Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
This bill amends Section 16 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to set minimum wage standards and federal cost-sharing for State agencies that administer SNAP. It requires State SNAP personnel wages to be at least the corresponding Federal pay rates under 5 U.S.C. chapter 53 and updated annually.
Progressives emphasize wages, retention, and service improvements
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly defines its purpose and establishes concrete statutory mechanisms to raise wages and shift SNAP administrative personnel costs to the Federal government contingent on State wage plans and maintenance‑of‑effort, but it omits several executional and fiscal details that would typically accompany a substantive funding and entitlement change.
This bill amends Section 16 of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to set minimum wage standards and federal cost-sharing for State agencies that administer SNAP.
It requires State SNAP personnel wages to be at least the corresponding Federal pay rates under 5 U.S.C. chapter 53 and updated annually.
If a State submits an approved personnel wage plan, the Secretary must pay 100% of administrative personnel costs for SNAP staffing, hiring, training, and maintenance.
Clear policy fix with administrative focus but large fiscal consequences and federalism implications lower chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly defines its purpose and establishes concrete statutory mechanisms to raise wages and shift SNAP administrative personnel costs to the Federal government contingent on State wage plans and maintenance‑of‑effort, but it omits several executional and fiscal details that would typically accompany a substantive funding and entitlement change.
Progressives emphasize wages, retention, and service improvements
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Progressives emphasize wages, retention, and service improvements
Generally supportive.
The bill raises pay and funds full administrative costs, which likely improves staffing, retention, and service delivery.
It aligns with goals to reduce barriers to benefits and strengthen frontline public-sector jobs.
Cautiously favorable if accompanied by accountability.
The policy could improve program efficiency, but raises legitimate fiscal and implementation questions.
Favorable if cost controls and audits limit waste.
Skeptical to opposed.
The bill increases federal funding and prescribes wage floors tied to federal pay, reducing state flexibility and expanding federal involvement.
Concerns focus on costs and moral hazard.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Clear policy fix with administrative focus but large fiscal consequences and federalism implications lower chances.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Progressives emphasize wages, retention, and service improvements
Clear policy fix with administrative focus but large fiscal consequences and federalism implications lower chances.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly defines its purpose and establishes concrete statutory mechanisms to raise wages and shift SNAP administrative personnel costs to the Federal government conti…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.