Analysis of U.S. Food Assistance Reductions and Their Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A new U.S. law is projected to curtail food assistance for over 22 million American families, presenting a significant challenge to the nation’s progress toward key Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). The legislation, which reduces funding for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and Medicaid, is expected to have severe consequences that directly conflict with SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). This report details the law’s specific impacts on these global objectives.

Impact on Sustainable Development Goal 2: Zero Hunger

The legislative changes represent a direct regression from the targets of SDG 2, which aims to end hunger, achieve food security, improve nutrition, and promote sustainable agriculture.

Disruption of National Food Security

The law’s primary impact is the removal of food assistance for a substantial portion of the population, directly undermining food security.

• Over 22 million American families are projected to lose SNAP benefits.
• In Colorado alone, nearly 300,000 individuals will be affected.
• The Congressional Budget Office estimates that over two million people will lose assistance each month, including more than one million in areas with high unemployment.

Nutritional Impact on Vulnerable Groups

The reduction in benefits is expected to have a critical impact on the nutritional status of the nation’s most vulnerable citizens, particularly children.

1. The law revokes automatic eligibility for free school meals that is linked to SNAP enrollment.
2. Summer EBT benefits for children are also expected to be eliminated for these families.
3. Brace Gibson, policy director of the Colorado Blueprint to End Hunger, warns of “severe hunger and malnutrition” as a likely outcome.

Implications for SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities)

By removing a foundational component of the social safety net, the law is poised to exacerbate poverty and deepen existing societal inequalities, running counter to the principles of SDG 1 and SDG 10.

Exacerbation of Poverty

SNAP is a critical anti-poverty tool. Its reduction will likely push millions of households below the poverty line by forcing them to allocate scarce resources away from other essential needs like housing and healthcare to cover food costs.

Disproportionate Impact on Vulnerable Communities

The policy disproportionately affects marginalized groups, thereby increasing inequality in direct opposition to SDG 10.

• Immigrant Populations: Lawfully present immigrants are at high risk of losing benefits.
• Children and Youth: Children and former foster youths face the loss of critical nutritional support.
• Veterans: Many of Colorado’s 370,000 veterans who rely on SNAP are expected to lose assistance.
• Unhoused Populations and Older Adults: These groups are identified as being at high risk of losing some or all of their SNAP benefits.

Conflict with Sustainable Development Goal 3: Good Health and Well-being

The law’s provisions are expected to produce negative health outcomes, undermining the core objective of SDG 3 to ensure healthy lives and promote well-being for all at all ages.

Projected Public Health Decline

A direct link exists between nutrition and health. The anticipated rise in food insecurity is expected to lead to a decline in public health.

• Lack of access to adequate nutrition increases the likelihood of illness and chronic disease.
• Experts predict “worsening public health outcomes” and an “over-burdening of our entire safety net” as a result of the cuts.

Reduction in Healthcare and Basic Needs Funding

The impact on health is compounded by massive funding reductions to programs that support basic needs.

1. SNAP funding is reduced by $189 billion.
2. Medicaid funding is reduced by $1 trillion, representing one of the largest cuts to basic needs programs in U.S. history.

Policy Analysis in the Context of SDG 8: Decent Work and Economic Growth

The law’s justification, centered on expanded work requirements, is contested by research and raises questions about its alignment with SDG 8, which promotes inclusive and sustainable economic growth and decent work for all.

Efficacy of Work Requirements

Proponents argue that expanded work requirements promote self-sufficiency and end dependency on government programs. However, this rationale is not supported by evidence.

• Decades of research indicate that such requirements do not significantly improve long-term employment outcomes.
• The policy risks penalizing individuals in areas where jobs are scarce, rather than fostering economic opportunity.

Conclusion: A Setback for National SDG Commitments

The enacted legislation significantly undermines the United States’ capacity to meet its commitments to the Sustainable Development Goals. By cutting access to essential food and healthcare for millions, the law directly obstructs progress on ending poverty (SDG 1), eliminating hunger (SDG 2), ensuring good health (SDG 3), and reducing inequality (SDG 10). The policy affects 40 million Americans who receive SNAP, including 16 million children, eight million seniors, and four million adults with disabilities, marking a substantial regression in social and economic policy aligned with global development targets.

SDGs Addressed in the Article

• SDG 1: No Poverty
• SDG 2: Zero Hunger
• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being
• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

Specific SDG Targets Identified

1. SDG 1: No Poverty

   • Target 1.3: Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all, including floors, and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.
     
     The article discusses the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) as a critical social protection system in the United States. The new law, which cuts SNAP funding and access, directly undermines this target by reducing the coverage of this safety net for millions of vulnerable Americans, including “22 million American families” and “nearly 300,000 in Colorado.”

2. SDG 2: Zero Hunger

   • Target 2.1: By 2030, end hunger and ensure access by all people, in particular the poor and people in vulnerable situations, including infants, to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.
     
     This target is central to the article. The projected loss of SNAP benefits for millions directly threatens their access to “nutritious and sufficient food.” The article highlights that “more than two million people are expected to lose SNAP assistance each month,” which will lead to “severe hunger.”
   • Target 2.2: By 2030, end all forms of malnutrition… and address the nutritional needs of… children… and older persons.
     
     The article explicitly states that the law is expected to “strip children of free school meals” and warns of “severe hunger and malnutrition.” It also notes the impact on “older adults,” directly connecting the policy changes to the nutritional needs of vulnerable groups mentioned in this target.

3. SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

   • Target 3.8: Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services…
     
     The article connects lack of nutrition to negative health outcomes, stating, “when people don’t have nutrition access, they’re more likely to get sick,” leading to “worsening public health outcomes.” Furthermore, it mentions a direct cut to Medicaid by “one trillion dollars,” which is a key program for health coverage in the U.S., thus impacting this target.

4. SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

   • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age, sex, disability, race, ethnicity, origin, religion or economic or other status.
     
     The article states that the new law will “disproportionately impact the state’s most vulnerable communities,” specifically listing “immigrant populations… children, and former foster youths, veterans, unhoused populations, and older adults.” This demonstrates a move away from social and economic inclusion for these specific groups.
   • Target 10.4: Adopt policies, especially fiscal, wage and social protection policies, and progressively achieve greater equality.
     
     The policy discussed—a “signature tax and spending law”—is a fiscal policy that reduces social protection (SNAP and Medicaid). By cutting benefits for the most vulnerable, this policy works against the goal of achieving greater equality.

Indicators for Measuring Progress

1. For Targets 1.3 and 2.1

   • Indicator: Number and proportion of the population covered by social protection programs like food assistance.
     
     The article provides baseline data and projections that serve as indicators. It states that “40 million Americans receive SNAP food assistance,” including specific demographics like “16 million children, eight million seniors, and four million non-elderly adults with disabilities.” The negative progress is indicated by the projection that “22 million American families” and “more than two million people… each month” will lose these benefits.

2. For Target 2.2

   • Indicator: Prevalence of malnutrition and access to nutritional support for vulnerable groups.
     
     The article implies a negative trend for this indicator by warning of “severe hunger and malnutrition” as a likely outcome. It also points to the loss of “free school meals and summer EBT benefits” for children as a specific measure of reduced nutritional support.

3. For Target 3.8

   • Indicator: Government spending on essential health services and population coverage.
     
     A direct indicator mentioned is the reduction in funding for health services. The article specifies that the new law reduces “Medicaid by one trillion dollars,” which directly measures a decrease in government commitment to health coverage.

4. For Target 10.2

   • Indicator: Number of people from vulnerable groups losing social protection benefits.
     
     The article provides specific numbers for vulnerable groups affected, which can be used as an indicator of rising inequality. For example, it notes that many of the “370,000 veterans in Colorado” who depend on SNAP are expected to lose benefits, and that “immigrant populations… children… former foster youths, veterans, unhoused populations, and older adults” are all at risk.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Analysis

Source: kiowacountypress.net