Within the first week of his term, President Donald Trump issued a flurry of executive orders and actions, including an attempted freeze on the funding of all federal assistance grants and loans, giving the administration time to determine which government programs are “consistent with the President’s policies and requirements.”
While this freeze has been temporarily blocked by a federal court amidst a number of lawsuits, and while the administration has been walking back the rhetoric of the order, the directive has prompted a number of burning questions about the president’s power to allocate federal money — including whether the president can effectively end food assistance programs like SNAP and WIC.
Can Trump stop SNAP and WIC payments?
The answer to this question is still unclear. Funding for SNAP and WIC is authorized by Congress and administered at the state level through the USDA. Congress has already authorized continued funding for SNAP with their one-year extension of the 2018 Farm Bill, and WIC was also authorized for continuation this past year.
The White House Office of Management and Budget (OMB), however, has some leeway in determining how this money is spent, because the USDA, as a federal organization, ultimately reports to the president.
In short, the Trump Administration has interpreted its budgetary purview to mean that, while it cannot end an existing federal program already funded by Congress, its management of this budget can be used to prevent the implementation of that funding — that is, should the judiciary ultimately clear the administration’s budget freezes.
Will Trump stop SNAP and WIC payments?
If the president is to be believed, SNAP and WIC payments will continue, even if the administration wins in court. “Social Security benefits, Medicare benefits, food stamps, welfare benefits, assistance that is going directly to individuals will not be impacted by this pause,” White House Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said in an attempt to clarify the nature of the executive action.
The rescinding of the strongly worded memo associated with the executive order may speak to some semblance of restraint related to budget cuts; but, importantly, it does not counteract the order nor the claim of presidential authority over the budget for programs like SNAP and WIC.
In short, should the courts clear his ability to halt any funding that does not align with the administration’s values, SNAP and WIC would effectively continue only at the whim of the president. Beyond the constitutional issues this would pose, it should go without saying that these programs are far too important to be under the purview of one office and one person.
With all this understood, SNAP and WIC participants in New York and across the country can expect to use their benefits as usual. At the same time, the dangerous precedent for interference in these vital programs should not be understated.
