House Republicans’ budget mega-bill would end an arrangement in which the federal government pays all of the benefits and half of the administrative costs of the food stamps program, forcing Nevada to either come up with $170 million a year to maintain it or shrink the program used by 1 in 6 Nevadans.

The plan for the federal government to reduce its support and require states to pick up more of the tab could be particularly painful for the roughly 505,000 people in Nevada who receive benefits from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Nevada’s enrollment rate is higher than in all but five states.

The SNAP cuts come as Republicans attempt to curb government spending and look for savings to partially offset their proposed $3.8 trillion in tax cuts. 

In total, the proposal would cut $230 billion in SNAP spending nationally. 

All this comes as hunger is becoming more endemic in the state. A new study from Feeding America, a national network of food banks, found that the food insecurity rate — or the percentage of people who have inconsistent or inadequate access to food — in Southern Nevada rose from 14.7 percent to 16 percent this year. The Trump administration has already ended grants and cancelled shipments of food to food banks in both ends of the state.

Food assistance providers are particularly worried about children. One in five Nevada children are food-insecure, per the Feeding America Study, and 35 percent of SNAP households have children.

Beth Martino, CEO of Southern Nevada food bank Three Square, said the SNAP cut as written would be “devastating” for beneficiaries and for the state’s ability to curb food insecurity, which rose sharply during the pandemic and has yet to return to pre-pandemic levels.

“I don’t think that the system is capable of taking a lot more strain,” she said.

What is SNAP?

SNAP is a long-running federal program that provides cash assistance to purchase certain foods at authorized retailers via an electronic benefit card. SNAP is only available to those below a certain income threshold — 130 percent of the federal poverty line or $1,580 per month for an individual in 2024 — and is subject to work requirements. The program is administered at the state level, and the size of the benefit is commensurate with income. 

The average SNAP benefit in Nevada is $166 per month, according to the Center for Budget and Policy Priorities.  

House Republicans’ bill would require states to share the cost of SNAP benefits for the first time and pay for a larger portion of the administrative cost. With Nevada already facing a tight budget outlook, Assm. Daniele Monroe-Moreno (D-North Las Vegas), the chair of the Assembly Ways and Means Committee, said the state would not be able to keep the program fully funded.

“SNAP is one of those programs that we need,” she said in an interview last week. “I don’t have all the resources financially in the state to continue it.”

In 2022, the Department of Agriculture estimated that 98 percent of eligible Nevadans received SNAP. If the proposed changes to SNAP pass and Nevada cannot find the requisite funds, the state could be forced to cut food assistance either through tightening eligibility or reducing benefits.

The Division of Welfare and Supportive Services (DWSS), which administers SNAP, noted through a spokesperson that under current law, the state does not have the authority to adjust benefit amounts. The agency’s administrator, Robert Thompson, was not available for an interview.

Spokesperson Kristle Muessle said the agency is monitoring the proposed changes and “will work to continue to provide the best service possible to the Nevadans who rely on these benefits and programs” if the bill passes.

Inside the proposal

The portion of Republicans’ budget bill that passed out of the House Agriculture Committee last week on a party-line vote would require states to begin paying more for SNAP in fiscal year 2028. States currently pay for half of the administrative costs of running the program, while the federal government pays for 100 percent of benefits.

But the Republican plan requires all states to fund 5 to 25 percent of benefits, determined by the rate at which states make erroneous payments. And states’ portion of the administrative costs will rise to 75 percent — potentially making it more expensive and difficult to tighten up error rates. 

Error rates have gone up since the onset of the pandemic, when SNAP benefits and spending were expanded. Nevada’s 2023 error rate of 6.71 percent was 12th-lowest among the 50 states. 

But the Republican budget sets 6 percent as the error rate threshold that triggers a higher cost share — states below it must pay for 5 percent of benefits, while states above it, such as Nevada, would be responsible for 15 percent — a potentially multimillion-dollar difference. 

If the changes to SNAP remain intact, Nevada’s share of the cost will be calculated using the FY26 error rate, which will be published in 2027.

In 2024, the federal government paid out $1.07 billion in SNAP benefits to Nevada, according to the Division of Welfare and Supportive Services (DWSS). Had the plan been in place this year, the state would have been responsible for $150 million.

If Nevada’s error rate and benefit totals remain at similar levels moving forward, then the House GOP budget bill will force the state — already struggling with falling revenue projections — to either find budget space for those funds or cut the size of the program. 

Martino said that food-insecure people typically use a patchwork of programs — SNAP, food banks, free and reduced-price school breakfast and lunch for kids and their own funds — to keep their families fed. A cut to SNAP would create a significant gap.

“This kind of proposal, which is really dismantling the program effectively, is going to be really catastrophic to people who rely on [SNAP] as a way to put food on the table,” she said.

Nevada would also be responsible for a greater portion of the administrative cost of running SNAP. In 2024, the state spent about $42.8 million to administer the program, while the federal government spent about $40.8 million, per DWSS. Under a 75-25 cost share, the federal government would shrink its portion by about $20 million, forcing the state to make up the difference or reduce its overall administrative budget. 

In addition, the House Republican proposal changes SNAP’s existing work requirements. Currently, able-bodied adults without dependents under age 54 must prove they are working at least 80 hours a month to qualify for the benefit. Under House Republicans’ bill, that age would be raised to 64. 

The bill also changes the definition of dependent — whereas it previously meant a child under 18, the work requirement exception now only applies to those with children under 7, or those with older children provided that they are married and live with someone who complies with the SNAP work requirements. 

What comes next

The SNAP proposal as written is a first draft with details likely to change amid negotiations on the bill, especially in the Senate — where numerous Republicans represent states with high usage of the benefit.

But through a procedural tool called budget reconciliation, Republicans, who control both houses of Congress and the White House, can pass their bill with only 50 votes in the Senate. That means that Democrats, who have lambasted the cuts, can do little more than protest.

Monroe-Moreno hopes the state can stave off cuts by raising awareness about the existing levels of food insecurity in Nevada — but acknowledged that the Trump administration and Republicans would need to be on board.

“It’s going to take partnership with the federal delegation, but more importantly, with the Trump administration and our governor saying this is important,” she said.

Another group lobbying against the cuts are the grocers and retailers who accept SNAP benefits. With fewer SNAP dollars available, the 2,000 retailers in Nevada that take SNAP could face losses.

“Those funds are spent at grocery stores here in Nevada,” Martino said. “What does that mean for local markets like a Mario’s Westside, or Smith’s or Albertson’s?”

Eric Neugeboren contributed reporting.