The National Grocers Association (NGA) has expressed optimism regarding the U.S. Senate’s revised approach to reforming the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). In a statement, NGA President and CEO Greg Ferrara highlighted the advantages of the Senate’s proposed modifications to the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which would preserve 100% federal funding for SNAP benefits, provided that states maintain low payment error rates. Ferrara referred to this approach as “more measured and practical,” emphasizing that it aligns with NGA’s advocacy efforts and helps avoid the proposed $80 billion in SNAP changes.
Consumer advocates and industry trade groups have raised concerns that the House version of the bill reduces federal funding for SNAP too significantly. Ferrara characterized SNAP as both a “vital safety net” and a “powerful economic engine.”
The NGA is encouraging the Senate to further enhance the legislation by minimizing its impact on grocers and consumers while ensuring continued funding for SNAP-Ed, a program that promotes participants’ long-term health and self-sufficiency, reportedly yielding a high return on investment for American taxpayers.
“As we move forward in supporting the ultimate passage of the Big Beautiful Bill Act, independent grocers are prepared to collaborate with Congress to implement solutions that bolster Main Street and communities across the nation,” Ferrara stated.
The Food Industry Association (FMI) also endorses the SNAP program, recognizing it as a critical resource for those needing assistance. The FMI asserts on its website that any amendments to the program should strengthen its efficiency, particularly by aiding state agencies in making accurate payments and preventing criminal fraud.
Additionally, Republican proposals have suggested extending work requirements for SNAP eligibility. This would mandate that individuals up to age 64 and parents of children aged 10 and older work at least 80 hours per month to qualify for benefits. Currently, the work requirement applies to individuals aged 54 and under, while the House bill suggested a similar requirement for parents of children aged 7 and older.
Though a spokesperson for FMI was unavailable to comment on the Senate’s proposed changes, a recent survey conducted for the FMI revealed that a majority of voters—70%—support the SNAP program, while 59% oppose cuts to SNAP benefits.
Both NGA and FMI have voiced their opposition to recent state waivers that permit individual states to limit the purchase of certain items, such as snack foods, with SNAP benefits. Elizabeth Tansing, VP of state government relations at FMI, and Peter Matz, director of food, pharmacy, and health policy at FMI, noted in a recent blog post that while these waivers aim to promote healthier dietary habits, they could result in unintended consequences for grocery stores, SNAP participants, and consumers at large. They warned that such waivers might lead to increased costs, complicate the system, and create a “slippery slope” of variations from state to state.
