‘The Rent Eats First’: 10 Days Without SNAP Benefits Shows How America’s Safety Net Is Failing Its Most Vulnerable – Ms. Magazine

Report on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Crisis and its Conflict with Sustainable Development Goals

Introduction: A System Failing to Meet Core SDGs

A recent disruption in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) across the United States has left millions of families without benefits for over ten days, exposing systemic failures in the nation’s social safety net. This crisis directly undermines progress toward several key United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), particularly SDG 1 (No Poverty), SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The suspension of benefits has created widespread desperation and food insecurity, disproportionately impacting the most vulnerable populations the program was designed to protect.

Analysis of Affected Populations and a Deepening of Inequalities (SDG 10)

The SNAP crisis exacerbates existing societal inequalities, directly contravening the objectives of SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities). The program primarily serves marginalized groups, and its failure has a targeted, negative impact on their well-being.

Key Demographics Affected:

• Approximately 80% of households receiving SNAP include a child, an elderly person, or a person with a disability.
• Nearly 50% of all SNAP recipients are children.
• 20% of Americans with a disability rely on SNAP for their nutritional needs.

Case Studies in Vulnerability:

1. Matt Chapman, Iowa: A 62-year-old man with a disability who relies on Social Security and his sister’s SNAP benefits. His health conditions, including type 2 diabetes, require consistent nutrition, which is now jeopardized. Even before the crisis, he depended on food banks multiple times per week.
2. Grace Robinson, Pennsylvania: A 30-year-old student with severe disabilities and multiple health failures. For her, SNAP and Medicaid are essential for survival, allowing her the autonomy to pursue an education—a direct link to SDG 4 (Quality Education).
3. Ebony’s Clients, Michigan: A Department of Health and Human Services employee and single mother, Ebony works with low-to-no-income families, single parents, and grandparents caring for grandchildren who are all dependent on services like SNAP.

Impact on Food Security and Health (SDG 2 & SDG 3)

The halt in SNAP benefits presents a direct threat to SDG 2 (Zero Hunger) and SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being) by creating immediate food shortages and forcing recipients to make impossible choices between nutrition and other essential needs like medicine and utilities.

Overburdened Food Pantries

• Food pantries are experiencing an unsustainable surge in demand. A pantry in Waukee, Iowa, reported a daily demand increase of over 100%, from 18 monthly packages to 60 daily visitors.
• Charitable food systems are incapable of replacing the scale of federal assistance. For every one meal a food bank can provide, SNAP provides nine.
• Food pantries often cannot supply the specific dietary needs of individuals with health conditions, such as Grace Robinson, who requires specialized food due to gastrointestinal failure.

Compromised Health and Well-being

• Recipients are forced to choose between purchasing food, medicine, or paying for utilities. This dilemma directly impacts health outcomes, especially for the elderly and those with chronic illnesses.
• The stress and uncertainty of the situation have a significant negative effect on mental health, as reported by recipients who have lost sleep and experienced severe anxiety.
• For children, who constitute half of SNAP recipients, the lack of consistent nutrition can lead to long-term developmental and health problems, further undermining SDG 3.

Systemic Weakness and Legislative Challenges (SDG 16)

The crisis highlights a failure of public institutions to provide reliable and effective support for its citizens, a core principle of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions). Misinformation and legislative actions threaten to further dismantle this critical support system.

Misinformation and Policy

• Public discourse often mischaracterizes SNAP recipients, with claims of widespread fraud and unwillingness to work. Official data refutes this, showing a fraud rate of approximately 3% and that 96% of recipients are U.S. citizens.
• Many recipients, like Matt Chapman and Grace Robinson, are unable to work due to significant disabilities.

Legislative Impact

• The “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” passed by the GOP, is projected to increase bureaucratic barriers and tighten eligibility requirements.
• These changes are expected to reduce or eliminate benefits for over 22 million families, further distancing the nation from its commitments to SDG 1 and SDG 2.
• Recipients express deep frustration that their lives and well-being are being used as political bargaining chips, with little regard for the human consequences of policy decisions.

Analysis of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) in the Article

1. Which SDGs are addressed or connected to the issues highlighted in the article?

• SDG 1: No Poverty

  The article directly addresses poverty by focusing on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a social safety net for low-income individuals and families. It describes how the loss of these benefits forces people to make “increasingly hard decisions” between essentials like food, medicine, and utilities, pushing them further into poverty.

• SDG 2: Zero Hunger

  This is the most central SDG in the article. The entire piece revolves around the “SNAP crisis” and its impact on food security. It details the struggles of families to find their next meal, their increased reliance on overwhelmed food pantries, and the inability to access sufficient and nutritious food, as highlighted by Matt Chapman’s comment about being left with “beans and rice or macaroni and cheese.”

• SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being

  The article establishes a clear link between food insecurity and poor health outcomes. It explains that losing SNAP jeopardizes the specific nutritional needs of disabled individuals, potentially worsening their conditions. It quotes individuals who must “choose between cutting their medication in half” and buying food, and describes how the stress of the situation causes loss of sleep, which negatively “affect[s] my illness” for one recipient.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  The article emphasizes that the SNAP cuts disproportionately harm the most vulnerable populations. It states, “Nearly four of five households that rely on SNAP include a child, a person with a disability or an elderly person.” It also discusses how political rhetoric and policy changes, like the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act,” target and create further hardship for these specific groups, thereby increasing inequality.

• SDG 4: Quality Education

  A direct connection to education is made through the story of Grace Robinson, a disabled college student. She expresses her fear, asking, “if I lose benefits, am I going to be able to remain going to school?” This illustrates how essential social protection systems like SNAP are for enabling vulnerable individuals, particularly those with disabilities, to access and continue their education.

• SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions

  The article critiques the effectiveness and accountability of public institutions. It opens by describing the SNAP crisis as exposing a “failing system that punishes the very people it was meant to protect.” The disillusionment with “politicians who can’t protect their most basic ones” and the criticism of legislative actions that harm citizens point to a failure of institutions to be effective and responsive to the needs of the vulnerable.

2. What specific targets under those SDGs can be identified based on the article’s content?

• 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’s entire focus is on SNAP, a key social protection system in the U.S. The crisis described—where millions of families spend days without benefits—demonstrates a failure to implement this system effectively and provide “substantial coverage” for the vulnerable populations it was designed to protect.

• 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… to safe, nutritious and sufficient food all year round.

    The article shows a direct failure to meet this target. Families are described as “struggling to find their next meal,” and individuals with disabilities note that food pantries cannot provide the specific, nutritious foods they need to stay healthy, which SNAP helps them afford. The uncertainty of benefits prevents access to sufficient food “all year round.”

• 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 and access to safe, effective, quality and affordable essential medicines for all.

    The article illustrates the lack of financial risk protection when people are forced to choose between food and medicine (“‘Okay, I’ve only got enough for either food or my medicine'”). This choice directly undermines access to essential healthcare and medicines for the most vulnerable, linking food security directly to health outcomes.

• SDG 10: Reduced Inequalities

  • Target 10.2: By 2030, empower and promote the social, economic and political inclusion of all, irrespective of age… disability… or economic or other status.

    The article highlights how the SNAP crisis and related policies disproportionately affect and economically exclude vulnerable groups. It specifically mentions that “disabled people, we’re just frustrated because we’re very overlooked in all of this,” indicating a lack of social and political inclusion for people with disabilities in policy conversations.

3. Are there any indicators mentioned or implied in the article that can be used to measure progress towards the identified targets?

• For SDG 1 (Target 1.3) & SDG 2 (Target 2.1)

  • Proportion of population covered by social protection systems: The article states that “12.3 percent of Americans” rely on SNAP benefits.
  • Prevalence of food insecurity among vulnerable populations: Statistics are provided on the composition of SNAP households: “Nearly four of five households that rely on SNAP include a child, a person with a disability or an elderly person,” and “Almost half of SNAP recipients are children.”
  • Increased demand on emergency food services: The article provides specific numbers from a Waukee food pantry, where demand for monthly grocery packages increased from “18 people… weekly” to “60 people… daily,” and daily packages increased from 80 to 120. This serves as a direct indicator of rising food insecurity.

• For SDG 3 (Target 3.8)

  • Household expenditure on health: While not a direct statistic, the anecdotal evidence of people having to “choose between cutting their medication in half” and buying food implies a high proportion of household income is required for essential health and living costs, indicating a lack of financial protection.

• For SDG 10 (Target 10.2)

  • Proportion of vulnerable populations relying on social assistance: The article provides a key indicator of economic vulnerability for a specific group: “Twenty percent of Americans with a disability rely on SNAP to survive.”

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Summary

Source: msmagazine.com