Oregon anti-hunger advocates say a draft of the federal farm bill in Congress could significantly limit food aid for everyone enrolled in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, informally known as “food stamps.” They’re calling on the two Oregon legislators on that committee to vote “no” on the changes to the program.
Congress members on the House Committee of Agriculture will meet to review — and possibly make changes and vote on — a proposed version of the farm bill on May 23.
Some Oregon anti-hunger advocates say they oppose the proposal and that it would mean a loss of $500 million in benefits over the next decade in the state.
Policy advocates at the Oregon Food Bank said in 2023 the food bank's network saw a14% increase in visits from the previous year. Advocates say any reduction in SNAP benefits would only deepen food insecurity across Oregon.
Lindsay Trapnell / Oregon Food Bank
At issue is the Thrifty Food Plan. It’s the lowest cost of four food plans that the USDA developed to estimate the cost of a healthy, realistic diet for a family of four. The other three food plans map out how much families with more financial resources might spend on food. The Thrifty Food Plan is what the USDA uses to determine SNAP benefit amounts.
In 2021, the USDA updated that plan based on current food prices, modern dietary needs and even how long it takes to shop and prepare food. Prior to that, the USDA would only adjust the plan based on inflation, according to Sammi Teo, a public policy advocate at the Oregon Food Bank. That 2021 change led to an increase in SNAP benefits.
Teo said the version of the farm bill before the House committee would reverse the 2021 updates. While SNAP benefits would not be cut for current recipients, it would mean less money for people in the future, and that would put vulnerable communities at risk of food insecurity, she said.
“It would disproportionately impact specific communities, namely Black, Indigenous, communities of color, immigrants, refugees, single moms and caregivers and trans communities — who are already two to three times more likely to face hunger and poverty in Oregon,” Teo said.
The 2018 farm bill was set to expire last fall, but lawmakers extended it for another year. The bill is an omnibus package of legislation that is renewed every five years and includes funding for crop insurance, agricultural conservation programs and rural development projects. A large chunk of the bill goes to fund food assistance programs like SNAP.
Over 700,000 Oregonians are enrolled in SNAP, according to data from the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.
Jacki Ward Kehrwald, a member of Partners for a Hunger-Free Oregon, said food insecurity is worsening and a cut to SNAP benefits could exacerbate the problem in Oregon.
“Now is a time in Oregon when we need to be supporting each other, we need to be finding ways to set up our neighbors for success,” Ward Kehrwald said. “This is not a time for cuts.”
Anti-hunger advocates call on legislators to protect SNAP
Advocates are calling on U.S. Rep. Andrea Salinas and U.S. Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer — the only two federal Oregon legislators in the House agriculture committee — to vote no on the changes to that program.
U.S. Rep. Salinas, a Democrat for Oregon’s 6th Congressional District, said she would like to go back to the drawing board and work with her colleagues to keep SNAP benefits from being cut and create a more bipartisan bill. She did not specify if she would vote no if the current proposal stays the same.
“I have not seen the language [of the bill], and it’s not fair for me to make a decision or a call like that until I’ve seen the language,” Salinas said. “And because I haven’t seen the bill language, I really cannot say.”
In a written statement, U.S. Rep. Lori Chavez-DeRemer, a Republican who represents Oregon’s 5th Congressional District, said she supports SNAP and noted that the changes to the program are not a cut. The representative did not specify how she would vote.
“To be clear, the House’s pending Farm Bill proposal would simply ensure that no drastic changes, including future potential efforts to slash benefits, can be made to the program by unilateral executive order while also protecting continued adjustments for inflation,” Chavez-DeRemer said. “Spreading politically motivated rumors about cuts is irresponsible and a disservice to Oregon families who rely on the program.”
