New Trump Rule Could Cut Food Aid for 6.3 Million People

By Yuval Rosenberg and Michael Rainey

Grocery store shelves

Good Wednesday evening. On this date in 1918, an armistice signed by the Allies and Germany signaled the end of fighting along the Western Front in World War I. Three years later, a casket containing the remains of an unidentified American service member was transported from the Capitol Rotunda, where it had been laying in state, to Arlington National Cemetery, where it was interred in a Tomb of the Unknown Soldier in a ceremony presided over by President Warren G. Harding. Today, we salute those who have served.

Here's your fiscal update.

Trump Admin Rule Change Could Cut 6.3 Million From Food Aid Program

The Trump administration released a plan this week that could cut more than 6 million people from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly referred to as food stamps.

A proposed rule from the U.S. Department of Agriculture would limit a policy called "broad-based categorical eligibility," which currently allows households that receive assistance through the Temporary Assistance for Needy Families program to also receive food aid through SNAP, even if their income is above the SNAP eligibility limit. States set their specific limits, but TANF benefits are in some cases available for those with income up to 200% of the federal poverty level; SNAP, on the other hand, typically cuts off aid at 130%.

According to an analysis by USDA, the rule change would result in nearly 18% of SNAP recipients - about 6.3 million people - losing their benefits. In addition, since SNAP automatically provides eligibility for other food aid programs, about 1.8 million children would lose access to free school lunches.

In the proposed rule published Tuesday in the Federal Register, the USDA said it was concerned that states had expanded SNAP benefit eligibility "beyond congressionally approved limits intended to preserve benefits for the truly needy."

Some Democratic lawmakers spoke out against the rule change. Calling it "heartless and cruel," Rep. Angie Craig, the senior Democrat on the House Agriculture Committee, said the "proposed rule would make it harder to meet basic needs and roll back efforts to streamline federal programs."

According to USDA data, more than 5 million people have already lost SNAP benefits during the second Trump administration, following the passage of the Republican tax bill in July 2025, which tightened the eligibility rules.

Currently, about 36 million people are receiving assistance through the program. If approved, the proposed rule change would take effect in 2029.

Dems, GOP Strategize Over Looming Funding Deadline

Ahead of a December 11 deadline to fund the government and avoid a shutdown of federal agencies, the top Democratic appropriator in the Senate says she wants a short-term funding bill that would give Democrats more leverage on spending bills next year.

Sen. Patty Murray of Washington told Politico that she wants a stopgap spending bill to keep the government funded into January, when her party takes control of Congress and she takes the gavel of the Senate Appropriations Committee. Murray reportedly said that her approach would ensure that the full-year spending bills Congress must pass reflect voters' demands.

"Voters handed us a huge mandate to write these bills that reflect their priorities," Murray told Politico. "So how we can lower costs and end corruption and end the war in Iran - the best way for us to do that is to do a short-term CR and then write these funding bills for next year."

Some Democrats reportedly have rejected the idea of a clean, short-term funding extension that wouldn't block funding for the Iran war. And Chuck Schumer, the Senate Democratic leader who faces some calls from progressives to step down from his leadership role, also faces pressure from some Democrats insisting on quick action to halt war funding.

Maryland Sen. Chris Van Hollen, who reportedly is mulling a potential challenge to Schumer, has dismissed the idea of a clean continuing resolution to avoid a shutdown.

"President Trump would have to tell the country that he wants to shut down all these federal agencies in order to keep his illegal, senseless war going," Van Hollen said, according to Punchbowl News. "Even after the American people have spoken loudly and clearly on this."

Murray told Politico that Democrats are still discussing how they might use the looming funding deadline to end the war, including possibly cutting off war funding as a condition of keeping federal agencies open. She reportedly said that Democrats are "looking at all the options" for ending the war.

Murray also said that Democrats will seek to push back on the Trump administration's efforts to shift or cancel congressionally approved spending and will demand an extension of their block on an administration plan to have political appointees oversee federal grants.

"I am going to make sure that we Trump-proof every one of our bills that we write next year, so this administration follows the letter of the law," Murray said.

Republicans still eyeing a third reconciliation bill: As Republicans try to decide on an agenda for their final weeks in power, some in the party are pushing to enact a conservative agenda, including a third party-line reconciliation bill.

House Freedom Caucus members argued at a news conference Wednesday that the party's election losses were the result of its legislative track record, or lack thereof.

"It's not because we didn't do enough liberal things that we had the result last Tuesday," Rep. Scott Perry of Pennsylvania, who lost his reelection bid, told reporters. "It's because we didn't deliver on the things that we told America we were going to do."

Passing another reconciliation bill will likely be a heavy lift - and will require a drive to move quickly that may also be a challenge.

"Right now, I'm not getting engagement from the White House, from either Senate or House leadership. So if that's going to happen, it's going to come from the pressure from members here," Sen. Ron Johnson, chair of the Senate Budget Committee, told Semafor on Tuesday.

Finding agreement on the details of a reconciliation bill could be problematic, given lingering divisions about what might be included in the package, including some qualms about Iran war funding.

"I think we're going to have a plan," Sen. John Kennedy said, according to Semafor. "If you're asking me if we have a plan right now, I wouldn't recognize it if it jumped up and yodeled and bit me in the butt."

Trump Admin Plans to Sell Off Federal Lands

In a new four-year strategic plan released this week, the Interior Department said it aims to sell off some portion of the nation's more than 500 million acres of federal land.

In an introduction to the plan, Interior Secretary Doug Bergum called for the "sustainable use" of public lands, so to "improve lives and create opportunity."

"Timber, grazing, geothermal energy, hydropower, outdoor recreation, hunting and fishing, mining, oil and gas and more contribute mightily to every facet of American life," Bergum wrote. "As President Theodore Roosevelt, who helped shape and define our department, explained: 'Conservation means development as much as it does protection.'"

The plan states that the Interior Department "will work to decrease the size of the federal estate by offering to states, localities and Tribes the opportunity to purchase federal lands." Doing so will allow the department to focus on "primary federal responsibilities and nationally significant federal lands."

The plan also states that the department will no longer use the Land and Water Conservation Fund to purchase more land. The fund receives $900 million per year from Congress, and the money will now be used to create "access easements on privately owned lands."

A major shift in policy: The new emphasis on development marks a major change in how the federal government interprets its mandate to manage public lands.

"This is the first time ever the Department of the Interior has made selling off and giving away public lands an official goal," Michael Carroll of the Wilderness Society told Public Domain, which covers environmental news. He added: "While the plan may be unprecedented and a terrible idea, it fits perfectly with the administration's push to pass the permitting bill, which will enable reckless drilling, mining and data center development on our public lands at the expense of future generations."

Rep. Jared Huffman, the senior Democrat on the House Natural Resources Committee, said the plan is "straight out of Secretary Burgum's vulture capitalist playbook. He looks at our public lands and sees a balance sheet - nothing more than tradeable assets and potential profits."

Conservative groups offered a more favorable interpretation. "It's encouraging that they're proposing trying to sell this land," Arthur Gailes of the American Enterprise Institute told the Washington Sun. "They are correct in their basic assessment that the federal government could scale back its land holdings a tremendous amount and generate revenue for the federal government."

Changes ahead: Whatever the merits of the plan, it may soon receive some serious pushback from Congress. Huffman is expected to take over the House Natural Resources Committee in January and has said lawmakers plan to look into Bergum's plans.

"Americans love their public lands and sent a clear message last week: The Trump administration's schemes to auction off our treasured resources and silence opposition must stop now," Huffman said. "Democrats in Congress are going to deliver."

Quote of the Day

"We are monitoring the abusive and capricious threats that are now proliferating from Democrat legislators who seek to abuse the legislative process to intimidate and to interfere with the lawful functioning of government. ... Beyond being inconsistent with the clear, well-recognized constitutional limitations on your investigative functions, threats to executive branch officials designed to deter them from public service, or process designed merely to abuse or instill fear in the recipient may cross the line into blatant criminality."

  • From a letter sent by White House counsel Will Scharf to incoming House Oversight Committee Chair Robert Garcia. The letter, dated Sunday, threatened to launch criminal investigations of Democrats for oversight investigations into the executive branch.

Garcia insisted that Democrats won't be put off. "Let's be clear: Congress' authority comes from Article I of the Constitution, not from the permission of the White House. Congress has wide latitude to conduct investigations and oversight, an authority inherent in the power to legislate," Garcia said in a statement. "We are a co-equal branch of government and will not be deterred by baseless threats from a weaponized DOJ or from the President's lawyers."

Fiscal News Roundup

Views and Analysis