Maine Beacon89%
More than 770,000 children are no longer receiving SNAP benefits after Trump changes federal food program 33%
By Nicole Santa Cruz for ProPublica41%
6/18/2026, 9:33:54 AM
BS Summary: This article contains 23 faulty reasoning types, including Appeal to Emotion, Anecdotal, and Hasty Generalization, with Negativity Bias as the most egregious example at 22.3% saturation with 266 hits. Analysis detected 1,958 faulty-reasoning hits from 1,195 analyzed words, generating a BS Score of 35.7% and a BS Rank of 33% (18,351 of 27,321 articles). This article is better (less manipulative) than 67.20% of the article peer group.
As a House committee debated President Donald Trump’s signature domestic policy bill last year, Republican backers repeatedly emphasized that its changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as food stamps, wouldn’t affect vulnerable people.
SNAP reforms would “restore integrity” to the program and ensure it works for the “ most vulnerable among us, including children ,” said Rep.
Glenn “GT” Thompson, a Pennsylvania Republican and chair of the House Agriculture Committee.
Passing the bill would be a “historic accomplishment” that will ensure “ those in need can continue to receive the assistance they need ,” said Rep.
John Rose, a Republican from Tennessee.
And Rep.
Dusty Johnson, a South Dakota Republican, said the bill would focus resources on the “neediest” Americans.
“If you are a pregnant woman, your benefits are unaffected.
If you have young children at home, your benefits are unaffected by this bill.
If you are disabled, your benefits are unaffected by this bill.”
But nearly a year after the measure was signed into law, the number of children receiving food assistance has plummeted by at least 776,000, according to a ProPublica analysis.
At least 12 states break down program participation by age, and of the 1,670,011 people who are no longer receiving benefits in those states, 776,134, or 46%, were children.
Another analysis reached the same conclusion: Just last month, the nonpartisan Center on Budget and Policy Priorities found there were 700,000 fewer children receiving food assistance.
Arizona has seen the nation’s largest percentage decline in SNAP participants; 205,223 children are no longer receiving the benefit since July 2025, a 55% drop.
Louisiana had the second largest percent decline among children, 22%.
The U.S.
Department of Agriculture, which oversees SNAP, hasn’t detailed the impact on children aided by the program, but initial figures show that compared to February 2025, 4.3 million fewer people received SNAP nationwide in February 2026, leaving 37.8 million participants.
Although children weren’t the intended targets of the legislation’s changes, they’re increasingly “collateral damage,” said Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
If states are trying to comply with the law’s changes to SNAP, they’re likely not focusing on making the program accessible, Bergh said.
Other experts said that people may be pushed off the program because of increased paperwork requirements to remain eligible.
States are required to impose work requirements for most adult recipients, while preparing for two major cost shifts.
In October, states will begin covering 75% of the program’s administrative costs.
States have been paying 50% of those costs.
In addition, states will have to pay a larger share of SNAP benefits starting in October 2027, based on their error rate.
Error rates reflect overpayments or underpayments of SNAP benefits.
While sometimes characterized as fraud, such errors are usually the fault of the state agency or the SNAP recipient, according to USDA, which describes them as “largely unintentional.”
If a state agency is facing staffing shortages and struggling to comply with new regulations, it will be harder for low-income families to access the benefits, Bergh said.
“Families are falling through the cracks.”
In Massachusetts, for example, the share of SNAP applicants who called an assistance line and couldn’t reach a worker rose from 61% in November to nearly 81% in March, according to the Department of Transitional Assistance , which administers SNAP in the state.
The state agency did not respond to a request for comment.
A USDA spokesperson did not address ProPublica’s questions about the number of children who have lost access to SNAP.
“There is no shortage of resources for the most vulnerable among us, including children,” the spokesperson said.
The three members of the House Agriculture Committee who defended last year’s bill before its passage — Rose, Thompson and Johnson — did not respond to ProPublica’s questions about their statements now that many children no longer receive SNAP benefits.
Rep.
Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat, asked Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins about her recent comments that it was “good news” that millions of people no longer receive SNAP.
If more than 700,000 children have been dropped in the 12 states that report those figures, “that number’s going to be into the millions” when other states are included, he said.
Rollins responded, “The 700,000 number of children is not correct,” contending that most people who were kicked off SNAP were “fraudulent.”
“That is not a nonpartisan group that gave you that number,” she said.
(ProPublica independently verified the figures reported by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.)
McGovern said he has talked to people who have lost food assistance.
“These are people who actually need and rely on this food assistance to provide basic nutrition for their families,” he said.
Pressure to lower error rates “creates a temptation for the states to bump off working families,” said Parke Wilde, a food economist at Tufts University.
Working families may have more volatile incomes, making it harder for state agencies to assess benefits accurately.
“When they say we want to preserve SNAP for those with the greatest need, they’re sort of acknowledging that they want the scale of the SNAP program to be smaller,” he said.
Mariana Chilton, an expert in child hunger at University of Massachusetts, Amherst, said a smaller program won’t save money in the long run.
Research shows that children who receive SNAP benefits are healthier, have better academic outcomes, use hospitals less often and have better mental health as teenagers.
She called the situation a “public health crisis” in the making.
“When children are not healthy, this affects children today and it affects them throughout their lifetimes,” she said, likening hunger during early childhood to a brain injury.
As Arizona’s SNAP participation drops, nonprofits are feeling the effects.
St.
Mary’s Food Bank, the largest in the state, has seen a 15% increase in need this year, which translates into 300,000 more visits from people in search of food, said Milt Liu, the chief executive officer.
“It’s important for everyone to realize that policies have implications for people on the edge, and we’re seeing that in our line every day,” he said.
On a recent morning, Ana Alvarez waited in a line of vehicles at a St.
Mary’s food bank in Phoenix.
Alvarez, a single mother of five who works at a restaurant, started coming to St.
Mary’s after she lost her SNAP benefits in September.
She reapplied for SNAP with the Arizona Department of Economic Security in December, but the application is still pending.
The department did not respond to questions about its backlog.
She clips coupons and has cut out trips to the zoo and restaurants with her children.
The slow season at the restaurant where she works is about to hit.
And as summer temperatures rise, Alvarez wonders how she will afford her electric bill, her rent and her car payment.
At least once a week she contacts the agency about her application.
The last time she called, a worker told her what others have in the past: She will have to keep waiting.
Speakers
11speakers58%attributed speech499writer words
Selected voice
100%flagged-word coverageUSDA spokesperson
17 attributed words2.4% of attributed speech67% writer coverage
Attribution is sentence-level. Pattern percentages are calculated only from words assigned to that voice.
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Loading…
Analysis
Hover over highlighted words in the article to view the associated bias or fallacy analysis.