The House of Representatives is expected to vote on a deeply harmful bill that would cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) by more than $300 billion. If enacted, these cuts would be devastating for families, children, seniors, veterans, and others in communities across the country, including right here in Montana, who rely on SNAP to put food on the table.
As Executive Director of North Valley Food Bank, I see every day how essential SNAP is to the wellbeing of our neighbors. For every one meal a food bank like ours provides, SNAP delivers nine. It is one of the most effective, efficient tools we have to meet the basic needs of our neighbors and strengthen local economies. In 2024 alone, SNAP brought over $169 million to Montana’s retailers, farmers, and grocers – while supporting more than 80,000 Montanans. These proposed cuts are not just numbers on a spreadsheet – they’re meals lost, lives upended.
Last week, I joined hundreds of advocates on Capitol Hill. During the SNAP Matters Rally and in meetings with Montana’s congressional delegation, we urged lawmakers to protect SNAP and the health of our communities. We left hopeful. But just days later, House Republicans released a budget reconciliation bill that includes the largest cuts to SNAP in the program’s history – including punitive changes like expanded work requirements, cost shifts to states, and restrictions on benefit adjustments tied to rising food costs.
The bill would expand work requirements to include parents with kids as young as seven and adults up to age 64 – affecting over 11 million people nationwide, effective immediately. People subject to these new rules would only be able to receive food assistance for three months out of every three years unless they prove they work 20 hours per week or qualify for an exemption. In Montana, 11,000 people are at risk of losing their benefits altogether, and 22,000 more could see their SNAP benefits reduced (https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/expanded-work-requirements-in-house-republican-bill-would-take-away-food). Currently, the average SNAP benefit is just $6 a day. When was the last time you ate on $6?
I think of one of our customers: an older woman caring full-time for her husband with a serious medical condition. Under this proposal, she may be forced to find a 20-hour-per-week job despite already providing vital, unpaid care. Or consider a single mom of two school-aged children, who can’t find childcare during school breaks. To avoid losing SNAP benefits, she would be required to work through the summer, regardless of whether she can access affordable childcare.
The problem isn’t that people don’t want to work. The vast majority of people who receive SNAP and are able to work already do. In Montana, more than 80% of SNAP households have at least one person who is working (https://frac.org/wp-content/uploads/SNAP_FactSheets_022525_MT27.pdf). But for our seasonal workers, those juggling multiple part-time jobs, or caregiving, tracking and proving 80 hours a month can be incredibly burdensome – and often impossible. Research shows that these rules don’t increase employment but instead strip access to benefits, worsening financial situations and long-term employment outcomes (https://www.hamiltonproject.org/wp-content/uploads/2023/10/20250407_THP_SNAPWorkRequirements_Paper.pdf). If we want to encourage work, we should improve work supports – like making job searches count toward eligibility or expanding earned income deductions – rather than punishing people already struggling.
Meanwhile, other parts of the proposed bill would prevent SNAP benefits from keeping up with rising food costs, restrict utility deductions, and make it harder for states to request temporary waivers during periods of high unemployment.
Worst of all, the bill includes a significant cost share for states. For nearly 50 years, SNAP has been 100% federally funded, showing a bipartisan commitment to fighting hunger. But this proposal would require states to pay at least 5% of costs and more depending on error rates. Montana’s current administrative error rate would lead to an annual cost of $25 million (https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/expanded-work-requirements-in-house-republican-bill-would-take-away-food). States that can’t afford these new costs may be forced to scale back or even eliminate their SNAP programs entirely. These changes wouldn’t go into effect until after the next election, leaving states to face the consequences while federal lawmakers avoid accountability.
Supporters of the budget reconciliation bill claim that cuts to SNAP will reduce fraud, but the facts say otherwise. SNAP fraud is rare and efforts to prevent it should be targeted, data-driven solutions that preserve access for those in need. Investing in chip technology for EBT cards, for example, would reduce card skimming and ensure benefits go directly to those who qualify.
As someone who has sat through hour-long eligibility interviews with clients in previous social service jobs, I can tell you: the current eligibility requirements and screening systems are already rigorous. These cuts aren’t about reducing fraud – they’re about reducing access.
The ripple effects would be felt far beyond food banks. SNAP supports public health, improves school readiness, boosts rural economies, and strengthens local food systems. Cutting SNAP undermines everything from educational outcomes to rural grocery stores and farm income.
Let’s call on Montana’s congressional delegation – and every lawmaker in Washington, D.C. – to reject this harmful bill. As one of our volunteers often says, ‘In Montana, neighbors help neighbors.’ Cutting SNAP goes against this spirit.
SNAP works. Let’s protect it – because no one in Montana should go hungry.
Sophie Albert is the executive director of the North Valley Food Bank. She lives in Whitefish.