Liz Ananat

@tmmcmillan.bsky.social has a new must-read piece on SNAP and work requirements. While her characterization of the evidence is both accurate and awesome, her story and the stories of other participants matter more. Let's all act in good faith.

Gift article:

www.nytimes.com/2025/06/10/o...

Watch me scramble in real time as I try to find the economic angle on the Musk-Trump tiff.

(I think I found one, and the issues it highlights are terrifyingly important.)

Seems like if we want to increase a culture of work etc etc, this might be more promising than taking food benefits away from 60 year olds or parents of 9 year olds. Of course funding things like this wouldn’t open up budgetary space for tax cuts for rich people.

Ok folks, we know work requirements reduce benefits without increasing work (cc: @chloeneast.bsky.social)

But who loses benefits and what happens if work requirements are reversed?

New evidence from linked SNAP-Medicaid data and a natural experiment in CT tell a concerning story...

Thread below 👇

What AEI Gets Wrong about SNAP Work Requirements They cited my research, so let me respond!

New from @chloeneast.bsky.social at Can We Still Govern:
AEI cited her work to make the case for SNAP work requirements. Chloe explains that her and other research show that work requirements reduce SNAP access while doing nothing for employment outcomes.
donmoynihan.substack.com/p/what-aei-g...

chart showing that service workers have more irregular hours inconsistent with work reporting requirements

The recurring theme of work requirements is that they hurt people who are working or looking for work.
Worse, the requirements make it impossible for some workers, such as those in the service sector with irregular hours. From @lizananat.bsky.social www.hamiltonproject.org/publication/...

I respond to AEI’s mischaracterization of three of my papers

AND

discuss the clear evidence that work requirements don’t increase work, but do reduce food assistance for households that need it.

Who do work requirements penalize? @lizananat.bsky.social‬, ‪@agpines.bsky.social‬, and Olivia Howard offer findings on low-income service sector workers whose unpredictable work hours are largely driven by their employers and not by choice. www.brookings.edu/articles/wor...

As @lizananat.bsky.social shows here, work requirements are unrelated to the jobs poor families depend on to survive. The result: one third of eligible service workers would get kicked off of programs with work requirements because of high volatility in the number of hours worked in service jobs.

Critical point: The legislation is designed to kick people off Medicaid because it ignores the reality that low-wage jobs have highly variable hours--and they can't control that.

Low-income workers experience—by far—the most earnings and work hours instability Instability is a defining characteristic of low-income workers’ earnings and work hours.

Inspired by your great work on hours volatility!

www.brookings.edu/articles/low...

Work requirements will trip some people up because they struggle with paperwork, but will by design hurt other people who work a lot but have unstable hours (thread)

Combined, these sources of volatility mean that nearly 1 in 3 service workers in households with children *who meet or exceed 80 work hours/month* over the course of the year would fall short of the work requirement in at least one month–and get kicked off basic needs programs: 8/8

Turnover is also high in the service sector–and the bill does not allow work search by those between jobs to count as work effort: 7/n

This volatility means that even someone who works on average throughout the year at well above the 80 hours/month required by the law is highly likely to have a “short” month and get kicked off basic needs programs: 6/n

That’s despite how hard it is to raise a family on this type of work. Hours fluctuate enormously in these jobs–driven overwhelmingly by employers’ focus on meeting fluctuating customer demand with the lowest possible labor costs, not by workers’ preferences: 5/n

And those aren’t just casual jobs held by young men who spend the rest of their time “playing video games”--in fact, service work has become more common for low-income families with school-age children than for any other group. 4/n

That’s bc Congress fails to understand low-wage work today: The bill is designed as if low-wage workers are still pulling fixed shifts at a factory &should just sign up for more shifts–but in reality, low-wage workers are increasingly in jobs in the service sector (retail, food service, health) 3/n

Work requirements penalize workers in volatile occupations Elizabeth Ananat, Anna Gassman-Pines, and Olivia Howard warn that work requirements, such as those Congress is currently considering adding or expanding in means-tested programs, penalize low-income w...

Each year, the bill would kick off 1 in 3 parents who work 80+ hours per month in the most common low-wage jobs *even if they manage to fill out the paperwork*, our new research with w/Olivia Howard @hamiltonproject.org finds: www.brookings.edu/articles/wor...
2/n

New research from me&@agpines.bsky.social

Congress is pushing work requirements for Medicaid&SNAP. You’ve heard these kick eligible folks off (@pamherd.bsky.social @donmoyn.bsky.social), don't increase work&cause hunger (@laurenhlb.bsky.social @chloeneast.bsky.social). But wait there's more! 1/n

#priorities
It really is just that simple.

YouTube video by Stone Center for Inequality Dynamics Elizabeth Ananat: Schedule Volatility in Hourly Service Work

ICYMI: Check out @lizananat.bsky.social Elizabeth Ananat’s, Mallya Professor of Women and Economics, Barnard College, presentation, “Schedule Volatility in Hourly Service Work: Evidence and Implications for Federal Income-Support Policies.” #academicsky
www.youtube.com/watch?v=dqwG...

Work requirements penalize workers in volatile occupations

Congress is considering adding or expanding work requirements for Medicaid and SNAP. But work requirements penalize low-income workers and families, who—not by choice—often experience volatility in employment and work hours. @lizananat.bsky.social, ‪@agpines.bsky.social‬, and Olivia Howard explain:

Work requirements penalize workers in volatile occupations Elizabeth Ananat, Anna Gassman-Pines, and Olivia Howard warn that work requirements, such as those Congress is currently considering adding or expanding in means-tested programs, penalize low-income w...

New @hamiltonproject.org research by @lizananat.bsky.social @agpines.bsky.social & Olivia Howard finds that work requirements penalize low-income workers for something they can’t control: employer-driven volatility in employment and hours.

www.brookings.edu/articles/wor...

A striking admission in Trump officials’ work requirements NYT op-ed: many working ppl who “work inconsistently throughout the year” will lose Medicaid & SNAP

New @hamiltonproject.org‬ ‬‬ brief by @lizananat.bsky.social‬, @agpines.bsky.social‬, Olivia Howard shows this is true - and why 1/

Schedule Policy/Career Rule is a Threat to Federal Statistical Agencies. Take Action Today. The Friends of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) is very concerned about the potential impact on federal statistics of Schedule Policy/Career Rule, a proposed change to federal employment policy. This change, initially introduced at the end of the first Trump administration (then referred to as “Schedule F”) seeks to reclassify certain senior federal employees, making it easier to remove them from their positions. Doing this requires adoption of regulations (a “rule”) to govern its implementation. On April 23, 2025, the Office of Personnel Management (OPM) opened a 30-day comment period on a rule to institute Schedule Policy/Career. OMB is accepting comments through May 23, 2025. We urge all Friends of BLS to utilize the templates below and take action to help preserve the integrity and objectivity of the federal statistical system by: Writing to your Representatives in Congress. Submitting a comment on regulations.gov. Policy Brief Email Template Comment Template

The administration is moving the rule. Official public (that's us!!) comment period is open.

Friends of BLS has resources making it super easy & efficient for you to:
1) submit evidence to the official record &
2) communicate to your federal reps
#econsky
www.friendsofbls.org/updates/2025...

Economists who use BLS data-- submit a public comment to defend its integrity!! See Aaron's thread!! #econsky

This can't be said enough. The narrative is quickly becoming but universities need fed funds, when it should be that the fed govt needs universities. NCI/NIGMS funding to Harvard/MIT supported research that led to the discovery of Herceptin, a cancer drug that has saved 3 million lives to date! 🧪

Japanese American National Museum takes a stand against DOGE cuts to NEH The National Endowment for the Humanities warned museums across the country that it was slashing funding, including money previously pledged to places such as LACMA and the Japanese American National ...

Can we get more of this? “The Japanese American National Museum will ‘scrub nothing,’ Fujioka said, and instead will highlight the importance of DEI.

“Our community is based on diversity, equity is guaranteed to us in the Constitution, and inclusion is what we believe in,” Fujioka said.

The problem is: they've mistaken correlation for causation. They think their parents and grandparents had a good life *because* of manufacturing jobs. When, in reality, their parents and grandparents had a good life *despite* manufacturing jobs, because of unions, high taxes, and social policies.