also significantly increases the cost-share percentage for states with the highest error rates from 15% to 20%. This proposal does not align with calls from Senate Democrats and hunger and public health advocates, state and local leaders, and others for at least a two-year delay to allow states to meaningfully reduce payment error rates.
Currently, the average payment error rate across the country is 10.6%. Unless new legislation amends existing law, 41 states will be required to pay between tens and hundreds of million annually in additional costs. In the last year, states have only reduced error rates by an average 0.31 percentage points, despite new investments in technology, policies, and data analytics to reduce error rates. Reducing error rates is a highly technical, complex process that takes time. Recent changes to eligibility requirements, the departure of over 30% of staff at USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), and the ongoing FNS reorganization will likely make it harder for states to quickly reduce error rates.
Impact of SNAP changes on Indian Country
One in four American Indians and Alaska Natives face food insecurity. Over one million participate in SNAP. Even with a one-year delay, the SNAP benefits cost-share requirement will strain state budgets. States will likely need to tighten eligibility requirements, enhance income verification processes that may delay approval of benefits, and shift resources from other programs.
According to a survey conducted by the American Public Human Services Association (APHSA), 42% of surveyed states said they are at risk or freezing or reducing hiring. The loss of these staff may result in states closing SNAP offices in more rural or remote areas, making it harder for Tribal members to verify eligibility and receive benefits. It may also make it harder for Tribal citizens to switch to the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). Individuals cannot simultaneously participate in FDPIR and SNAP. To switch from SNAP to FDPIR, a Tribal citizen must first disenroll from SNAP and receive a decertification letter. If they don’t, they, or the Tribal organization administrating FDPIR, can be penalized. Delays in this process due to SNAP staffing shortages could leave Tribal citizens without nutrition assistance.
States may also consider pausing or withdrawing from SNAP entirely due to the cost. In such cases, Tribes have limited options. The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, which authorizes SNAP, has a limited pathway for Indian Tribal Organizations (ITOs) to assume administration of SNAP if USDA determines that state agencies have failed to administer SNAP on Indian reservations. An ITO would likely be able to petition to assume SNAP administration if a state withdraws from SNAP or significantly pulls back services on Indian reservations. However, the ITO would likely be subject to the same cost-share requirements for both administrative costs and SNAP benefits as the state, which would be prohibitive for more Tribes. USDA would also need to to make a determination of state failure, a determination which could see delays due the USDA’s current staffing losses.
In addition, Tribes located in states that administer SNAP through counties will likely be disproportionately impacted. In nine states, including states with significant Tribal citizen populations such as California, Minnesota, North Carolina, North Dakota, and Wisconsin, counties administer SNAP and are partially or fully responsible for the cost of state administration. OBBBA increased the administrative cost share for states from 50% to 75%, and many states are passing that cost on to counties. As a result, counties with the highest SNAP participation rates — and the highest poverty rate — will be hit with the larger SNAP bills.
Counties receive most of their funding from states and property taxes. As funding from states dry up, counties will increasingly rely on property tax and other revenue streams. Counties with significant amounts of land held in trust for Tribes will have more limited opportunities to raise revenue. These counties may need additional support for the state to continue services or may otherwise need to shift limited resources from other programs to pay for SNAP.
Other changes in the Senate Farm Bill
In addition to changes to the SNAP cost share, the updated Farm Bill would allow year-round sale of E15, a gasoline blend that contains a higher percentage of ethanol. It otherwise makes several small changes that may be of interest in Indian Country:
Title II – Conservation
- Expands the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) to include certain types of wildlife habitat restoration and protection activities.
- Expands priority resource concerns to include a new priority for wildlife habitat connectivity and wildlife habitat migration corridors that are used by native big game species, including deer, elk, and moose.
Title IV – Nutrition
- Requires USDA to establish a streamlined vendor application for direct marketing producers to participate in SNAP; the Senior Farmers’ Market Nutrition Program; the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC); and the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP). This change could make it easier for smaller producers, including Tribal producers, to find market opportunities for their products in federal nutrition programs and increase community access to locally produced foods.
Title VII – Research and Extension
- Allows Tribal Colleges and Universities (TCUs) to use funds for agricultural extension activities for acquiring, maintaining, and operating equipment that strengthens the TCU’s capacity to provide extension services. TCUs are significantly underfunded and have limited resources for equipment purchases. While this increased flexibility is positive, without a concomitant increase in funding, TCUs will remain under-resourced.
Title XII – Miscellaneous
- Requires USDA to establish a fertilizer price and market reporting system to provide regular, public updates on the price and production of fertilizer. The cost of inputs, include fertilizer, has increased significantly due to conflicts in Iran, straining farmer finances.
What’s next?
The Senate Agriculture Committee is holding a markup on August 6 at 9:30 am ET. It remains unclear if the updated Farm Bill text has the votes to advance out of committee. With Republican Committee member Sen. Mitch McConnell (R-KY)’s continued absence from the Senate, the Committee needs at least one Democrat member to support the updated legislation. The one-year delay of the SNAP benefits cost-share may not be sufficient to win Democrat support.
If the legislation advances, it still faces an uphill battle to final passage. Congress has a tight legislative calendar this fall with a number of other competing priorities, including federal funding, voter registration and election security legislation, and a potential third reconciliation bill to fund the Iran war. House Agriculture Chair G.T. Thompson (R-Penn.) has expressed support for the updated Senate Farm Bill text but supports inclusion of several controversial provisions on pesticide regulation and animal welfare that may threaten the bill’s final passage.
Congress last passed the farm bill in 2018. If legislators are unable to reach an agreement, they will need to pass another one-year extension of the 2018 bill’s authorities — the fourth one-year extension in as many years.