Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Amends the Food and Nutrition Act to require State SNAP administering agencies to pay staff at least equivalent to Federal General Schedule rates and to update those wages annually. States submitting approved wage plans would receive Federal payments equal to 100% of SNAP administrative personnel costs for hiring, training, and maintaining staff, subject to a supplement-not-supplant maintenance-of-effort requirement and additional-full-time-equivalent position condition.
Left emphasizes improved access and worker pay; right emphasizes federal overreach and cost.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive statutory change to SNAP administration by setting wage floors tied to Federal pay and authorizing full federal reimbursement of administrative personnel costs contingent on approved wage plans and maintenance-of-effort.
Amends the Food and Nutrition Act to require State SNAP administering agencies to pay staff at least equivalent to Federal General Schedule rates and to update those wages annually.
States submitting approved wage plans would receive Federal payments equal to 100% of SNAP administrative personnel costs for hiring, training, and maintaining staff, subject to a supplement-not-supplant maintenance-of-effort requirement and additional-full-time-equivalent position condition.
States must submit wage plans within one year of enactment.
Narrow, administratively focused bill with clear benefits but large fiscal implications; could pass as part of larger package but stands alone faces resistance.
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive statutory change to SNAP administration by setting wage floors tied to Federal pay and authorizing full federal reimbursement of administrative personnel costs contingent on approved wage plans and maintenance-of-effort. It is reasonably specific about core operational requirements but omits several implementation, fiscal, and oversight particulars that would be expected given the scale of the funding and policy change.
Left emphasizes improved access and worker pay; right emphasizes federal overreach and cost.
These are examples from the analysis, not a ranked list of the most-affected groups.
Left emphasizes improved access and worker pay; right emphasizes federal overreach and cost.
Likely broadly supportive: raises frontline staff pay, improves hiring and retention, and shifts administrative costs to the Federal government.
Viewed as strengthening access to benefits and worker protections at state SNAP offices.
Cautious but generally favorable if controls exist: supports better staffing for program integrity and service delivery, but worries about long-term federal cost and incentives.
Would seek oversight, clear metrics, and budget discipline.
Likely opposed: views the bill as federal overreach that mandates higher state wages and creates open-ended federal liabilities.
Concerned about costs, work incentives, and centralizing personnel standards.
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Reached or meaningfully advanced
Still ahead
Still ahead
Still ahead
Narrow, administratively focused bill with clear benefits but large fiscal implications; could pass as part of larger package but stands alone faces resistance.
The bill has not accumulated any surfaced votes yet.
Left emphasizes improved access and worker pay; right emphasizes federal overreach and cost.
Narrow, administratively focused bill with clear benefits but large fiscal implications; could pass as part of larger package but stands al…
Relative to its intended legislative type, this bill clearly establishes a substantive statutory change to SNAP administration by setting wage floors tied to Federal pay and authorizing full federal reimbursement of adm…
Go beyond the headline summary with full stakeholder mapping, legislative design analysis, passage barriers, and lens-by-lens tradeoff breakdowns.