Will millions of low-income Americans lose food stamps during shutdown? – Al Jazeera

Report on the Impact of a Potential US Government Shutdown on Sustainable Development Goals

Executive Summary

A potential United States federal government shutdown threatens the continuity of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a critical food-purchasing assistance program for approximately 42 million low-income individuals. This report analyzes the situation through the framework of the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), highlighting the direct and indirect consequences for poverty, hunger, health, economic stability, and inequality in the nation. The suspension of SNAP benefits would represent a significant setback for the achievement of SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger), while also negatively impacting SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being), SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth), and SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

Direct Threats to SDG 1 (No Poverty) and SDG 2 (Zero Hunger)

The potential cessation of SNAP benefits poses an immediate threat to food security and poverty alleviation efforts. The program is a primary mechanism for addressing hunger and nutritional needs among the most vulnerable populations.

Key Demographics and Program Statistics

• Beneficiaries: Approximately 42 million people.
• Benefit Value: An average of $190 per individual or $356 per household monthly.
• Target Population: The majority of recipient households live in poverty, making the program essential for meeting basic needs and aligning with the core mission of SDG 1.

Institutional Failure and Food Security

The Department of Agriculture has warned that funding for SNAP benefits could be exhausted in November if the shutdown persists. This failure of governmental function, stemming from political disagreements over federal funding, directly undermines the principles of SDG 16 (Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions) by preventing the state from delivering essential services. State governments in Florida, Illinois, New York, and others have confirmed that benefits may not be issued, creating a direct challenge to achieving SDG 2 by putting millions at risk of hunger.

Wider Implications for Associated SDGs

The disruption of SNAP extends beyond immediate hunger, affecting public health, economic systems, and social equity.

Impact on Health and Economic Growth (SDG 3 & SDG 8)

The loss of SNAP benefits would compromise the ability of families to purchase nutritious foods, including fruits, vegetables, and dairy products, thereby negatively impacting SDG 3 (Good Health and Well-being).

1. Agricultural Economy: The program is a significant contributor to local economies. An analysis by the Agriculture Department’s Economic Research Service indicates that nearly 25 cents of every dollar spent via SNAP directly benefits farmers and ranchers, supporting SDG 8 (Decent Work and Economic Growth).
2. Food Supply Chain: The administration’s prior reduction of $500 million in deliveries through the Emergency Food Assistance Program has already strained food banks, compounding the threat to the food security infrastructure.

Exacerbation of Inequality (SDG 10)

Policy proposals and the potential funding lapse disproportionately affect vulnerable populations, deepening societal divides and working against SDG 10 (Reduced Inequalities).

• Proposed Legislative Changes: A Republican-backed bill was estimated by the Congressional Budget Office to reduce SNAP participation by 2.4 to 3.2 million people through stricter work requirements, directly impacting low-income individuals.
• Vulnerable Groups: Studies indicate that a significant percentage of veterans rely on SNAP benefits, highlighting the program’s role as a social safety net for those who have served the country.

Analysis of SDGs, Targets, and Indicators in the Article

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

   The article primarily discusses issues related to food security, poverty, health, and institutional stability, which connect to several Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs):

   • SDG 2: Zero Hunger: The central theme of the article is the potential disruption of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), a food aid program for 42 million low-income Americans. This directly relates to the goal of ending hunger and ensuring access to food.
   • SDG 1: No Poverty: The article explicitly states that “The majority of SNAP households live in poverty.” SNAP is a social protection system designed to alleviate poverty by helping families afford basic necessities, connecting the issue to the goal of eradicating poverty.
   • SDG 3: Good Health and Well-being: The government shutdown, which threatens SNAP funding, stems from a political disagreement over “expiring enhanced subsidies for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), through which uninsured Americans can buy health insurance.” This links the article’s context to the goal of ensuring healthy lives and promoting well-being, specifically through access to healthcare.
   • SDG 16: Peace, Justice and Strong Institutions: The article highlights a “government shutdown” and political “disagreements” leading to a failure to fund essential services. A state governor is quoted describing the situation as “the dysfunction in Washington.” This points to a failure of effective and accountable institutions, which is the focus of SDG 16.

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

   Based on the issues discussed, the following specific SDG targets can be identified:

   • 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 focuses on the potential loss of SNAP benefits, which directly threatens the access to food for 42 million vulnerable people.
   • Target 1.3: “Implement nationally appropriate social protection systems and measures for all… and by 2030 achieve substantial coverage of the poor and the vulnerable.” SNAP is a key national social protection system in the United States. The threat of it running out of money represents a direct challenge to the implementation and reliability of this system.
   • Target 3.8: “Achieve universal health coverage, including financial risk protection, access to quality essential health-care services…” The political impasse causing the shutdown is explicitly linked to funding for the Affordable Care Act (ACA), a policy aimed at expanding health insurance coverage.
   • Target 16.6: “Develop effective, accountable and transparent institutions at all levels.” The government shutdown is a clear example of institutional failure, where political disagreements prevent the government from performing its basic functions, such as funding established social programs.

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

   Yes, the article contains several explicit and implicit indicators that can be used to measure progress:

   • For Target 2.1 (End Hunger):
     • Number of beneficiaries of food assistance programs: The article states that “About 42 million people receive money through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).” This number serves as a direct indicator of the scale of food insecurity being addressed.
     • Value of food assistance benefits: The article mentions an “average individual monthly benefit of about $190 or $356 per household,” which is an indicator of the level of support provided to ensure access to food.
     • Number of people at risk of losing benefits: The CBO’s estimate that “2.4 million people” could lose SNAP benefits due to policy changes is an indicator of negative progress or risk.
   • For Target 1.3 (Social Protection Systems):
     • Funding status of social protection programs: The central point that the “programme would run out of money to pay for benefits in November” is a critical indicator of the stability and reliability of the social protection system.
     • Coverage of vulnerable groups: The article cites a study finding that “8 percent of veterans rely on SNAP benefits,” providing a specific indicator of the program’s coverage for a particular vulnerable population.
   • For Target 16.6 (Effective Institutions):
     • Continuity of government operations: The occurrence of a “federal government shutdown” is a direct indicator of institutional dysfunction and an inability to operate effectively.

SDGs, Targets, and Indicators Summary

Source: aljazeera.com