DENVER (KDVR) — Concern over the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s direction to not release SNAP benefits in November continues to grow, with nearly two dozen state attorneys general writing the agency to ask for clarity on Friday on why the USDA is not tapping into contingency funds for November.
Among signatories was Colorado Attorney General Phil Weiser, who noted in a press release that in Colorado, SNAP, or the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, over 600,000 residents receive funds and that about 50% of recipients are children.
The letter comes as The Associated Press reports that a USDA memo stated that the agency will not tap into its contingency fund to cover SNAP and other food benefits in November, saying the funds cannot be legally used.
“Coloradans should not go hungry during the government shutdown when USDA has reserve funds to meet critical needs. Suspending SNAP benefits at the end of the month will cause grave harm to children, seniors, and veterans who rely on food assistance every day for their meals. USDA must explain what legal authority they have to withhold congressionally mandated funds to the states for food assistance,” said Weiser in his press release.
The attorneys general’s letter asks the USDA how it is legally able to direct states to stop issuing SNAP benefits, saying that the USDA did not cite any legal authority or reasoning in an Oct. 10 letter that told the states to stop work on November benefits until further notice.
In a late afternoon press release, Colorado Gov. Jared Polis said that the USDA memo says that the states that step up and cover the cost of feeding families that rely on food stamps will not be reimbursed.
“In Colorado, we love everyone and take hunger seriously. I am so disappointed to see the federal government seems to have no urgency or desire to stop families from going hungry,” said Polis in the release.
Politicians have been pointing fingers at each other ever since the government shutdown began, arguing that it’s the other party’s fault for not passing funding measures for the federal government.
On Wednesday, Polis asked the Colorado Joint Budget Commission for an emergency $10 million to support food banks and pantries.
“Just one month ago—and in anticipation of a possible shutdown—USDA recognized that ‘Congressional intent is evident that SNAP’s operations should continue since the program has been provided with multi-year contingency funds that can be used for State Administrative Expenses,’ and that ‘multi-year contingency funds are also available to fund participant benefits in the event that a lapse occurs,'” the AGs’ letter states.
The USDA’s lapse of funding plan also says that it would bring back furloughed staff to complete “critical tasks for programs funded through the SNAP, CNP and WIC accounts on an as needed basis.”
Weiser said that the USDA told state agencies and directors of those agencies that said, “if the current lapse in appropriations continues, there will be insufficient funds to pay full November SNAP benefits for approximately 42 million individuals across the Nation.”
He said that the USDA “appears to have at least $6 billion in SNAP contingency reserve funds,” which were earmarked previously by Congress for emergencies. The attorneys general’s letter argues that this funding should be used now, rather than suspend November benefits.
“Furthermore, USDA also has access to other funds that could also be used to provide SNAP benefits during the ongoing shutdown,” Weiser said.
Can the USDA legally pause SNAP benefits?
The attorneys general asked the USDA how it could justify its Oct. 10 directive to pause November benefits, saying that it is “in considerable tension with Congress’s directives.”
The group asked the USDA what legal authority or reasoning was behind the letter and noted an urgency in the request because states must send information to vendors “several days before the start of the month,” meaning that November benefits for many, even if they are distributed, will be delayed.
“USDA does have authority to reduce SNAP benefits or even suspend or cancel them under certain circumstances,” Weiser said in his release. “However, USDA’s Oct. 10 letter does not indicate that any of the legal requirements to do so have been met.”
The attorneys general also noted that the Oct. 10 letter didn’t say if the November benefits were suspended or cancelled, and if that’s what the USDA has done, how it determined that was the correct course of action, versus a reduction in benefits.
Letter advocates for over 1.174 million veterans on SNAP
The attorneys general also told USDA that, of the 42 million Americans who depend on SNAP to feed themselves and their families, over a million are veterans who also receive the food benefits.
The letter noted that between 2018-2019, there were about 1.174 million American veterans who were on SNAP, including:
- 28,498 veterans in Arizona
- 39,517 in Michigan
- 84,931 in California
- 62,061 in Pennsylvania
- 107,606 in Florida
- 93,261 in Texas
- 44,192 in Georgia
- 13,976 in New Jersey
- Nearly 24,000 in Colorado
“These figures represent only a small snapshot of the millions of individuals and families who will imminently suffer the consequences of USDA’s current directive to States,” the attorneys general’s letter stated.
The letter concluded with a series of questions seeking clarity and additional information about USDA’s directive, with a deadline of the end of the day on Monday, Oct. 27.
The questions included:
- Does USDA have contingency funds leftover from previous Congressional appropriations? What is the total?
- Does USDA have access to any other sources of available funds to pay benefits and administrative costs?
- Does USDA intend to use those funds to furnish SNAP benefits, even at a reduced level? If not, why? And if so, how will that plan be executed and when should states send benefit issuance files?
- Should states treat the Oct. 10 letter as a “suspension” rather than “cancellation” of benefits, or neither?
The letter added that the states are ready to mitigate the federal government shutdown’s impact, and that agencies are complying with the directive despite the concerns.
States beyond Colorado that joined in signing the letter included Arizona, California, Hawaii, Connecticut, Illinois, Delaware, Maine, District of Columbia, Maryland, Massachusetts, New Mexico, Michigan, New York, Minnesota, North Carolina, Nevada, Oregon, New Jersey, Rhode Island, Vermont, Wisconsin and Washington.
Want more insights? Join Working Title - our career elevating newsletter and get the future of work delivered weekly.
