Sharon Parrott

The President’s accusations are baseless. His actions will undermine trust in our country’s economic statistics – widely viewed globally as the gold standard – that are vital to keeping our economy strong and meeting the needs of people and communities across the country.

x.com/byheatherlon...

Russ Vought: Appropriations process ‘has to be less bipartisan’ The OMB director said more rescissions packages could soon be headed to the Hill.

Bipartisan agreements are key to funding the government on time & with the resources required to serve the country’s needs. Undermining the ability for Congress to reach them risks lasting harm. www.politico.com/live-updates...

There’s little reason for the minority party in Congress to agree to a deal when the Admin & majority party can unilaterally strip funding they don’t like, or if the Admin may attempt to unilaterally & illegally withhold funds w/no pushback from the majority party.

Rescission Package Would Sabotage Recent Funding Deal, Cripple Future Ones | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities President Trump’s proposal to rescind $9.4 billion in previously approved spending, which the Senate is expected to vote on this week, is a bad idea for several reasons, as noted in a recent CBPP...

By approving the Administration’s rescission package, as is widely expected, congressional Republicans are sabotaging the bipartisan funding agreement reached just months ago & poisoning the well for future deals. www.cbpp.org/blog/resciss...

CBPP Announces New Executive Vice President, Legal Department and Administration | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) announced today that Nicole Greenidge-Hoskins has joined the organization as Executive Vice President, Legal Department and Administration following.....

I'm thrilled to welcome Nicole Greenidge-Hoskins to CBPP as Executive Vice President, Legal Department & Administration. Her deep commitment to our work, legal expertise, & experience supporting operational excellence will help CBPP meet this moment. www.cbpp.org/press/press-...

Republican Bill Will Raise Costs, Poverty, and Hunger, Take Health Coverage Away From Millions | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities House and Senate Republicans have now passed a bill that will raise families’ food and health care costs, increase poverty and hunger, take health coverage away from millions of people, and drive up d...

Congressional Republicans and the President now own its impact. Unfortunately, it is their constituents who will pay the price for their poor leadership. www.cbpp.org/press/statem...

House & Senate Republicans passed a bill that will raise families' food & health care costs, increase poverty & hunger, take health coverage away from millions of ppl & drive up deficits - all to give costly tax cuts to the wealthy & corporations.

House Should Reject Senate Republican Bill That Is Even Worse Than Already Harmful House Version in Important Ways | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities Following a series of middle-of-the-night backroom deals, and less than an hour after the final language was unveiled, Senate Republicans voted to pass a bill that would raise food and health care cos...

Senate Rs voted to pass a bill that wld raise food & health care costs on families, increase hunger & take health coverage away from millions of ppl while doubling down on tax cuts for the wealthy. House Rs must stand up for their communities & reject it. www.cbpp.org/press/statem...

Senate Republicans Can Still Abandon Disastrous, Rushed Reconciliation Bill | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities The Senate is barreling toward a vote on a still-not-finished bill that would take away health coverage and food assistance from millions of people who need it, raise families’ costs, and make a large...

The Senate is barreling toward a vote on an unfinished bill that wld take away health coverage & food assistance from millions, raise families’ costs, & make ppl in our nation worse off. There’s still time for senators to say no to this bill. My statement: www.cbpp.org/press/statem...

Chairman Boozman Statement on Ag Committee’s Reconciliation Provisions | The United States Senate Committee On Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry WASHINGTON – U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Chairman John Boozman (R-AR) issued the following statement on the budget...

The Parliamentarian ruled 2 of the most harmful #SNAP cuts in the Senate Republican bill violate the Byrd rule, including an unprecedented cost-shift to states that could end SNAP entirely in parts of the U.S. www.agriculture.senate.gov/newsroom/rep...

This cost-shift is a disaster. And no one should be sanguine that all states will come up with the $. #SNAP could disappear in some states or become nearly impossible to access in others. How in the world is this making us great?

A nationwide #SNAP program was created during the Nixon Admin to provide critical food assistance to people in every state who need it. SNAP has been incredibly successful at reducing hunger and malnutrition, though far too many ppl still struggle to afford food.

House Republican Reconciliation Bill Would Force States to Cut Food Assistance, Health Care, and Other Vital Services | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities The House Republican reconciliation bill features major cuts to food assistance and health care for millions of people, as reports have long indicated it would.The House Republican reconciliation...

State revenues are strained and will be in worse shape if the economy falters. If states can’t pay this new unfunded mandate, it is kids, seniors, veterans, people with disabilities, workers, and parents who will pay the price. www.cbpp.org/research/sta...

The problem here is the federal government is making deep cuts to federal SNAP funding and then not even assuring that the reduced federal funds get to families if states can’t pay their share.

Its only other option to reduce its costs to $146M wld be to create huge access barriers. And remember, “success” here would mean that 365k households who need assistance to afford food don’t get help – hunger will rise. Evictions too as ppl can’t afford food and rent.

Fed law (rightly) determines sets out eligibility standards for SNAP. The state can make some tweaks to state options to lower benefits for some or restrict eligibility for some, but that won’t be enough.

NC currently provides SNAP to about 730k households. If it can only pay $146M in state funding for SNAP benefits rather than $292M, then it will have to find a way to cut about 365k households off the program. Its options for doing this are limited.

A 10% cost shift to NC would = $292 M in 2028 (est). If NC decides it can only afford $146M, then it has to shrink its caseload so that it can afford the 10% state share on the benefits provided to each household still getting assistance.

2. The match structure means that if a state can only put up half of the funding, the fed funding falls by half too.

3. Benefits are set in federal law based on the cost of food.

To understand why, you need to know 3 things about the SNAP law and the bills.

1. The bills require the state to pay its share of benefits for each fam – federal $ can’t go to a fam unless the state puts in their share.

A state that decides it can pay some but not all of its share of benefits will have to dramatically shrink the # of ppl getting food assistance.

If a state decides it can’t pay any of the food benefit costs, then the fed gov’t would provide no funding & the state would have to terminate the program. It’s a match - fed $s only flow if states put up their share.

Despite a 50-yr history of the fed gov’t fully funding #SNAP benefits, both bills wld require states to pay a % of benefit costs – up to 15% in Senate & up to 25% in House. What ppl don’t understand & Rs proponents haven’t made clear, is what happens to fams if states can’t pay.

Research Note: Senate Republican Leaders’ Proposal Risks Deep Cuts to Food Assistance, Some States Ending SNAP Entirely | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities States, which must balance their budgets every year, would struggle to absorb these substantial new costs.

Our state by state numbers show how much states could be expected to pay under Senate version of provision: www.cbpp.org/research/foo...

Misunderstood sleeper issue in OBBB cld mean the end of #SNAP as a national food assistance program available in all states. The cost-shift drafting means a state that can’t pay its share of benefits loses ALL fed $; a state that can only pay ½ has to cut enrollment by about ½.

Add in the President’s tariffs and this agenda would make all but the highest income 20 percent of households *worse off*.

It shocks the conscience that Senate Republican leaders saw the impacts of the House bill — 16 million more people uninsured and millions losing help buying groceries, including families with children — and chose to double down.

Rather than course correct, Senate Republican leaders are rushing to advance a bill that is in some ways even more destructive and harmful than the unpopular House Republican bill. The Senate must reject it.

Policymakers of both parties in Congress need to see this budget, and this entire agenda, for what it is — an irresponsible tax giveaway at the expense of everyday families & investments in our future — and plan a better course for the country.

To get the full picture of the administration’s harmful agenda requires including the Trump-backed bill under consideration in Congress, which gives massive tax cuts to the wealthy partly paid for by raising costs and taking away health coverage and food assistance from millions.