Federal lawmakers cut billions from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, with the passage of the Big, Beautiful Bill last year.
The program helps people put food on the table.
The Trump administration subsequently announced plans to disband the U.S. Department of Agriculture's annual hunger survey.
ALSO READ: USDA released its annual food security report. It could be the last one
Urban Institute Senior Fellow Elaine Waxman recently spoke with WUSF's Gabriella Paul about the imminent void of food security data.
This interview transcription has been edited for clarity and length.
OK, so — 1,000 foot view — remind us what the status of the [USDA] Household Food Security Survey is, and what's at stake moving forward?
"So we've been very fortunate in the United States to have an annual national survey that collects systematic data on food security...in September, it became known that the USDA, which has published these reports annually, had decided to discontinue that data collection.
So, that is a very important loss, not just because we lose the Household Food Security report, which provides both national estimates, [and] state-level estimates, but [the] USDA has also withdrawn funding — it's our understanding — for the inclusion of food security questions and other important national surveys like the National Health Interview Survey."
Could you put a finer point on who's using this data, and what it means for it to be potentially not be there anymore?
"Absolutely. Well, for example, the federal government has given grants in the past to encourage more purchases of fruits and vegetables with SNAP — and in virtually every one of those grant applications is a statement of the food insecurity estimates for the local area to make the case for why they should get a grant.
States also use it to understand where resources need to be deployed and how things are moving overall, based on economic conditions or changes in policy.
Service providers lean on it really heavily because they have limited resources. So, am I going to put a Mobile Food Pantry in this community or that community, right?
So, it's one of those government reports that really gets heavy use, and in particular, the availability of state, credible, rigorous state-level data has taken a real blow, because there's not easy ways for states to step up and do that. It's very expensive."
To that point, just talking about how hard it would be to replicate in any capacity, can you respond to the memo about this survey, calling it redundant and costly as a justification for eliminating it?
"So it's my understanding that roughly the administration was paying roughly $1.3 million to the Census Bureau to field these questions every year. That's a fairly nominal amount. That's not a big cost saver, and arguably it's a very big opportunity cost to remove it.
In addition, it was useful to have food security questions embedded in some of the other national surveys. That's not redundancy, that's thoughtful use of research to understand, for example, the intersection between food insecurity and health, and so through these surveys over the years, we've learned that food insecurity is associated with higher rates of diabetes, higher rates of cardiovascular disease, cognitive delays in children...you know, those are major public health considerations."
That's a good point on the intersections of the data and public health. The data has also been a good benchmark on the effectiveness of SNAP. Are we going to be able to monitor the impact of the billions in cuts coming to the program starting this year?
"No, we lose visibility for understanding what happens as a result of food assistance program choices...
And that's been really critical during the Great Recession, [we saw] a very big spike in food insecurity...we were also able to use the food insecurity trends to see what happened during COVID. We had a big spike initially, but then miraculously, we held it flat over the course of the year... because we had a quick response by the federal government and also by the charitable sector.
......And that's where the loss of data, the loss of trust in data is so concerning, because ultimately it affects everybody. It's not a researcher issue, right? It's really about who can understand what [the] government is doing and what choices are being made and how that may affect you...
Taking data away is also eroding democratic participation.
Yeah, if the numbers aren't there, there's perceivably not a counterpoint to any president saying what is true.
Right, and if you don't measure something, particularly in our modern world, it's easy to say it doesn't exist...
And if you're not monitoring food insecurity, that's diminishing the idea that there are people in this country who struggle to put food on the table...
People do have those struggles, but we're slowly disappearing our ability to document [and] act on it."
Gabriella Paul covers the stories of people living paycheck to paycheck in the greater Tampa Bay region for WUSF. Here’s how you can share your story with her.
