The Sentinel: Search results for SNAP

Federal food assistance changes threaten benefits for thousands of Illinoisans

The domestic policy law signed by President Donald Trump last week creates new work requirements that could jeopardize food assistance benefits for 360,000 Illinoisans.

by Ben Szalinski
Capitol News Illinois

SPRINGFIELD - Hundreds of thousands of Illinoisans could lose benefits from a federal food assistance program while the state will be required to cover more costs under changes passed in the latest domestic policy plan.

Photo: Donna Spearman/Unsplash

President Donald Trump signed the “One Big, Beautiful Bill Act” into law on July 4, making sweeping changes to social services programs, including Medicaid. Among the programs being revamped is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP. The bill institutes new work requirements for many people to remain eligible for benefits and shifts some costs for the program to the states.

Food stamps were first established in the 1930s during the Great Depression. Renamed to SNAP in 2008, the program provides monthly stipends for low-income Americans to purchase select foods at grocery stores. While states implement the program and pay a portion of administrative expenses, the federal government has historically covered the cost of the benefits.

Under the law, work requirements to qualify for SNAP benefits have been expanded to include people up to age 64, along with homeless people, veterans and young adults leaving foster care. Previously, only people age 18-54 had to meet work requirements.

Those populations didn’t previously have to prove they were doing a certain amount of work, but when the changes kick in, they will have to do 80 hours of paid, unpaid or volunteer work each month to qualify for benefits, according to the U.S. Department of Agriculture. The law continues to provide exemptions for people who are physically unable to work, such as for pregnancy.

The changes could leave 360,000 people in Illinois at risk of losing eligibility, according to the state.

“Trump and Republicans would rather children go hungry so their friends can receive tax cuts,” Gov. JB Pritzker said in a statement. “Here in Illinois, we have been working to combat food insecurity for years, and while no state can backfill these costs, the State of Illinois will continue to fight against these harmful impacts and stand up for working families.”

About 1.9 million people were using SNAP in Illinois as of March 2025, according to the USDA.

New costs for the state

Illinois and most other states will have to cover a greater portion of costs for SNAP under the law, including benefits based on the state’s error rate of over- and under-payments on benefits.

Beginning in federal fiscal year 2028, which begins in October 2027, the law requires states with an error rate greater than 10% as of at least FY25 to cover 15% of the cost of benefits. States with lower error rates would cover a smaller portion of the benefits. Illinois recorded an 11% error rate in FY24, according to the USDA.

More than 1.8 million Illinoisians received $4.7 billion of SNAP benefits in FY25, according to the state. If Illinois must pay 15% of the cost of benefits, it could leave the state on the hook for $705 million — or about 1.3% of the current-year budget. Also beginning in federal fiscal year 2027, which begins in October 2026, states will have to cover 75% of administrative costs for SNAP, rather than 50%. This year’s state budget appropriates $60 million for administrative costs for SNAP — up $20 million from last year.

The changes are part of initiatives by congressional Republicans and the Trump administration to shift more responsibility for assistance programs to states. The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office estimates changes to SNAP will reduce federal spending by $279 billion over 10 years but increase state spending on SNAP by $121 billion over the same time. The CBO predicts some states could abandon the program or choose to provide a lower level of benefits and not make up for reductions Congress made to the program.

Pritzker and 22 other governors sent a letter to Congress last month saying it’s possible states will have to leave or reduce the SNAP program because of the new cost requirements.

Capitol News Illinois is a nonprofit, nonpartisan news service that distributes state government coverage to hundreds of news outlets statewide. It is funded primarily by the Illinois Press Foundation and the Robert R. McCormick Foundation.

10 ways the GOP budget will make life worse for Americans

For the first time, states will have to take on a significant share of funding SNAP. New work requirements for SNAP will have little effect on employment, but will cause more children to go hungry.

by Sarah Anderson and Lindsay Koshgarian
OtherWords

The GOP’s “One Big Beautiful Bill,” which narrowly passed Congress and was recently signed by President Trump, represents the largest transfer of wealth from the poor to the rich since chattel slavery.

Here are just 10 of the worst things about it.

1. It’s going to kill people.

Cuts to Medicaid and the Affordable Care Act, combined with new administrative hurdles, could result in an estimated 51,000 preventable deaths per year. The new law and other actions by the Trump administration will strip health insurance from 17 million people.

2. It will be an apocalypse for rural hospitals.

The budget restricts the provider taxes that many states use to fund Medicaid. The threat is particularly severe for rural hospitals, which rely heavily on Medicaid revenue. More than 700 rural hospitals are already at risk of closure — and at least 338 are at increased risk due to changes in this budget.

3. It takes food from the mouths of hungry people.

New work requirements for SNAP benefits will take food assistance from millions, including children and veterans. As with Medicaid, new work requirements for SNAP will have little effect on employment, but will cause more children to go hungry.

4. It squeezes states on SNAP.

For the first time, states will have to take on a significant share of funding SNAP. This unprecedented shift will likely lead many states to cut enrollees or even terminate food aid altogether.

5. It bars lawfully present immigrants from aid.

Hundreds of thousands of lawfully present immigrants, including children, will lose access to Medicaid, the Children’ s Health Insurance Program, Medicare, ACA tax credits, and SNAP benefits. And 2.6 million U.S. citizen children who live with only an undocumented adult are expected to lose their Child Tax Credit.

6. It terrorizes immigrant families.

The GOP budget provides $170 billion to arrest, detain, deport, and wall off migrants. That includes $45 billion for new immigration detention centers, including family detention facilities — a vast increase that will primarily benefit private companies contracted to build and run them.

7. It takes from the poor to give to the rich.

The bill’s tax policies will overwhelmingly benefit the wealthiest households. A Yale analysis of the bill’s combined tax and spending policies finds that the poorest 20 percent of households will suffer a net income loss of $700 per year on average, while the top 1 percent will get a $30,000 increase.

8. Corporations will take the spoils for themselves.

The budget keeps the corporate tax rate at 21 percent, a drastic reduction from the 35 percent rate from before the first Trump tax cuts in 2018 — despite the fact that ordinary workers have not benefited from this rate reduction.

9. It rewards polluters while raising energy costs.

The budget also includes more than $1 billion in new tax breaks and subsidies for the fossil fuel industry, accelerating climate change while costing taxpayers. It also allows oil and gas companies to avoid paying fees for polluting methane leaks, a major cause of climate change.

Meanwhile, cuts to clean energy subsidies could raise household energy bills by $415 a year over the next decade.

Photo: Dariusz Sankowski/Pixabay

The Big Beautiful Bill gives the Pentagon billions of dollars to spend with private contractors.

10. It funds war and enriches war profiteers.

The bill gives the Pentagon a $150 billion boost, bringing overall Pentagon spending to over $1 trillion — a record high. That includes $25 billion for the “Golden Dome,” a missile defense system that’s economically and physically impossible but would enrich wealthy Pentagon contractors like Elon Musk.

Instead, Congress should harness America’s abundant wealth to create a moral economy that works for all of us. By fairly taxing the wealthy and big corporations, reducing our bloated military budget, and de-militarizing immigration policy, we could free up more than enough public funds to ensure we can all survive and thrive.

We have no excuse for not investing our national resources in ways that reflect our Constitutional values: to establish justice, domestic tranquility, real security, and the general welfare for all.

Sarah Anderson directs the Global Economy Project at the Institute for Policy Studies. Lindsay Koshgarian directs the IPS National Priorities Project. They produced a longer version of this analysis for Repairers of the Breach. This version was distributed by OtherWords.org.

Commentary |
Basic human needs are not fair fame for billionaire tax cuts

It’s clear that this nation’s safety net has to be stronger so that people like me don’t fall through the cracks.

by Marisa Pesce

OtherWords

Tens of millions of Americans rely on the public assistance programs — like Medicaid, SNAP, housing aid, and more — that Republican leaders are now threatening to gut.

I’m one of them.

My dream is to regain the financial independence I once enjoyed before life and systemic obstacles got in the way. I come from a family with a history of mental illness and domestic abuse, and I’ve suffered through mental health challenges myself.

I’ve always worked hard. After high school, I earned a college degree and found the calling of being a teacher. I earned and paid for my Master’s degree while teaching full time as a high school math teacher. I still struggled with challenges, but life was good. The system had worked. I had a home and was financially independent.

I’ve had to rely on someone who participated in the domestic violence against me to help with rent.

Then, I was the victim of a major, life changing domestic violence event, and my life started to unwind. I had to relocate to another state where I didn’t have a place to call home, my benefits were less, and my mental illness was exacerbated by the isolation and trauma.

Despite the challenges I faced, I was able to find some needed assistance for food and mental health care as I got on my feet.

Also known as “food stamps,” the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) was a godsend for helping me put food on the table. Throughout my life both Medicaid and Medicare have helped with mental health treatment, and the Supplemental Security Disability Income (SSDI) program helped keep me out of poverty.

These are precisely the circumstances for which temporary assistance for basic needs like food, housing, and health care exists. But affordable housing was unavailable in my new home state, and SNAP benefits were much lower — even as my food needs stayed the same.

So my debts increased, and I’ve had to rely on someone who participated in the domestic violence against me to help with rent. I have a little income from SSDI, and I volunteer to stay engaged in my calling to teach and help others while I fight to recover from losing my home and my ability to keep up financially.

It’s clear that this nation’s safety net has to be stronger so that people like me don’t fall through the cracks. But House Republicans are currently trying to cut food assistance and other benefits, not strengthen them.

I just want to eat, get better, and afford safe housing so I can get back on my feet, back to financial independence, and back to doing all I can to help my community.

I need more help putting food on the table. But they’re proposing cuts to drastically reduce federal funding for SNAP, expand already harsh working requirements, and change how our need for healthy food is calculated, which is likely to slash benefits. And they’re doing it all to finance $4.5 trillion in tax breaks for corporations and the wealthiest.

I just want to eat, get better, and afford safe housing so I can get back on my feet, back to financial independence, and back to doing all I can to help my community. Yet I and millions like me are nothing but pawns in a political game that aims to hurt us and help those who already have wealth.

When I was teaching, I taught my students about fairness and equality — about what it means to live in a society where we look out for each other, where no one is left to be ill, unhoused, and hungry. I think some politicians need to go back to school, because they seem to have forgotten lessons like these.

So it’s our job to school them. We must let them know that basic human needs are not fair game for getting money for tax cuts for billionaires. Instead, our priorities should be healthy and safe communities for all.

About the author:
Marisa Pesce is a teacher, human rights consultant, anti-poverty advocate, and volunteer with RESULTS from Providence, Rhode Island. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.

Keywords:

Potential Medicaid, SNAP cuts could derail American education system

Illinois' "trigger law" could also lead to over 700,000 adults losing Medicaid coverage if federal reimbursement rates drop below 90%.

by Judith Ruiz-Branch
Illinois News Connection

CHICAGO - As Congress considers federal cuts to Medicaid and SNAP food assistance, groups advocating for Illinois schools are speaking out on how it would affect students across the state and the education system at large.

They said budget cuts would have both direct and indirect effects, from student eligibility to school reimbursements for things like meals and health screenings, and straining the state budget as well.

Jessica Handy, executive director of Stand for Children Illinois, highlighted the importance of students having access to health care and food, linking it to issues like chronic absenteeism, which has recently spiked in Illinois.

"These things really are all interconnected," Handy explained. "It's not that kids can show up to school hungry, show up to school with some severe chronic health issues and not have treatment and then be able to sit there and learn as if those things didn't happen."

She stressed implementing stricter qualifying requirements for Medicaid would reduce the number of students with health coverage and school funding from Medicaid reimbursements.

Handy pointed out changes in school-based Medicaid reimbursements like expanding coverage to include therapy services and vision screenings are now a significant funding source for schools. Illinois' "trigger law" could also lead to over 700,000 adults losing Medicaid coverage if federal reimbursement rates drop below 90%, potentially affecting school staff.

"If the Legislature comes back into session and wants to change that trigger law, then we have another really expensive budget pressure that leaves fewer flexible dollars to fund our schools," Handy observed.

Handy noted potentially shifting SNAP benefit costs to states could also jeopardize school funding. Although Illinois' 2025 legislative session has adjourned, she emphasized lawmakers would have to come back this year if federal budget cuts are implemented to rework the state budget, with the uncertainty further compounding matters.

"Schools can't budget and plan effectively for programs throughout the school year when they're not sure what the impact's going to be," Handy added. "It leaves everybody in a kind of gray area that's not good for stability and not good for really being able to focus on programs, instead of on logistics and keeping the doors open."

Other interesting articles:

Down but not out, SJO stumbles against Unity

St Joseph-Ogden head coach Shawn Skinner

Spartan head coach Shawn Skinner talks to players after his team's 21-0 loss on the road at Unity.

"I thought our defense played stout. I thought that we had some plays that were designed to be good. We just had one breakdown here and there. Unity wasn't going to allow us any breakdowns."

Head coach Shawn Skinner

On beautiful September evening, St. Joseph-Ogden fans fill the visiting team bleachers and wait for the week four game to start. A win victory would have kept the Spartans tied for first in the Illini Prairie Conference. The shutout drops SJO into a five-way tie with Unity, Monticello, Prairie Central and Olympia for second place.

Crayton Burnett throws a pass against the Unity Rockets

"We are going to learn from this. I'm a big believer you can learn as much from win as a loss. I don't think you got to lose to learn." ~ Coach Skinner

Above: Crayton Burnett makes a pass during first half action against the Rockets. Not having enough time in the pocket to throw the junior signal caller threw for 66 yards, completing 10 of 20 attempts.

Left: Keaton Nolan makes a catch while playing on kickoff return for the Spartans. Nolan was held to just 23 yards of rushing on offense after eight touches.

Below: Senior Jaden Miller blast his way past two Unity blockers while playing defense in the second quarter.

All photos: PhotoNews Media/Clark Brooks

Jaden Miller, senior, fights his way past Unity offensive linemen.

A Spartan fan takes photos from the stands prior to the start of the football game against Unity. There will be a lot more photos of players next week as SJO hosts the Pontiac Indians (1-3) for their homecoming contest this Friday.

Sam Wesley yells instructions to teammates before the snap

"It was a hostile environment. We came out and gave our best effort. You can't fault us (for) that."

~ Sam Wesley, Senior, Linebacker

Above: Senior running back Brayden Weaver finds open turf in front of him during a carry in the first half. Weaver finished the game with just 13 all-purpose yards in the week four game against the Rockets.

Right: Sam Wesley shouts out instructions and adjustments to teammates before the Rockets snap the ball during second half action.

Below: Conner Hodge blocks nose to nose with a Unity lineman.

All photos: PhotoNews Media/Clark Brooks

Viewpoint |
Nearly half of older Americans can’t even afford basic needs

"The next administration wants to slash the social safety net. That would be devastating for seniors like me."

by Sherlea Dony

OtherWords

I worked hard my whole career and retired feeling secure. Then I lost every last dime in a scam. I was left with $1,300 a month in Social Security benefits to live on in an area where monthly expenses run about $3,700.

I’m a smart woman, but scams against older Americans are increasing in number and sophistication. Whether through scams, strained savings, or costs of living going up, half of older Americans — that’s 27 million households — can’t afford their basic needs.

And suddenly I became one of them. The experience has taught me a lot about the value of a strong social safety net — and why we’ll need to protect it from the coming administration.

I was ashamed and frightened after what happened, but I scraped myself up off the floor and tried to make the best of it.

I’d worked with aging people earlier in my career, so I was familiar with at least some of the groups who could help. I reached out to a local nonprofit and they came through with flying colors, connecting me to life-saving federal assistance programs.

I was assigned a caseworker, who guided me through applying for public programs like the Medical Savings Plan (MSP), the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), subsidized housing, Medicare Part D, and Medicaid.

It’s hard to describe my relief at getting this help.

Before receiving the MSP, I’d been paying for medications and health insurance — which cost about $200 — out of my monthly Social Security check. With MSP, that cost is covered. I also found an apartment I liked through subsidized housing, and I have more money for groceries through SNAP. Now it’s easier to afford other necessities, like hearing aid batteries and my asthma inhaler.

But I’m worried about the incoming administration’s plans to cut programs like these, which have helped me so much. They’re proposing slashing funding and imposing overly burdensome work and reporting requirements. Studies show that requirements like these can cause millions of otherwise eligible people to lose critical assistance.

President-elect Trump has also indicated that he favors increased privatization of Medicare, which would result in higher costs and less care. And his tax promises are projected to move up the insolvency date of Social Security.

All told, the federal budget cuts the incoming Republican majority in Congress has put forward would slash health care, food, and housing by trillions over the next 10 years, resulting in at least a 50 percent reduction in these services. And they plan to divert those investments in us into more tax cuts for the nation’s very wealthiest.

I want lawmakers of each party to know how important these social investments are for seniors and families. Older Americans — who’ve worked hard all our lives — shouldn’t be pushed out onto the streets, forced to go without sufficient food or health care due to unfortunate circumstances.

We have the tax dollars — the question is whether we have the political will to invest in seniors, workers, and families, or only for tax cuts for the very rich. If we do the latter, that’s the real scam.

About the author:
Sherlea Dony is a retired American Sign Language interpreter, consultant on access services for students who are deaf and hard of hearing, and copy editor currently living in Rochester, New York. This op-ed was distributed by OtherWords.org.

Commentary |
Six ways Trump's budget will damage rural Americans' way of life

Republicans in Congress are jamming through a sweeping bill to fund handouts to the rich - at the cost of jobs, health care, and food in rural America.

by Michael Chameides
OtherWords

Right now, Congress is working on a giant, fast-track bill that would make historic cuts to basic needs programs to finance another round of tax breaks for the wealthy and big corporations.

As the Communications and Policy Director for the Rural Democracy Initiative, 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.

This dangerous, unpopular bill would increase costs for rural working families by thousands of dollars per year, leaving millions hungry and without health care — all to provide tax breaks and handouts to the wealthy and special interests.

Here are just six of the worst provisions.

1. It guts rural healthcare.

The bill would drastically cut Medicaid and impose new barriers to care. It would take healthcare away from 13.8 million Americans and increase the cost for millions more. In some states, 50 percent of rural children get healthcare from Medicaid. Millions more rely on access to clinics and hospitals that would likely close because of these cuts.

Other Stories ~

Global Zionist citizenship, an updated anifesto

State Representative says Illinois needs to focus on its citizens

American holiday efficiency, a three-for-one on June 14

2. It takes food off the tables of rural people.

The plan includes approximately $290-$319 billion in cuts to SNAP (the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps) even as the cost of groceries continues to escalate. More than 15 percent of families in small towns and rural areas rely on this support to feed their families.

3. It shifts costs to states and local governments.

State and local governments in rural areas depend more on federal funding from programs like SNAP and Medicaid than other states. 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 control.

Landowners have fought to stop the use of eminent domain for carbon pipelines by passing bans and moratoria, as well as enacting county setbacks and safety requirements to protect their communities.

But this bill would overrule state and local laws and ordinances, override local voices, and deprive residents of a fair opportunity to evaluate the adverse impacts of pipelines. It also sets up a “pay to play” system under which companies can simply pay for pipeline, mining, and drilling permits — and avoid public comment and legal challenges.

5. It ends clean energy and infrastructure funding.

The bill would phase out existing tax credits for wind, solar, batteries, geothermal, clean energy, and advanced manufacturing. 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. These changes would also reduce new clean energy projects — and jeopardize billions in rural investments in clean energy manufacturing.

6. It gives handouts to agribusiness 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.

In short, this bill would make it harder for rural people to meet their basic needs — all so the wealthy and corporations can avoid paying their fair share of taxes like the rest of us do.

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.

Michael Chameides is the Communications and Policy Director for the Rural Democracy Initiative. A longer version of this op-ed was originally published by Barn Raiser. This version was distributed for syndication by OtherWords.org.

Food prices, inflation threaten food security for Illinois families

by Lily Bohlke, Public News Service

Supply-chain issues, inflation and job loss during the pandemic have put many families' food security at risk.

In Illinois, hunger remains higher than pre-pandemic levels. Recent census surveys show 7% of households in the state are considered food insecure, and it jumps to 12% for households with children.

Jim Conwell, senior director of marketing and communications for the Greater Chicago Food Depository, said for families already concerned about making ends meet, increased grocery prices are hitting household budgets hard.

"Add on top of that, as we enter the winter months, increased costs for utilities and home heating," Conwell outlined. "There's going to be more families who are struggling to make it through a month and get all the foods they need."

According to the U.S. Department of Labor, food prices overall have increased 6.8% since November 2020. Prices for meat, poultry, fish and eggs have risen more than 12%, and they're up 4% for fresh produce.

And with the ongoing challenge of rising prices, Conwell pointed out it can be even more difficult for families to get back on track, despite many people going back to work and schools reopening.

"Households with children and households of color have been disproportionately impacted by the increased need during COVID-19," Conwell reported. "Here in this area, Black and Latino households are more than twice as likely to experience food insecurity as white households."

He added the Food Bank also has mobile pantries for people who can't get out to shop for groceries, as well as programs for enrolling in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

Between 2019 and 2021, SNAP has seen an increase of seven million people receiving benefits.

Op-Ed |
Congress is taking from the poor and giving to the rich

Let’s say you’re lucky enough to get housing at that wage. Do you then spend all your money on rent and skip nutritious meals for your family?

by Jocelyn Smith
OtherWords

I know how it feels to be hungry and homeless.

That’s why after work, I drive around town and pick up leftover food from restaurants, schools, grocery stores, and special events. My fellow volunteers and I set up in a big parking lot in our downtown to make this food available to anyone who shows up — no questions asked.

And it’s why other volunteers and I also work to find empty housing units that have fallen into disrepair because the landlords can’t afford the upkeep. We raise money and give them grants so they can bring the units up to code for use as low-income housing rentals.

I’m proud to do this work. But it’s no substitute for fair, living wages and a reliable public safety net. The minimum wage where I live is $12 — well below the $21 per hour the National Low Income Housing Coalition has calculated is necessary to afford a market rate two-bedroom rental locally.

Let’s say you’re lucky enough to get housing at that wage. Do you then spend all your money on rent and skip nutritious meals for your family? Or do you skip health care and medication? If you have a paycheck and a roof over your head, you might not qualify for food assistance, even if you don’t make enough to make ends meet.

foodbank photo — Foodbanks play a crucial role in addressing hunger and ensuring that vulnerable populations have access to nutritious food when they are unable to afford or access enough food on their own.

I work, volunteer, take care of my child, and I’m fortunate enough to have housing. But I still need to rely on SNAP — the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, also known as “food stamps” — for my family.

My daughter has epilepsy, and thankfully I was able to get her onto Social Security Disability Insurance. However, she needs not only costly medication but also frequent neurological supervision and a device that helps to stop her seizures. There’s no neurologist in our town who can treat her, so we have to travel and lodge hours away for it.

when we need help, the bar for our income shouldn’t be so low that we must be nearly destitute, without any savings or emergency cushion, to qualify.

The expense is enormous, and that’s not even getting into expensive medications for my own heart problems and autoimmune disorders. Thankfully, we qualify for Medicaid. Otherwise, treatment would be out of reach.

But what does it say about our policy priorities when we need to say, “I’m disabled, taking care of my disabled daughter, I work, and I help feed my community, and yet I need assistance affording meals for my family?” These are the realities that a good society plans for so we can all thrive, no matter what obstacles life throws our way.

The programs our tax dollars pay for so families like mine can get help when we need it must be more robust. Programs like SSDI shouldn’t be so inaccessible. Food, housing, and health care shouldn’t be so expensive — and wages shouldn’t be so low that these basic necessities are unaffordable.

And when we need help, the bar for our income shouldn’t be so low that we must be nearly destitute, without any savings or emergency cushion, to qualify.

Is Congress working on any of this? Unfortunately, no. Instead, they’re doing the opposite right now.

In fact, the GOP budget proposal would slash $880 billion from Medicaid and $230 billion from food assistance. They’re also cutting government agencies that assist with affordable housing, transportation, safety, veterans, and children with disabilities.

Why? Because they need to find at least $4.5 trillion to give even more tax cuts to the wealthiest and largest corporations. They are reaching into my very shallow pockets, into my daughter’s life-saving medical care, and into the mouths of those who come to my food table in that parking lot.

They’re stealing from us to give to the rich, perpetuating a vicious cycle of poverty that keeps people homeless and hungry.

I don’t think that’s fair. Do you? We all deserve better.

Jocelyn Smith lives in Roswell, New Mexico. She works at a local talk radio station, runs a local Food not Bombs chapter, and volunteers at Rehab to Rental, helping to increase affordable housing options. This op-ed was produced in partnership with the Institute for Policy Studies and the Working Class Storyteller and distributed by OtherWords.org.

Federal Affordable Connectivity Program offers low-cost internet to eligible citizens

Photo:NAPSI

NAPSI -- A fast, reliable Internet connection has become a critical part of our daily lives. From remote learning and working to networking and searching for jobs, Americans everywhere felt an online shift during COVID-19.

And, while the country gradually recovers from the pandemic, the collective need to stay connected remains stronger than ever.

Enter the Affordable Connectivity Program (ACP).

ACP extends and makes permanent the Internet subsidy for families in need that began under the Emergency Broadband Benefit (EBB) program. Falling under the $1.2T bipartisan Infrastructure Investment and Jobs Act, the ACP is part of a $65 billion broadband Internet initiative designed to bring affordable or even free Internet service to families who qualify.

Eligible households can save up to $30 a month, or up to $75 if they reside on tribal lands.

So, who qualifies? Here’s a glance at the different criteria from the FCC of which one or more is required:

Household is at or below 200% of the Federal Poverty Guidelines.

Participates in certain assistance programs, such as SNAP, Medicaid, Federal Public Housing Assistance, SSI, WIC, or Lifeline.

Participates in tribal-specific programs, such as Bureau of Indian Affairs General Assistance, Tribal TANF, or Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations.

Participates in the National School Lunch or Breakfast Program, including through the USDA Community Eligibility Provision.

Received a Federal Pell Grant during the current award year.

Meets the eligibility criteria for a participating provider’s existing low-income Internet program.

Visit fcc.gov/acp for more details and call 844-844-WIFI (844-844-9434) to find a participating provider nearby.