House Republicans, aligning with President Donald Trump’s 2025 budget agenda, have proposed tightening work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as part of a reconciliation bill aiming to cut $230 billion from the House Agriculture Committee’s jurisdiction, primarily targeting SNAP. The proposal, detailed in the “America Works Act of 2025” led by Rep. Dusty Johnson (R-S.D.), would expand work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents (ABAWDs) from ages 18–54 to 18–65, requiring at least 20 hours per week of work or work-related education. It also redefines a “dependent child” from under 18 to under 7, meaning adults with children 7 or older would face these requirements.
Additionally, the bill removes exemptions for veterans and former foster youth, reversing concessions made in the 2023 Fiscal Responsibility Act, and limits states’ ability to waive the three-month SNAP benefit time limit in areas with unemployment below 10%. These changes could affect millions, with estimates from Trump’s first term suggesting 700,000 people could lose benefits monthly under similar restrictions. The Congressional Budget Office previously estimated such policies could save $90–120 billion over a decade, though deeper cuts are projected for 2026–2034. Critics, including the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, argue these measures increase food insecurity without boosting employment, citing evidence that administrative barriers disproportionately harm vulnerable groups like those with disabilities or unstable jobs.
The proposal also includes shifting some SNAP costs to states, potentially forcing reductions in benefits, and caps future updates to the Thrifty Food Plan, which could cut benefits for all 42.1 million SNAP recipients by $274 billion over 10 years if fully repealed. House Agriculture Committee Chair Glenn Thompson (R-Pa.) insists direct benefit cuts are off the table, focusing on “program integrity” and state accountability, but skeptics, including Democrats and some centrist Republicans, question how $230 billion in savings can be achieved without impacting benefits. The bill faces opposition from Democrats and moderate Republicans like Rep. David Valadao (R-Calif.), whose districts rely heavily on SNAP, and must navigate Senate reconciliation, where smaller cuts are proposed.