Opinion: SNAP program changes may mean fewer retailers offering healthy food in rural and low-income areas

SNAP changes a may further limit access to healthy food. 
(Photo by Maria Lin Kim, Unsplash)

U.S. retailers will face new rules if they want to continue participating in the Department of Agriculture's Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. "Starting on Nov. 4, 2026, any retailers that accept SNAP benefits from their customers will have to stock a wider variety of food, some of it perishable," writes community health expert Benjamin Chrisinger in his opinion for The Conversation.

The USDA is touting its stricter requirements as a way to make healthier food more available to the roughly 38 million Americans who rely on SNAP for groceries but, as Chrisinger explains, the new rules could hurt overall grocery access because the added expense in complying with USDA changes may lead smaller stores to stop accepting SNAP.

Current USDA rules require all SNAP-participating retailers to sell at least three items in each of four staple food categories, which include dairy, produce, grains and protein. "Under the stricter new rules, all retailers accepting SNAP as payment must sell at least seven kinds of food in each of those four categories," Chrisinger writes. "And they need to offer at least one perishable variety in three of the four."

The stricter rules will not require changes from larger retailers because they already sell a wide variety of items across all USDA staple categories. But small shops and convenience stores, which are often found in rural and low-income areas, may find the changes too expensive.

"A big industry group that represents convenience stores and an anti-hunger organization are both warning that instead of making it easier for low-income people to follow a balanced diet, the new USDA rules might lead many small shops to stop accepting SNAP benefits," Chrisinger writes.

While small stores that now accept SNAP offer convenient options to area residents, getting them to stock healthier food may not happen because grocery items already have razor-thin profit margins and "many smaller retailers are not familiar with how to source and stock healthier food, especially produce," Chrisinger adds. "And many question whether these products will sell."

Grocers and SNAP recipients face perplexing set of rules restricting 'junk food' purchases

In Idaho, candy is banned, unless it contains flour or requires 
refrigeration. (Photo by Denny Mueller, Unsplash)

States that no longer allow Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program money to pay for "junk food" have left retailers and SNAP recipients confused about which foods are allowed for purchase with SNAP dollars, reports Rachel Roubein of The Washington Post. The new rules may disproportionately impact rural residents, who are more likely to participate in SNAP than their urban counterparts.

Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and his supporters have led the charge to keep highly processed foods off of American tables, beginning with the SNAP program. Roubein explains, "They argue federal dollars shouldn’t help people buy products increasingly linked to poor health and obesity. Trump administration officials have pushed states to bar the use of food stamps for soda and candy."

In response, 10 states received federal waivers to restrict SNAP food choices and rolled out their own unique set of restrictions. "In Iowa, anti-hunger advocates recently sought to highlight how some cold sandwiches and granola bars may not qualify," Roubein reports. "In Idaho, legislators had attempted to clarify the state’s candy ban, since it allows KitKats and Twix because they contain flour."

The fact that each state has its own rules "has led to a complicated and at times counterintuitive maze of new restrictions, according to more than two dozen interviews with trade groups for independent grocers and convenience stores, store owners, anti-hunger advocates, SNAP participants and others," the Post reports.

Fearing the loss of their SNAP licenses, some grocers have banned additional products from SNAP purchases to ensure compliance, Roubein explains. But that change has left SNAP-spending customers not just trying to figure out what their state allows, but also what the store they are shopping in allows.

While most anti-hunger activists oppose the restrictions as further marginalizing and punishing people for "being poor, nutritionists and nutrition advocates have mixed opinions," the Post reports. "Others say they have long sought to test SNAP changes, and want to see data showing whether the new rules impact consumer behavior and improve health." States with restriction waivers have two years to pilot their programs.

What will it take to pass a new federal Farm Bill? The last one was approved in 2018.

A new Farm Bill will have to work around political
flashpoints. (Graphic by Adam Dixon, Offrange)

The last Farm Bill was passed by Congress in 2018, but political divisions over Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program funding and farm subsidies have prevented lawmakers from agreeing on a new Farm Bill, leaving sectors that depend on the massive omnibus package relying on extensions for authorized funding, reports Clare Carlson for Offrange. Farm policy experts say any new Farm Bill will have to navigate around conflicts to address an evolving set of farming and rural needs.

Mike Lavender, a policy director at the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, told Carlson that as the number of U.S. farms has shrunk, and the size of the remaining farms has grown, what farmers need in a Farm Bill has changed.

As politicians continue to battle over SNAP and subsidies, those two entities only "make up two of the Farm Bill’s 12 titles, which include research, conservation, forestry, and rural development," Carlson reports. "The programs under those other 10 titles are what get neglected, Lavender said, hurting farmers and rural communities in the process."

With the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act in 2025, SNAP funding was separated from the Farm Bill and "wrapped into budget reconciliation bills," Carlson explains. OBBA cut SNAP’s budget by 20% while "doubling funding to subsidy programs for commodities like soybeans, wheat, and corn."

Michael Happ, a program associate at the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy, told Offrange, “We might be living in a post-Farm Bill world right now where we just pass farm policy through budget bills and we leave out a lot of really important research and programs that help farmers."

Meanwhile, House Agriculture Chair Glenn Thompson "pledged to complete a five-year farm bill in committee by the end of February, as lawmakers try to bridge political divides that have stalled the legislation," reports Marc Heller of E&E News. "Thompson (R-Pa.) told state agriculture officials that finishing the bill. . . is his top priority."

Carlson adds, "Without a Farm Bill, food and agricultural policy could be left to the whims of whichever party controls the White House. . . . Planning for the future is also a lot harder for farmers without a Farm Bill."

As five states roll out 'no junk food' SNAP rules, retailers scramble to update their systems and educate SNAP users

States in green have been granted federal SNAP waivers to restrict SNAP benefit purchases. (USDA map)

State food-choice restrictions on Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program purchases have some grocery stores in a conundrum, trying to determine which foods are allowed and which aren't.

Beginning Jan. 1, Indiana, Iowa, Nebraska, Utah and West Virginia rolled out their new "no junk food" SNAP purchase limits, but a total of "eighteen states have adopted new food-stamp restrictions," report Jesse Newman and Laura Cooper of The Wall Street Journal. As a whole, rural Americans are more likely to use SNAP benefits, but less likely to know about benefit changes because of online access limits.

Each state has limited different items and has varied its wording of restrictions, which can be confusing. For instance, in Indiana, mini-donuts can be purchased with SNAP benefits, but candy bars cannot. The Journal reports, "Grocery executives said that determining which products are food-stamp eligible and which aren’t has become a complex undertaking."

Retailers, who are working to ensure that only SNAP-allowed items can be purchased, have had "employees sifting through state-issued flow charts, scanning product bar codes and checking ingredient lists across thousands of goods in stores," Newman and Cooper explain. Allowed items have to be cataloged and entered into computer systems as well.

Beyond the labor hours needed to update their SNAP catalogs, retailers and industry groups said "guidance from USDA and many state agencies on how to implement the new restrictions has been insufficient," Newman writes.

For states that implemented their restrictions on Jan. 1, many SNAP enrollees seem unaware of the changes. Mark Griffin, chief executive of grocery chain B&R Stores, said "his company is dealing with lines at checkout counters as clerks tell longtime customers they can no longer use food stamps to buy soda or candy," the Journal reports.

The SNAP changes are part of a federal push to help Americans make healthier dietary choices; however, opponents to SNAP restrictions point out that "limiting grocery options ignores the real causes of poor diets, such as low incomes, high food prices and access to healthy food," the Journal reports. Last month, the Trump administration unveiled new dietary guidelines that it hopes can address some of the chronic diet-related diseases in Americans.

Does SNAP need tweaks to prevent fraud and abuse, or a complete overhaul?

Opinions on the degree of fraud in SNAP vary.
(Adobe Stock photo)

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program provides a lifeline for Americans who struggle to afford enough groceries to survive. The program is critical to rural communities where one in seven rural households relies on SNAP, according to Food Research & Action Center 2025 research.

Despite its importance to millions of Americans, the SNAP system, formally known as food stamps, is considered by the Trump administration to be fraught with fraud and errors that cost American taxpayers millions each year. 

Trump appointees tend to see SNAP fraud as a pervasive problem "perpetrated by organized criminal organizations, individual recipients and retailers willing to break the laws for profit," reports Geoff Mulvihill of The Associated Press. "Some experts agree that SNAP fraud is a major problem."

The sheer size of SNAP spending means taxpayers should expect some losses from errors and fraud. Christopher Bosso, a professor at Northeastern University, who published a book on SNAP, told Mulvihill, "If you’re spending $100 billion on anything, you’re going to have some leakage."

Despite various levels of fraud-prevention and detection investments at the federal and state levels, there are many ways SNAP can be misused. "Organized crime groups put skimmers on EBT readers to get information used to make copies of the benefit cards and steal the allotments of recipients," Mulvihill explains. Crime groups also steal identities and use them to receive benefits. Other times, recipients sell their card benefits.

Mark Haskins and Haywood Talcove, executives at LexisNexis Risk Solutions Government, which helps design fraud-prevention strategies, both "believe fraud costs significantly more than the USDA’s $9 billion estimate," Mulvihill reports. Haskins told AP, "The system is corrupt. It doesn’t need a fix here and there, it needs a complete overhaul."

Researchers and supporters often refer to SNAP fraud as "troublesome," Mulvihill writes. But they don't see program misuse as "massive" enough to require a total overhaul.

Although SNAP fraud data isn't readily available in any public repository where Americans can evaluate it, an April 2025 survey of 1,000 registered U.S. voters commissioned by The Food Industry Association found that 19% of Americans believe that SNAP benefits should be cut due to fraud and abuse, while 21% think people should receive SNAP because they need help. Overall, 64% of respondents had a favorable opinion of SNAP.

Quick hits: Cold Case Card Deck to solve crimes; USPS podcast; Walmart's new milk plant; states snip SNAP snacks

Maine State Police hope their card deck 
will generate tips on unsolved cases. 
(Maine State Police photo via Midcoast Villager)

The Maine State Police are launching a Cold Case Deck of Cards initiative to generate leads for unsolved cases. "The deck features 52 of Maine State Police’s unsolved homicides and suspicious missing person cases and will be distributed to inmates in correctional facilities across the state," reports Jim Leonard of the Midcoast Villager. "This marks the first time the concept has been implemented in Maine. Similar initiatives in more than two dozen states have been credited with helping solve multiple homicide investigations."

Just because cranberries are tart doesn't mean they require a ton of sugar to become tasty. "Diabetics or anyone who wants to reduce the added sugars they’re consuming can try a few culinary tactics to lower their sugar intake while still enjoying this holiday treat," writes food scientist Rosemary Trout for The Conversation. "Don’t cook your cranberries much longer after they pop. You’ll still have a viscous cranberry liquid without the need for as much sugar. … For a richer flavor and a glossy quality, add butter. … Adding chopped walnuts, almonds, or hazelnuts can slow glucose absorption, so your blood glucose may not spike as quickly."

In a tribute to snail mail and history buffs, a new podcast, "People of Agency," offers listening excursions into "the stories of individuals who have shaped USPS over its 250-year history," reports Sean Michael Newhouse of Government Executive. The show is co-created and co-hosted by Aileen Day, a political communications consultant, and Maia Warner-Langenbahn, who co-hosts the "Well, I Laughed" podcast. In the show's first episode, the duo recount the story of Mary Katherine Goddard, who was "put in charge of Baltimore’s mail in 1775 and printed the first copy of the Declaration of Independence that listed all of its signatories."

In a bid to have more control over production and supply, Walmart recently opened its "second U.S.-owned milk processing facility in Valdosta, Ga., a $350-million plant supplying milk to more than 650 Southeast stores," reports Taylor Leach of Dairy Herd. While the company does purchase milk from local farmers, "some critics have warned Walmart buys milk from only a handful of large farms, putting smaller farms under further pressure. … The opening also follows Walmart’s recent investments in case-ready beef plants in Thomasville, Ga., and Olathe, Kansas."

Shaking your real Christmas tree before bringing it 
into your home can keep bugs from coming inside.

The holidays can be full of surprises, but discovering six-legged stowaways in your freshly cut Christmas tree shouldn't be one of them. "Bringing a real Christmas tree into your warm living room can accidentally wake up thousands of dormant bugs, turning your cozy holiday into a surprise visit from nature," reports Jenn Jordan of The Weather Channel. To prevent insect or spider visitors from entering your home, while your tree is still outside, give it more than one seriously hard shake. Many tree farms use mechanical shakers, which can also do the trick.

From the bubonic plague to cholera pandemics to deadly staph infections, bacterial illnesses often pose one of the biggest challenges to human survival. But with innovation, microorganisms can also help humans do remarkable things. "In the boulder-strewn desert east of Tucson, Arizona, miners are using sulfuric acid and bacteria to bring online the first new U.S. copper production in more than a decade," reports Ryan Dezember of The Wall Street Journal. Advances in technology are key to how this copper is mined. The enterprise uses "microbes to strip copper from ores that are otherwise uneconomical to mine." The Grand Canyon's state motto just happens to be Ditat Deus, which is Latin for "God Enriches." Last year, 70% of U.S. copper came from Arizona.

A total of 18 states have banned some non-nutritious foods from SNAP purchases. 
(Axios graph, from USDA data)

More states are restricting junk food purchases with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits to increase the federal funding they receive. "Six more states agreed to ban the use of SNAP benefits for junk food under new deals with the Trump administration," reports April Rubin of Axios. "The new waivers restrict the purchase of non-nutritious items like soda, energy drinks, certain juices, prepared desserts and candy." While which foods and drinks are restricted varies by state, all states with added nutritional restrictions will all receive more federal dollars to support their SNAP programs.

Secretary of Agriculture plans to have all food stamp beneficiaries recertify to receive benefits

Recent SNAP spending peaked around 2020 during the Covid pandemic. (The Conversation graph, from USDA data)

The secretary of the U.S. Department of Agriculture, Brooke Rollins, announced last week that all Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients will be required to recertify to continue receiving benefits. 

Rollins said recertification is needed to help root out fraud and corruption in the SNAP program, formerly known as food stamps, reports Grace Yarrow of Politico. 

Rollins told Newsmax that she plans to “have everyone reapply for their benefits, make sure that everyone that’s taking a taxpayer-funded benefit through . . . food stamps, that they literally are vulnerable and they can’t survive without it.”

The most common types of SNAP fraud include applicants who lie about their living or financial situations to qualify for benefits, enrollees who trade their food benefits for cash and criminals who "skim" EBT cards to steal their benefits.

Rollins did not give a process or timeline for all SNAP beneficiaries to recertify, but she has "teased an announcement of a new plan to overhaul the program in the coming weeks," Yarrow writes.

President Donald Trump maintained that SNAP is intended for people who can't afford the most basic grocery items and are unable to work.

He told Fox News, "SNAP is supposed to be if you’re down and out. . . But people who are able-bodied can do a job — they leave their job because they figure they can pick this up, it’s easier. That’s not the purpose of it.”

Although SNAP spending peaked at $128 billion during the pandemic, U.S. taxpayers still paid $100 billion for the program in 2024, which served roughly 42 million Americans. 

Partial SNAP benefits will be paid to participants in November, but their delivery could be significantly delayed

USDA officials claim other funds cannot be used to pay November 
SNAP benefits in full. (USDA photo)

As the federal government shutdown drags into its sixth week, the Trump administration announced it would make partial payments this month to Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants; however, it wouldn't predict when the reduced benefits would reach U.S. households, reports Zach Schonfeld of The Hill. 

On Friday, two federal judges "ruled the Trump administration must empty a multi-billion dollar emergency fund before cutting off SNAP," Schonfeld reports. "The judges indicated the USDA could use dollars from another funding source to fill the remaining gap for November."

The administration indicated it will not access other Department of Agriculture funds beyond the USDA's contingency fund, meaning that the November SNAP benefit will be reduced. "The administration says the fund has $4.65 billion available for households," Schonfeld explains. "It is not enough to cover the full November benefits, which are expected to cost upwards of $9 billion."

The Trump administration flatly rejected the judges' suggestion to redirect USDA money to fully fund November SNAP payments. Patrick Penn, who oversees the SNAP program at the USDA, wrote in a sworn declaration, "Section 32 Child Nutrition Program funds are not a contingency fund for SNAP. Using billions of dollars from Child Nutrition for SNAP would leave an unprecedented gap in Child Nutrition funding." 

Although Penn said the USDA will begin providing states with details, he warned November payments could take "weeks or months" to reach beneficiaries.

Rural families will be impacted by pause in SNAP benefits due to federal government shutdown

Roughly 41 million Americans rely on SNAP benefits.
(Photo by Aaron Doucett, Unsplash)

Due to the federal government shutdown, funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) will cease soon, and the Trump administration has not made any plans to find money to keep the program running. 

“The pause in food stamp benefits that will hit Saturday, November 1 will disproportionately hurt rural families,” Sarah Melotte and Tim Marema reported for The Daily Yonder.

Food pantries are preparing for a surge in people who cannot afford groceries without SNAP. 

“Rural families top the list of groups that will be affected by the freeze in SNAP benefits. The Daily Yonder found that 13.7% of rural households receive SNAP benefits, compared to 11.4% of metropolitan households,” Melotte and Marema wrote. 

Additionally, SNAP benefits mostly go to households with children, a trend that can be seen in both urban and rural counties.

“Twenty-five Democratic-led states sued the Trump administration on Tuesday to force it to resume food stamps payments,” Julianna Bragg reported for Axios.

The USDA 'lapse in funding' plan for SNAP is no longer on its website. Agency claims funds can't be used for SNAP.

Rural communities are often more dependent on SNAP to meet basic food needs.
(The Daily Yonder graph, from 2015 U.S. census data)

The Department of Agriculture had a contingency plan to continue Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits during the federal shutdown, but the 55-page 'lapse in funding' document recently disappeared from the USDA's website, reports Raymond Fernández of NOTUS. Rural counties are particularly vulnerable for any SNAP pause because their populations are more dependent on the program.

Despite the 'lapse in funding' plan, the USDA now claims its emergency fund can't be legally used to pay for SNAP during the shutdown. States working to cover a federal SNAP benefits pause with their own funds were warned by the USDA that the federal government will not reimburse them for any SNAP-pause spending.

In response to the USDA's refusal to access the contingency funds, a bipartisan group of two dozen states filed a lawsuit in federal court in Massachusetts, hoping the judge will compel the USDA to use the contingency funds to provide November SNAP benefits, report Tony Romm and Maya Shwayder of The New York Times. 

Proceedings in the states' lawsuit began Thursday, with the Trump administration "staunchly defending its decision to stop paying food stamps during the government shutdown, telling a federal court that it could not tap a tranche of available funds to provide aid to millions of poor Americans in November," Romm and Shwayder explain. "The arguments at times appeared to frustrate and confound a federal judge, who promised to rule soon."

Trump administration announces no food aid for millions of people in November unless government shutdown ends

Roughly 20 million children rely on SNAP benefits for
food each month. (USDA photo)

As the second-longest federal government shutdown continues, millions of Americans who rely on grocery money from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) may go hungry. 

The upper banner of the Department of Agriculture's website reads, "The well has run dry. At this time, there will be no benefits issued November 1." About one in eight Americans relies on SNAP for food, which includes roughly 20 million children. 

The clash between Senate Republicans and Democrats has left each side blaming the other for the continued shutdown and the possibility of a SNAP benefit pause. Democrats refuse to reopen the government until Republicans negotiate with them on Affordable health care subsidies. "Republicans say Democrats must first agree to reopen the government before negotiation," reports Adriana Gomez Licon of The Associated Press. 

Democrats had hoped USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins would access a contingency fund to cover most of November's SNAP dollars; however, a USDA memo that "surfaced Friday says 'contingency funds are not legally available to cover regular benefits,'" Licon writes. The document notes that contingency funds are reserved for disaster relief.

Most states have also warned SNAP participants that benefits may not be made available on Nov. 1. Licon reports, "Arkansas and Oklahoma, for example, are advising recipients to identify food pantries and other groups that help with food."

Although some states, including Louisiana and Virginia, have told SNAP beneficiaries they plan to continue food aid, it's unclear whether they can legally do so. Licon adds, "The USDA memo also says states would not be reimbursed for temporarily picking up the cost."

States warn millions of SNAP and WIC recipients that a continued shutdown will pause November benefits

Area food banks are preparing for a surge in need.
(Adobe Stock photo)

At least 25 states issued benefit gap warnings to the more than 41 million Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program recipients and nearly 7 million families who receive aid from the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, known as WIC," report Leah Douglas and P.J. Huffstutter of Reuters.

Minerva Delgado, who directs Alliance to End Hunger activities, told Reuters, "Families are going to be hurt by this should it continue, at a time we know families are struggling to make ends meet."

Food banks in states that issued SNAP and WIC warnings are already hard at work to meet increased demand. But some food pantries already face food shortages due to USDA cuts to its food bank support earlier this year.

Potential loss of grocery benefits would disproportionately hurt rural residents, veterans and elderly individuals who tend to be more dependent on SNAP benefits. Additionally, rural food pantries will face significant supply challenges because they rely more heavily on Department of Agriculture programs and have fewer private donors to help them.

According to Reuters, Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins told NewsNation that SNAP benefits would "go away" without a deal to reopen the government by November.

The liberal Center on Budget and Policy Priorities "estimates that about $5 billion is available in a contingency fund and is calling on the administration to use that for partial benefits in November," reports Geoff Mulvihill of The Associated Press. "Forty-six of the 47 Democrats in the U.S. Senate sent a letter Thursday to Rollins calling on her to release the contingency money."

States that issued verifiable benefit loss warnings include: Minnesota, California, Pennsylvania, Texas, California, Arkansas, Hawaii, Indiana, Mississippi, New Jersey, Kentucky, Florida, New York, North Dakota, South Dakota and Wisconsin.

Louisiana, Vermont and Virginia pledged to maintain food aid to recipients despite potential gaps in federal funding.

Food banks are already stretched thin, and changes to SNAP benefits are likely to leave some Americans hungry

Food banks have already been impacted by USDA cuts.
(Photo by Aaron Doucett, Unsplash)

With food prices continuing to climb higher than overall inflation, many Americans have turned to food banks to make ends meet. But food pantry organizers say they are already strapped by increasing needs and fear that when Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, changes start pinching people's budgets, pantries won't have enough food to meet the demand. 

Food bank shortages are likely to become more common for rural pantries because they rely more heavily on Department of Agriculture programs and have fewer private donors to lean on for assistance.

"Food banks across the country were already straining under rising demand. Now, they worry many more Americans will go hungry," reports Dan Frosch of The Wall Street Journal. "Some food banks and pantries are pushing for more state, local and private funding. Others are considering cutting back services and the amount of food they can distribute."

Food pantry leaders "say the SNAP reductions included in the new budget bill will strain resources by pushing more people whose benefits have either been cut or reduced toward pantries to get food," Frosch reports. "Republicans say changes to the SNAP program will ensure people receiving the benefits are working, as required."

Changes that have already gone into effect significantly shift age and work requirements to receive benefits. The new budget "expands work requirements for SNAP, raising the upper age limit for able-bodied adults from 54 to 64, meaning those people will typically have to work for 80 hours a month to qualify for food benefits," Frosch writes. Individuals caring for children 14-17 will now have to work to qualify for SNAP. 

Just as pandemic-era aid tapered off throughout the U.S., food inflation began to spike, which led to more people relying on food pantries. While most food banks were able to meet their community's needs, they now have to contend with cuts. Frosch explains, "Earlier this year, the Department of Agriculture canceled millions of pounds of shipments to food banks that were part of its emergency food-assistance program for low-income people." 

A USDA spokesperson told the Journal that regular food deliveries had continued, but "food banks say they are already feeling the impacts of federal cuts," Frosch adds. "For Sarah Aragón, the head of programming for Roadrunner Food Bank, New Mexico’s largest charitable food operation, that has meant losing more than seven million pounds of food she had been counting on."

Some pantries are planning to make cuts if needs overwhelm their supply, but others already run out of food sometimes. Aragón, from Roadrunner Food Bank, told Frosch, "When we have to tell people that we have no more left, the look on their faces when they walk away is like, ‘What am I going to do now?' I don’t have an answer.” 

Quick hits: Kentucky history in photos; rural SNAP use; world's biggest telescope; gloomy toy tariffs; radishes!

South Fork of the Kentucky River, Breathitt County, Kentucky, 1940. 
(Photo by Marion Post Wolcott, Farm Security Administration)

Even one photo of an event or a person during a historical era can add rich nuance to a story. Sometimes, photos can even be the story. "Imagine looking at a state in forty-year intervals. Documenting Kentucky: Three Photographic Surveys, does just that in a new show at the Frazier History Museum in Louisville, Kentucky," reports Ted Wathen for The Daily Yonder." From loading cut tobacco leaves to a handful of newly hatched guinea chicks to horse-led recliners, the photographs tell quite a story.

Far fewer rural families currently use the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, known as SNAP, than they did in 2015. "SNAP use has declined in nearly every state," reports John McCracken of Investigate Midwest. "Rural states have seen major drops in the number of households using the program, with Iowa, Mississippi, Arkansas and Tennessee seeing the most significant declines." The recently passed "One Big Beautiful Bill Act" will reduce federal SNAP spending by $290 billion over the next decade.

A small section of the observatory’s total view of the Virgo cluster. Bright stars in the Milky Way galaxy shine in the foreground, and many distant galaxies are in the background. (NSF-DOE photo)

Outer space can be a shared adventure as the world's largest telescope starts taking pictures. "The Vera C. Rubin Observatory is poised to discover billions of new astronomical objects, revolutionizing understanding of everything from the history of the solar system to the workings of dark energy," reports Jay Bennett for Wired. "The telescope will create a decade-long, high-resolution movie of the universe. It will generate about 20 terabytes of data per day, the equivalent of three years streaming Netflix."

While Santa Claus hasn't commented on the subject, the U.S. toy industry is hurting from high tariffs on Chinese goods. "The cost of toys and games is rising at a record rate as the industry begins to feel the impact of President Donald Trump’s tariffs on China," reports Rhian Lubin of The Independent. "Nearly 80% of the toys sold in the U.S. are sourced from China, according to The Toy Association, and the industry is bracing itself. . . . Last month Mattel, the creator of Barbie, Hot Wheels, Uno, American Girl and more, was threatened by Trump for refusing to move its production to the U.S. – the ultimate goal of the president’s tariffs."

Radishes come in a wide variety of flavors, colors
and shapes. (Photo by Philippe Collard, Unsplash)

For some people, summer's glory is summed up in a trip to the garden or a local farmer's market, where a variety of colors and flavors await to be tossed together into a delectable meal. Some visitors love fresh sweet corn, while some are rhubarb aficionados, but others love root crops -- especially radishes. "Of all the root crops known to humankind, my favorite is the humble radish," writes Jerry Nelson of Successful Farming. "Radishes are a good source of vitamin C, minerals, and bad breath. But their benefits don’t end there. They don’t even begin there. . . ."

Despite all their flaws, people are remarkably adaptable and creative beings. "Humans are the only animal that lives in virtually every possible environment, from rain forests to deserts to tundra," reports Christina Larson of The Associated Press. "This adaptability is a skill that long predates the modern age. According to a new study published in Nature, ancient Homo sapiens developed the flexibility to survive by finding food and other resources in a wide variety of difficult habitats." In other words, we were born food foragers and farmers!

SNAP cuts, requirements could leave more rural Americans hungry; critics say benefit to taxpayers unclear

Critics of  proposed cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) are struggling to find evidence of how they will help U.S. taxpayers. But they say one thing is clear: The changes outlined in the One Big Beautiful Bill could leave thousands of rural Americans hungry.

"Cuts to SNAP would affect residents of every state in all types of communities, but advocates fear the fallout could especially hit rural people, who are more dependent on food stamps, the largest anti-hunger program in the nation," reports Kevin Hardy for The Daily Montanan. The bill "expands work requirements to include people between 55 and 64 years old and those with children aged 7 or older." It contains stiffer rules for counties with higher unemployment numbers.

Government penalties for not working a required number of hours are dramatically tougher on rural residents because more remote places have far fewer business and employment opportunities. Hardy adds, "Rural hunger is already on the rise and grocery stores face an uphill battle to keep going in the most isolated parts of the country."

Residents in southeastern Missouri's Mississippi County, many of whom can scarcely afford a roof over their heads and food on their tables, provide an example of who SNAP cuts will hurt the most. Hardy explains, "Limited job opportunities leave many workers struggling to cover housing and grocery bills. Nearly a quarter of residents live below the poverty line — almost double the state and national averages."

SNAP cuts stand to do irreparable harm to rural grocery stores that already face razor-thin profit margins. "The National Grocers Association has opposed the potential cuts, saying SNAP provides not only critical food, but also meaningful boosts to local employment and economies," Hardy reports. "The organization, which represents retail and wholesale grocers, said cuts will particularly hurt independent and rural stores."

"Deep cuts to SNAP would have an uneven impact on rural stores," Hardy explains. "For Kay Voss, the cuts would be catastrophic at her Stratton Country Market in southwest Nebraska. She estimates 40% of sales are paid for with SNAP." She told Hardy, "“I’d probably close the doors."

Hungry people have fewer places to go in rural America, which adds stress to regional food banks that have already faced an uptick in need because of food inflation. Hardy reports, "Cuts to the SNAP program will drive up demand on food banks, especially in rural areas that have long struggled with access and transportation to secure fresh foods."

Policy director for Rural Democracy Initiative warns of budget bill’s ‘devastating’ impacts

Members of the 119th House applaud the passage of the One Big Beautiful Bill Act. (The Hill video reel photo)

After weeks of wrangling, the U.S. House of Representatives passed President Donald Trump's "one big, beautiful bill" on May 22. The bill, which has moved to the U.S. Senate, includes massive spending cuts to support tax cut extensions and additional tax cuts.

Michael Chameides, the communications and policy director for the Rural Democracy Initiative, in an opinion piece published in Iowa's Times-Republican, points out six ways the bill could hurt rural residents. He writes, "I’ve been hearing from rural leaders across the country about the devastating impacts this bill would have. . . .The good news is it’s not too late. But there’s little time to spare." 

Here are the six concerns Chameides cited:

1. The bill "guts" rural health care. "It would take health care away from 13.8 million Americans and increase the cost for millions more. In some states, 50% of rural children get healthcare from Medicaid. Millions more rely on access to clinics and hospitals that would likely close because of these cuts."

2. It cuts federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program spending. "More than 15% of families in small towns and rural areas rely on this support to feed their families."

(The Department of Agriculture canceled "about $660 million in funding this year for the Local Food for Schools program, which is active in 40 U.S. states," reports Aimee Picchi of CBS News. The cuts were announced in March and have left schools and farmers scrambling.)

3. The bill shifts more costs onto state and local governments. "Slashing federal funding to states would create new burdens for rural states that are already struggling to provide critical public services like health care, transportation, and emergency response services to local communities."

4. It takes away local land control. "Landowners have fought to stop the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines by passing bans and moratoria. . . .This bill would overrule state and local laws and ordinances. . . and deprive residents of a fair opportunity to evaluate the adverse impacts of pipelines."

5. The bill phases out clean energy and infrastructure spending, including tax credits. "It would also take away $262 million in funding for energy efficiency and conservation grants as well as transportation infrastructure. . . .Ending these tax credits will increase household energy costs, which are already higher in many rural communities."

6. The bill favors bigger agribusiness companies and mega-farms. "Leaders in Congress are using the budget reconciliation process to give big farms a $50 billion windfall. Add the heightened pressures and instability caused by the Trump administration’s erratic trade policy and more family farmers would lose their farms — while Big Ag consolidates more of the market."

Chameides calls on rural residents and businesses to speak up: “Lawmakers have already heard from the giant corporations who helped write the bill. Now they need to hear from the rest of us. It’s up to us to alert our communities and tell our lawmakers: Don’t sell rural America out to big corporations and the wealthy.”

A longer version of the Times-Republican op-ed was originally published by Barn Raiser. To learn more about what could happen to the bill in the Senate, click here. 

Opinion: Rural Americans already face food insecurity. Will Republican lawmakers leave them even hungrier?

Most Americans don't consider hunger a political
issue. (Adobe Stock photo)

Many rural residents already face the daily struggle of not having enough food. Republican lawmakers eager to cut SNAP benefits may be about to make their battle with hunger worse. "These are anything but good times in rural America, which has been hit by everything from tariffs to extreme weather to bird flu and immigration crackdowns," writes José Andrés in his opinion for The Washington Post. "On top of those crises, Congress is now adding another — threatening to cut federal food benefits as the Republican leadership plays politics with the budget."

Despite rural America being where the country's agricultural powerhouses are, rural residents are more likely to suffer from food insecurity and poverty. "The government’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP — once known as food stamps — is a lifeline for entire rural economies," Andrés explains. "Poverty rates are actually higher outside cities than in them. So it should be no surprise to learn that families in rural counties use SNAP more."

The desire to cut SNAP by Republican lawmakers representing rural regions seems like a particularly harmful mismatch. "In some of the reddest states in the country, where Donald Trump won by 20 points or more in 2024, SNAP benefits are about as widely used as they are in states such as California and New York," Andrés writes. "In Louisiana, where House Speaker Mike Johnson is from, it’s even higher: 1 in 5 count on SNAP to meet their basic food needs."

Congress has planned cuts anyway. "Under the House budget plan, SNAP is facing $230 billion in cuts over 10 years: a massive 20 percent reduction," Andrés explains. "More than two-thirds of SNAP recipients are either children, elderly or disabled. Three-fourths live below the poverty line. For a family of three, that means earning less than $26,650 a year."

Addressing hunger isn't a political issue for most Americans. "Support for hunger and nutrition programs is broad and deep, stretching from evangelical groups to progressive nonprofits," Andrés adds. "Doing good can be good politics. One of the reasons the government exists is to take care of our forgotten neighbors who need a helping hand. If 'America First' means anything, it surely means taking care of the forgotten Americans in so-called flyover country."

Zaytinya photo

José Andrés is a chef, restaurateur and
founder of the nonprofit organization
World Central Kitchen.
Read his full opinion here.

Some states look to restrict soda and candy from food stamp purchases. Arkansas and Indiana are 'first in line.'

SNAP changes restricting soda from purchases has
soda makers worried. (Adobe Stock photo)

Food stamp recipients in two states may no longer be able to purchase soda or candy with their monthly Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP benefits. Soda makers have long fought against the restriction. "The Agriculture Department is fast-tracking state requests to yank soda and candy from food-stamp programs," report Laura Cooper, Kristina Peterson and Josh Dawsey of The Wall Street Journal. "Arkansas and Indiana are among the first in line." The changes would impact many rural residents who are often more likely receive SNAP benefits than their metro or urban counterparts.

Indiana and Arkansas said "they were seeking clearance from the USDA to implement the changes, and Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins said her agency would move 'very, very quickly' to approve them," the Journal reports. Rollins told the Journal, "That’s exactly the vision of making America healthy again. I am 100% certain that these changes will be nothing but positive for those underserved communities that are food challenged.”

If multiple states choose to adopt the restrictions, soda maker sales would take a dip. "Soda companies have lobbied hard against such changes," the Journal reports. "The Republican governors of West Virginia and Utah have said they plan to pursue similar restrictions in their food-aid programs."

Historically, SNAP recipients spend a fair amount of their food purchasing dollars on highly processed foods including soda. "About 23% of food stamp dollars go toward foods like sweetened beverages, candy, desserts and salty snacks − for an annual total of about $25 billion," report Calley Means and Tarren Bragdon in their opinion for USA Today. "These foods are proven to contribute to obesity and a slew of related health problems in children and adults."

Soda makers have tried to convince President Trump that restricting SNAP food and beverage purposes would anger many of his supporters, and "Trump himself, who also drinks Diet Coke from a wine glass for toasts, has been skeptical of banning things his supporters like," reports The Wall Street Journal. "Republicans have long been divided on the issue, with some uncomfortable over the idea of policing people’s purchases."

GOP lawmakers consider snipping SNAP benefits to balance tax cuts. An expert explains SNAP.

The Conversation Chart, from USDA data

Congressional Republicans are eyeing substantial cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program; however, lopping off grocery dollars from the more than 41 million low-income Americans who rely on SNAP, which includes 1 in 5 children, could prove tricky and unpopular.

To explain what SNAP benefits are, and why some GOP lawmakers want to cut SNAP spending, The Conversation asked Tracy Roof, a political scientist who has researched government food programs, to explain, "What’s going on?" An edited version of their Q&A is shared below.

Why does it look like the federal government may cut SNAP spending?
"SNAP critics believe that the U.S. spends too much on the program, which cost the federal government $100 billion in the 2024 fiscal year. . . . Federal spending on SNAP, however, has been falling since it peaked at $119 billion in 2022. Some Republican lawmakers are calling for new changes that would cut spending on the program."

Is there a SNAP budget? How do people qualify for benefits?
No, there is no limit on what the federal government can spend on SNAP. However, persons applying for benefits must meet a complex set of eligibility criteria, which varies by state. "Americans can usually qualify for SNAP benefits if their income is under 130% of the federal poverty line. In 2025, that would be $41,795 for a family of four, and they have limited savings."

Does SNAP have work requirements? If so, what are they? Can unauthorized immigrants receive SNAP benefits?
"Most adults under the age of 60 are subject to work requirements if they are 'able-bodied' and not caring for a child or incapacitated adult. If adults between the ages of 18 and 54 don’t log at least 20 hours of work or another approved activity, their benefits can be cut off. Immigrants without authorization to reside in the U.S. aren’t eligible for SNAP."

How can the federal government try to cut SNAP spending?
There are two likely ways for lawmakers to trim SNAP costs.

"One is through the farm bill, a legislative package Congress typically renews every four or five years that sets policies for SNAP and programs that support farmers’ incomes. . . .The latest [Farm Bill] extension will expire on Sept. 30, 2025.

"The other option is through the so-called budget reconciliation process underway in Congress. Right now, the primary Republican plan calls for extending $4.5 trillion in tax cuts passed in the first Trump administration and making up to $2 trillion in spending cuts over the next decade."

How popular do you think these changes would be?
Cutting SNAP benefits at a time when food inflation and food insecurity are high is unlikely to be popular. "Polls show most Americans support increasing SNAP benefits, not cutting them. . . . Food banks, already struggling to meet demand and facing federal spending cuts, have warned they will not be able to fill gaps caused by reduced SNAP spending or new limits on benefits."

To read what changes or restrictions Republicans might seek to cut SNAP spending or to read more about the political obstacles to SNAP reductions, read the full Q&A here.