Democrats pick fight over how GOP's SNAP change hits states
Legislation passed out of the GOP-led Congress on Thursday that could see some states pay a share of benefit costs for SNAP, also known as the food stamps program, for the first time.
The federal government currently covers the cost of benefits, but under the plan that's been tossed around by congressional Republicans over the past few months, some states would have to cover anywhere between 5 percent and 15 percent of the benefits costs if they have a payment error rate above 6 percent — which factors in over-and-underpayments.
However, changes were made to the text that allowed delayed implementation for the cost-share requirements for states with the highest error rates shortly before its passage in the Senate this week. GOP leadership sought to lock down support from Alaska Sens. Lisa Murkowski and Dan Sullivan, whose state had the highest payment error rate in the country in fiscal year 2024.
Sen. John Hoeven (R-N.D.), a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said Republicans made the change to comply with chamber rules.
'You have to give those states time to adjust because about all they're going to do is get down to that midrange, and then they're still going to have to pay a penalty because they're so high,' he said. 'So, it's about giving states a fair chance to adjust.'
Under the plan that was greenlit by Congress on Thursday, some states would begin contributing a share of benefit costs in fiscal year 2028, depending on their payment error rate. But the plan also allows for delayed implementation for two years for states with payment error rates if they reach around 13.34 percent or higher — an effort Republicans say is aimed at providing states like Alaska with much higher rates to bring them down.
Hoeven said the GOP-led agriculture committee, which crafted the SNAP pitch, 'came up with a lot of proposals' trying to comply with restrictive rules governing a special process that Republicans used to approve the plan in the upper chamber without Democratic support. Under the rules, Hoeven said, 'they always said you got to give states time to adjust in order to meet the test.'
Republicans say the overall proposal is aimed at incentivizing states to reduce erroneous payments. But Democrats have sharply criticized the plan, arguing it would encourage states with higher error rates to continue making erroneous payments.
'The most absurd example of the hypocrisy of the Republican bill: they have now proposed delaying SNAP cuts FOR TWO YEARS ONLY FOR STATES with the highest error rates just to bury their help for Alaska: AK, DC, FL, GA, MD, MA, NJ, NM, NY, OR. They are rewarding errors,' Sen. Amy Klobuchar (Minn.), top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture Committee, wrote this week as she sounded off in a series of posts on X over the plan.
In another swipe at the plan, Sen. Brian Schatz (D-Hawaii) wrote on X that he had to text his state's governor that 10 states with 'the MOST ERRORS in administering the program' are 'exempt from food assistance cuts,' at that Hawaii is not exempt because the governor has done 'good work in reducing the error rate by 15 percent.'
The comments come as Democrats and advocates have argued the measure could lead to states having to cut benefits because of the shift in cost burden.
Recent figures unveiled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) showed Alaska's payment error rate hit 24.66 percent in fiscal year 2024. The national average was 10.93 percent.
Murkowski said after the vote that she didn't 'like' the bill but sought to 'to take care of Alaska's interests.' But she also said she knew 'that, in many parts of the country, there are Americans that are not going to be advantaged by this bill.'
'I don't like the fact that we moved through an artificial deadline, an artificial timeline to produce something, to meet a deadline, rather than to actually try to produce the best bill for the country,' she said. 'But when I saw the direction that this is going, you can either say, 'I don't like it and not try to help my state,' or you can roll up your sleeves.'
Republicans also criticized Democrats for challenging a previous GOP-crafted SNAP provision that sought to provide more targeted help to Alaska, as GOP leadership sought to win Murkowski's support for the bill, which ultimately passed the Senate in a tie-breaking vote. However, Democrats opposed previously proposed waivers for the noncontiguous states of Alaska and Hawaii, decrying 'special treatment.'
In remarks on Wednesday, House Agriculture Chairman Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) the Senate 'had to add something to get to address that challenge that Alaska has.'
'The goal is, from a functionality perspective, they need to get their error rate down as soon as possible, because when the time comes, and they have to start to pay, they don't want to be that high error rate that you're coming in now,' he said.
'In most states, Alaska would be a challenge, I think, but most states have been under 6 percent at one time in past years,' he said.
However, he also wasn't 'crazy about' work requirements exemptions for some Indigenous populations in the Senate's version of Trump's megabill that didn't appear in the House bill, as Republicans seek to tighten work requirements.
'It's what the Senate had to do,' he said, though he noted that 'economic conditions are challenging on those sovereign lands and in high unemployment, high poverty.'
It's unclear whether the carve-outs were the result of talks Alaska senators had with GOP leadership around SNAP in the days leading up to the Senate passage. The Hill has reached out to their offices for comment.
The Alaska Department of Labor and Workforce Development said Alaska has 'one of the largest indigenous populations in the nation,' with Alaska Natives representing 17 percent of the state in 2010.
At the same time, the Senate bill nixed temporary exemptions that had been preserved in the House bill for former foster youth, homeless individuals and veterans.
Despite being preserved in the House plan, Thompson criticized the carve-outs, which were secured as part of a previous bipartisan deal in 2023.
'It cheats all those individuals from having access to that to us funding their SNAP Employment and career and technical education, because the whole goal here is to raise these people out of poverty if they're struggling in poverty, because that's how you qualify for SNAP,' he said. 'And the fact is, they were made ineligible for the really great benefits.'
Other proposals in the party's SNAP plan seek to limit the federal government's ability to increase monthly benefits in the future, changes to work requirements and include a chunk of farm provisions.
The plan comes as Republicans sought to find ways to generate north of $1 trillion in savings of federal dollars over the next decade as part of a major package that also advances President Trump's tax agenda, which is estimated to add trillions of dollars to the nation's deficits.
Republicans say the proposed spending reductions, which are achieved also through changes to programs like Medicaid, are aimed at rooting out 'waste, fraud and abuse' in the federal government.
But preliminary research released this week by the Urban Institute found that just the SNAP changes could affect about 22 million families, who researchers said could be at risk of 'losing some or all of their SNAP benefits' under the plan.
Asked if last-minute changes to the plan to help other states and not his bothered him, Sen. Jim Justice (R-W.Va.), who ultimately voted for the plan, told reporters this week, 'Yes and no.'
'But at the same time, I think they probably had more severe need and so I think it'll be fine,' Justice, a former governor, said Tuesday.
'If it's like any business deal that I've ever seen in my life, you know, the parties of a good business deal walk away after they get something done, and they walk away, and they're probably holding their nose a little bit, and they're probably regretting certain things and saying, 'Doggone, we didn't do good on this and that and everything,' That's a good deal.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Hashtags

Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles


New York Times
5 minutes ago
- New York Times
Trump's Big Bill Is Now Law. What Was Learned?
To the Editor: Re 'Three Lessons From the Big, Awful Bill,' by Jason Furman (Opinion guest essay, July 7): I'm afraid that Professor Furman drew the wrong lessons from this bill. Its passage had nothing to do with the quality of ideas, experts or even economics. It was all about greed (for power and money) and fear (of President Trump). The legislators' constituents or the fate of the country meant nothing in the face of the Big, Awful Tyrant in the White House. Susan BodikerWashington To the Editor: Jason Furman is wrong to think that the way the Republicans brought us the worst piece of legislation in modern times holds a lesson for Democrats. It's easy to put together legislation that enriches the rich, brings cruelty to the vulnerable and is fiscally irresponsible. It's what Trump supporters do. It's much harder to craft legislation that helps bring about economic growth that can be widely shared among all Americans and do good for the world. The lesson here is more simple: Whatever debates Democrats are having between more centrist and progressive elements pales in comparison to the damage we do when we don't get out the vote to prevent Republicans from taking power. Richard DineSilver Spring, Md. To the Editor: Maybe there's only one lesson from President Trump's hugely horrific bill: Legislating works very differently when there is a large dose of authoritarianism in the body politic. Want all of The Times? Subscribe.

Business Insider
12 minutes ago
- Business Insider
DNC chair says Elon Musk's third party 'could be successful' and should be taken seriously
As Elon Musk pledges to form a new political party, the chair of the Democratic National Committee says it's worth taking seriously. "I don't think we should take it lightly or just suspect — as many of these attempts in the past have failed — that it's going to fail," DNC Chair Ken Martin said on a Monday episode of "Endless Urgency," an online show hosted by Democratic operative Mike Nellis. The chair laid out two key reasons why Musk's "America Party" could succeed: resources and frustration with both parties. "You have the richest man in the world, who's going to dump a lot of money and resources trying to stand this up," Martin said. "And my sense of it is that there's definitely frustration in both parties right now with a two-party system, and it could be successful." Musk spent nearly $300 million to elect President Donald Trump and other Republicans in 2024. Martin also said that Musk's nascent efforts to create a new party were indicative of the divisions within Trump's coalition. "It's laying bare that there are deep divisions within this Republican Party," Martin said. "There are the mega-Trumpers, and then there are the sort of conservative traditional Republicans, and then there's the sort of libertarian wing that has also creeped into their party." The tech titan's political alliance with Trump culminated in the launching of DOGE, only to unravel in epic fashion after several months over Musk's objections to the " Big Beautiful Bill." Musk has yet to formally register a new political party, but he wouldn't be the first prominent businessman to try to take on America's two-party system. Trump has dismissed the idea, calling Musk a "train wreck" while saying that the American political system "seems not designed" for third parties. That may be a mistake, according to Martin. "I'm not sure how it will impact the elections in the future, but if Elon Musk is serious about this and he's going to dump in billions of dollars, it's going to have to be taken serious by both parties," the Democratic Party leader said.
Yahoo
14 minutes ago
- Yahoo
Breaking down claim foreign press started calling Republicans the 'American Fascist Party'
Why is there not a rating on this post? There's not enough verified evidence for us to definitively confirm or debunk this rumor. Contact us if you have credible information to share. We'll update this post as necessary. In early July 2025, a rumor began circulating online claiming that foreign news outlets started referring to the Republican Party, or Grand Old Party (GOP), as the "American Fascist Party." "The Republicans are now being referred to as the American Fascist Party by the foreign press, and I'll be calling them this as well," one Facebook post (archived) read, reaching over 18,000 reactions, 1,800 comments, and 2,500 shares. (Facebook page U.S. Democratic Socialists) Similarly, another Facebook post (archived) with over 13,000 reactions, read, "Republicans are now being referred to as the American Fascist Party by foreign media (and they would know). Guess we better do the same. Just to avoid any confusion." Other posts (archived) made more specific references to "European media." The claim spread across multiple platforms, including Bluesky, Facebook, Instagram, X and Threads. However, none of the posts included specific examples of which foreign or European news outlets referred to the Republican Party as the "American Fascist Party." They did not cite any country, language, publication name, or article where such a label was being used. Our review of international news articles in multiple languages found no indication that this term had been adopted by mainstream foreign news outlets, either in English or in other languages. The phrase does not appear to be in common use across international media. The popularization of the term "American Fascist Party" likely stems from a 2023 opinion article by former U.S. Labor Secretary Robert Reich, published in the British newspaper The Guardian. However, this was an individual commentary, not an example of widespread usage in foreign press. We performed a Google search in over 20 European languages (English, Bulgarian, Croatian, Czech, Danish, Dutch, Estonian, Finnish, French, German, Greek, Hungarian, Irish, Italian, Latvian, Lithuanian, Maltese, Polish, Portuguese, Romanian, Slovenian, Spanish and Swedish). The search returned no relevant results showing that mainstream news media in these languages referred to the Republican Party as the "American Fascist Party." The phrase "American Fascist Party" seemed to trace back to commentary by Reich. In an April 2023 opinion piece for The Guardian, a British newspaper, Reich wrote that the Republican Party was "hurtling toward fascism." He wrote that "Donald Trump is not singularly responsible for this dangerous trend, but he has legitimized and encouraged the ends-justify-the-means viciousness now pushing the GOP toward becoming the American fascist party." Reich has repeated similar phrasing in other opinion pieces and social media posts on Instagram, YouTube and Facebook. "My friends, the Republican Party is no longer committed to democracy. It is rapidly becoming the American fascist party," Reich wrote in an article published on Substack and Common Dreams. But these reflected his personal opinion, not an editorial position of a news organization — and certainly not a trend among foreign media. Additionally, while European news outlets like The Independent or Le Monde have discussed concerns about the GOP's direction and mentioned fascist rhetoric or tactics, they had not referred to the GOP as the "American Fascist Party" as a matter of journalistic framing or categorization. For instance, journalist Patrick Cockburn wrote in a 2021 article for The Independent that the "nullification of elections is only the latest step in the Republican Party's strange voyage towards becoming a genuine fascist party." However, the phrase "American Fascist Part" was mostly used in social media posts, comments, and blog articles — not in reputable news publications or mainstream news outlets. Over the years, we fact-checked numerous viral claims involving fascism. For instance, in August we debunked a claim that Winston Churchill once said that the "fascists of the future will call themselves anti-fascists." In December 2020, we looked at claims that in an interview that published widely in 1976, David Bowie said he believed in fascism and that "Adolf Hitler was one of the first rock stars." Additionally, in January 2024, we investigated whether a viral video showed hundreds of people performing a Fascist salute in Rome on Jan. 7, 2024. Evon, Dan. "Did Winston Churchill Say 'The Fascists of the Future Will Call Themselves Anti-Fascists?'" Snopes, 7 Aug. 2018, Google Search. Accessed 7 Jul. 2025. ---. Accessed 7 Jul. 2025. Is Trumpism a Form of Fascism? Two Historians Debate. 3 May 2025. Le Monde, Lee, Jessica. "Did Bowie Say He Supported Fascism and Praise Hitler?" Snopes, 23 Dec. 2020, Opinion | The United States Now Has a Fascist Political Party | Common Dreams. Accessed 7 Jul. 2025. Reich, Robert. "Is the GOP Becoming the American Fascist Party?" Robert Reich, 10 Apr. 2023, "The Republican Party Has Turned Fascist – It Is Now the Most Dangerous Threat in the World | Patrick Cockburn." The Independent, 23 Jun. 2021, "---." The Independent, 23 Jun. 2021, Wrona, Aleksandra. "Is 2024 Video of Hundreds Performing Fascist Salute in Rome Real?" Snopes, 10 Jan. 2024,