Guy Gordon (00:00.706)
Hello, and welcome to another edition of the Facts Matter Podcast. I’m Guy Gordon, the one big beautiful bill act. We’ve talked a lot about it and its various impacts and consequences on state government. Bob Schneider’s done a breakdown on Medicaid and some of the other things. today we’re going to look at the impact on SNAP, what we used to know as food stamps. It is the primary support for those that are impoverished or food insecure. And there have been some

Dramatic changes in terms of who is eligible, also in the cost sharing between the federal and the state government. We’re gonna set that aside for a moment. That’s more of an administrative issue. But we bring in Carly Abramson, who is our research associate for health issues here at the Citizens Research Council, to break down what the state can do to kind of mitigate the impact of the OBA downflow, if you will. Hello, Carly.

Karley Abramson (00:58.466)
Hi.

Guy Gordon (00:59.768)
So let’s start with with first, what changes were made to Snap that we really need to to look at?

Karley Abramson (01:06.754)
Yeah, so like you mentioned there was that change in the administrative share of those costs in terms of how much the federal government is paying and how much Michigan pays. So Michigan will have to pay a larger portion of those overall administrative costs. but outside of those administrative costs, the actual benefits are entirely federal dollars. and so Michigan doesn’t pay any of the actual benefits.

Guy Gordon (01:22.435)
Okay.

Karley Abramson (01:34.824)
And that part is not changing. It’s just the eligibility for access to those federal benefits is undergoing some changes. And so there’s a few different categories of people who are going to find that they are either no longer eligible or they have they are subject to work requirements where they weren’t subject to them before. And and so

Guy Gordon (01:55.948)
Right.

So let’s break that down. First of all, refugees and asylum seekers are completely ineligible, so those people are now out of the picture. also let’s talk about these work requirement changes because th there have been some work requirement issues there for a while, but they’ve changed it at the margin. So who might now find themselves having to satisfy this work requirement?

Karley Abramson (02:01.655)
Correct. Correct. Yep. They’re out, yep.

Karley Abramson (02:19.533)
Correct, right.

Karley Abramson (02:25.055)
Right. And so work requirements have always been a part of the program. Previously, I it was anyone over the age of fifty-five wasn’t subject to the work requirements. Now between between the ages of fifty-five and sixty-five, you are now subject to those same work requirements. So you have to submit the documentation. it is also extended to I think previously it was anyone with

A child 14 or no. yeah, so it yeah. Correct. Now, right, now it is a caregiver to a child under the age of 14. So any working parent with high school age children is now going to be subject to those work requirements as well. there’s it I think there’s a change to the location-based.

Guy Gordon (02:57.174)
If they were a caregiver of a child up to the age of eighteen, they were exempt

Guy Gordon (03:06.38)
Right.

Karley Abramson (03:21.985)
waivers. Now I think you only get some kind of waiver if you’re in a location where the where the unemployment is at like ten percent or something, which I don’t think is that applicable to

Guy Gordon (03:34.08)
actually I did a check on that not long ago and it there was at least between eight and twelve counties that would have fallen into that basket. most of them I mean most of the U P and then a a a good section kind of in the middle of of the northern part of the mitten.

Karley Abramson (03:36.887)
I don’t know how many, yeah.

Karley Abramson (03:43.18)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (03:51.734)
Yeah. But it’s unclear how broad you know how much of a actual financial impact or how many people that that would benefit. so yeah, there’s just there’s these changes that we can see have meant that less that fewer people will have access to these benefits because the way the benefits are calculated, they’re they’re distributed at the household level.

Guy Gordon (04:16.643)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (04:17.057)
But it is based on the number of eligible members within that household. And so fewer eligible members in the household who are snap eligible means a potentially lower maximum benefit for the household. and then on top of that, yeah.

Guy Gordon (04:31.192)
We should point out this isn’t while while we’re talking about a substantial amount of of funding for Michigan, and I think about seven hundred, eight hundred thousand households are covered in Michigan, the actual individual grant or the individual stipend is is not that large. I mean, anybody that would go to the grocery store, for each person in your household that’s eligible

Karley Abramson (04:45.452)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (04:54.529)
Right.

Guy Gordon (04:59.702)
It’s a hundred and seventy five dollars a month. Certainly helpful to that family, but certainly doesn’t cover the complete cost of of what you need.

Karley Abramson (05:03.444)
Yes.

Karley Abramson (05:11.731)
Right. And so like it’s is that you have a maximum potential based on the household. that is based on the number of members. You we will now have fewer eligible members contributing to that maximum household. And then on top of that, the net income of the individuals, 30% is then subtracted from that maximum household to get their the actual benefit. So by the time you get, you know, go through all of that.

Guy Gordon (05:19.063)
Uh-huh.

Karley Abramson (05:40.981)
all those calculations in the formula, the actual benefit is you’re you know, a few a few hundred dollars, but can vary. it’s kind of a sliding scale depending on income as well. So

Guy Gordon (05:51.67)
Okay. So and we should point out that and when the OBA was passed, some of these things became they had immediate effect. Others there was a a grace period there before they came into effect. So we don’t have a lot of data. but as of April of twenty-six, which was the the the last month for which we have data, we have been able to document a decline in the number of people enrolled in the program here in the state of Michigan. How large is that?

Karley Abramson (06:06.434)
Right.

Karley Abramson (06:21.057)
Yeah. Right. And so we have documented about an eight percent an about an eight percent decline. so it’s about a hundred thousand fewer people receiving those benefits. and so we’ve s and that that decline very clearly tracks when Oba was implemented. and we’ve seen like a little bit of an uptick in

this last month of April, potentially, you know, better ec economic conditions, but still overall there is a a decline in the number of people who are receiving these benefits.

Guy Gordon (07:03.074)
And there I think there’s a key distinction here that we need to point out because it gets to how we could mitigate this, and that is are those hundred thousand people, the one in twelve people that are now no longer in the program, were they actually ineligible? Were they eligible but couldn’t document their eligibility? Or are they people that just didn’t take the time to try to prove their eligibility?

Karley Abramson (07:30.101)
Yeah, it’s un unclear it, you know, exactly the mechanism in which people lost access, right? And so it it could be that they just were no longer eligible so that their, you know, membership in the household was not used to calculate the overall household benefit. it and it it could be that those work requirements were too burdensome to document. That part is a little bit unclear.

But for the most part, like the the correlation between the implementation of these OBA, the between the implementation of OBA and the eligibility changes and the decline has been very clear. We’re not exactly sure on like the precise mechanism. it’s probably a combination of all of those things that that have led to that outcome.

Guy Gordon (08:15.565)
Mm-hmm.

Guy Gordon (08:19.454)
And if if we lost eight percent, are we doing better or worse than the nation at large?

Karley Abramson (08:25.377)
We’re doing about the same. So the I think the average, the national average is higher, it’s at twelve percent. But that is there’s a few states that had very large percentages, had a that are kind of pulling the average up. I think the me in terms of the median, we’re much closer to the median, and that that is about between like eight and twelve percent where where most states are at. So Michigan is not doing particularly worse.

Guy Gordon (08:33.26)
Yeah.

Karley Abramson (08:55.157)
or losing at a different rate than other states. it’s just it is also a problem for Michigan as it is for many other states to figure out what to do.

Guy Gordon (09:06.104)
So in your paper, which we invite all of our listeners and viewers to go to CRCMish dot org to read it in total, you point out that there have been a number of studies over many years that have benchmarked both the primary impact, primary benefit of the SNAP program, but also secondary benefits, indirect benefits. Break down those because

Karley Abramson (09:27.885)
Mm-hmm.

Guy Gordon (09:32.43)
the the the loss of those benefits could have social consequences in terms of what we see.

Karley Abramson (09:38.399)
Absolutely. So yeah, there has been a lot of research about the benefits of SNAP. in terms of reducing food insecurity, pushing children out of poverty, impact on test scores and graduation rates, health outcomes, the

Guy Gordon (09:57.548)
And health outcomes is a big one. I mean, there is a very distinct bridge between good nutrition and health.

Karley Abramson (10:05.207)
Correct. And so there’s a lot a lot of research, you know, showing that those those health outcomes and not just those indirect health outcomes, but actually nutrition itself, having a more nutritious diet is associated with SNAP benefits compared to people who are similar similarly situated but don’t have access to those SNAP benefits as well. And so we’re seeing healthier people and you know, as we’ve talked about before when it comes to other

you know, ripple effect costs, healthier people have to see the doctor less, and are, you know, more productive. And so there’s a lot of

Guy Gordon (10:46.04)
Well, there’s a big return on the investment. It’s not a dollar for dollar return. Yeah.

Karley Abramson (10:47.753)
Exactly, exactly. And so it is it’s yeah, it’s pretty much it just it has been documented over and over that this is financially, socially beneficial for Michigan because the money is all federal dollars in these benefits and Michigan not only takes care of the immediate problem of people

needing access to healthy foods, but it it then reaps that investment of being able to feed people and provide them a life that enables them to contribute back to the state.

Guy Gordon (11:31.286)
And and because we know how many f fewer people are in the program now, roughly a hundred thousand or about an eight percent, one in twelve no longer in it, we can extrapolate the fact that it’s about a three hundred million dollar financial loss that would be paid to groceries, paid to to to grocers or or to other food providers. And also it you are going to have higher costs in other areas as well. One of the things that really underscored for me, Carly, reading your paper.

Karley Abramson (11:48.77)
Right.

Karley Abramson (11:53.003)
Yeah, it w yeah.

Guy Gordon (12:00.586)
is my goodness, this universal school meal program that’s going to become even more critically essential point.

Karley Abramson (12:03.944)
Mm. Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (12:09.065)
Exactly. Yeah. Because without without that, you know, there’s the snap el the SNAP eligibility, there would have been potentially kids who are no longer SNAP eligible, which means they wouldn’t also would also not be eligible for that federal lunch program. But because Michigan has its state program, you know, it that that is even more vital now because we can ensure that kids have access to to healthy foods and and and that’s one of those policy options that

can be applied broadly to everybody, it has a benefit to everyone, but will also help this particular population.

Guy Gordon (12:40.909)
Right.

Guy Gordon (12:44.342)
Well, and in terms of Michigan’s options to mitigate the consequences of these OBA changes, that’s kind of that’s one that we’ve already we can already check that box. Right? And and that’s that’s a a good thing. And that it but it’s a you know, footnote to legislators, this is one of those things that now makes it even more essential. So the other things, and and one of them is as we said, you know, as as someone who just applied for Medicare a year ago, I can tell you.

Karley Abramson (12:52.927)
Right. Yeah. Yeah. And right.

Guy Gordon (13:11.66)
That that was the most intimidating thing and I I consider myself a you know, my intelligence is meager, but I think I can usually handle those things. That was a daunting task. So for people that are trying to document their eligibility for SNAP, certainly it would behoove Michigan if they want to mitigate these consequences to have some navigation.

Karley Abramson (13:20.811)
Mm.

Karley Abramson (13:24.087)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (13:30.029)
Absolutely. And so, you know, any extra resources or infrastructure that the state can manage to help people navigate. And this sh it shouldn’t be too burdensome simply because we have it’s unlike Medicaid where we would kind of we were kind of adding work requirements where they didn’t exist. The work requirements have been a part of this program. And so we you know, to be able to try to get that to run more efficiently,

And to help people, you know, notify them exactly what they need, reminders, anything that could make them more likely to submit the documentation or some guidelines for what, you know, how and what they are supposed to ask of their employers, things like that, just anything like that that can make that process run smoothly because these people, the the population that we’re expecting to provide this documentation is already under bare is already under severe strain.

Guy Gordon (14:28.472)
Uh-huh.

Karley Abramson (14:28.961)
being in food insecure areas. And so any extra help, you know, that that Michigan can spare for that would be very helpful.

Guy Gordon (14:37.836)
And you point out that in the new budget there is some set asides for that navigational assistance.

Karley Abramson (14:45.393)
Mm-hmm. Yeah. I don’t I don’t know exactly because I don’t remember off the top of my head what what was yes, yeah. Yeah, right. And there’s already and not just in in that aspect, but in other potential policy solutions, Michigan’s already doing some things. And so it’s actually pretty it this is not about really creating any new programs. There’s already things that Michigan does that it can just do a little bit more of.

Guy Gordon (14:50.19)
Mm-hmm. But they’re acknowledging the problem with and they are appropriating some dollars for that.

Karley Abramson (15:14.071)
To try to compensate for some of these costs. So that, you know, that there’s already partnerships with food banks. You know, there’s already different kinds of programs to connect the food banks to Michigan farms. And, you know, so that that kind of stuff is just a matter of allocating more resources than we used to because the food banks themselves are probably going to be more burdened to try to make up for.

Guy Gordon (15:41.656)
No question.

Karley Abramson (15:42.645)
Right. And so so being able to kind of to channel resources to them when they’re going to be in need of those.

Guy Gordon (15:51.308)
Well, and let’s let’s take a little bit further too, to to those that are listening and watching. Yes, it’s a state responsibility to to try to make sure that we maybe catch these people that are falling through the net. It’s also our responsibility. so if you’ve got a pantry program or a food bank in your neighborhood that you’ve supported in the past, continue to you know, continue to do that, but maybe bump up your contribution a little bit because they’ll be under they’ll be s seeing more demand.

Karley Abramson (16:17.579)
Definitely. Yeah. No, there’s there’s that’s, you know, one very direct way that you’re right that not just the state can do, but individuals can participate in that as well. and then, you know, the the state could also you the state could navigate a parallel benefits program, could offer its own benefits that could be somehow linked to the existing bridge card. and you know, as long as it’s a separate

Guy Gordon (16:24.194)
Yeah.

Karley Abramson (16:43.969)
funding source that’s separate from the federal dollars, but there’s ways to kind of streamline that process to do a parallel program where for the user it all comes from the same place and the same card, but it it is a you know a separate stream of state benefits as well.

Guy Gordon (16:45.495)
Yeah.

Guy Gordon (16:59.992)
Do you have that card if you’re no longer eligible?

Karley Abramson (17:03.483)
well

Guy Gordon (17:04.494)
I mean that’s we we’d almost need a a parallel program, right?

Karley Abramson (17:08.811)
Right, exactly. Yeah. Yeah. I don’t know exactly how it would work if if you’re eligible for state but not eligible for federal because it because I Michigan states implement the federal the federal program, right? So the bridge card is still Michigan specific. So I imagine there would be ways to kind of merge those if if the state had its own parallel program for benefits.

Guy Gordon (17:35.446)
Right.

Karley Abramson (17:36.863)
It se that seems doable since it’s already administered at the state level. Is that yeah?

Guy Gordon (17:41.206)
Okay. So we’ve got navigation support, food bank support, maybe a parallel program to backfill some of the loss of benefits if if one or more pers persons in the household become ineligible. The final one, you know, that that’s already in existence and it’s done a lot to to help lower income or the working poor is the earned income tax credit.

Karley Abramson (17:52.181)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (18:04.895)
Exactly. And, you know, like we mentioned with the school lunch program, there are options like the earned income tax credit, other, you know, child tax credits that would provide a financial benefit to that same population. but it it would be enacted a little more broadly. So it doesn’t just target the people who are now ineligible for SNAP that need the SNAP benefits. It would it targets kind of their overall financial security.

in a way that could then help them when it comes to not having access to SNAP anymore. So if they’re overall in a more financially secure place because of these other benefits, then, you know, indirectly that could help them fill in those gaps, you know, for their families. So there’s those policy options as well, which are aimed broadly, but then would have the indirect effects on this like specific population that really is going to need it.

Guy Gordon (19:01.048)
Yeah. with this appropriation in place to to do the navigation, I’m just curious how many of those that have been rendered ineligible, how many of those eight percent could be brought back in just because the documentation hurdles are are high or the intimidation factor is high?

Karley Abramson (19:13.484)
Right.

Karley Abramson (19:18.315)
Right. Yeah. And it’s and it’s unclear how much of the drop is due to that people just are have become ineligible and there’s not much that can be done about it, and how much is because of that documentation that is unknown at at this point. but it’d be, you know, be interesting to see. And at at at the very least, if there’s anyone who should be on it who isn’t, Michigan is very incentivized to want to make sure that those people

Guy Gordon (19:35.778)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (19:48.055)
who are eligible are receiving receiving those benefits.

Guy Gordon (19:52.256)
And who are the parties that are responsible for getting that messaging out? Is it the state of Michigan? Is it county health departments? Is it food assistance programs? When folks come in, you know, th there could be a conduit of information there about where to go for help. Has anybody coordinated this?

Karley Abramson (20:12.217)
I don’t I don’t know exactly how the connection between the state and local entities in terms of that that messaging. I’m not exactly sure how that operates. In terms of responsibility, you know, it is the state’s responsibility to get that messaging across. They might delegate that to local entities to be able to, you know, because

Oftentimes you do want to leave it up to local entities to be able to tailor to their populations the right kind of messaging. But it it it does come from the top, from the state of of providing that direction and then guiding local entities on how to do that.

Guy Gordon (20:49.826)
Yeah.

Guy Gordon (20:55.992)
I gotta tell you, this is one of those things where the bottom up approach may work better because if you had an ombudsman in these pantry programs or these food banks, ’cause that’s gonna be the next stop for those folks, boy, that would be really helpful. And that’s something that the philanthropic community could cover.

Karley Abramson (21:06.021)
Mm-hmm. Right. And if and if we find and if we find that the navigation piece is a is a big part of the problem, right, then but a as of what we know now, that navigation piece is is a is one part of of the drop. we don’t know how much it accounts for that whole 8%. It’s possible that most of that eight percent is just people are not eligible anymore and they

Guy Gordon (21:23.682)
Yeah.

Karley Abramson (21:34.273)
you know, the that overall household benefit is reduced. And so if that’s the case, there’s only so much that navigational aid would be able to do. So that piece, along with the other channels toward filling in the gap, are all going to be very important to kind of to do together. There’s a lot of different areas in which we can chip away at the problem. And unlike Medicaid where we, you know, would have to just get people on insurance or not,

Guy Gordon (21:55.426)
Mm-hmm.

Karley Abramson (22:03.583)
you can you can provide you know a you can provide an incremental benefit of food to people in a way that with healthcare you can’t always provide that incremental benefit the same way.

Guy Gordon (22:10.446)
Uh-huh.

Guy Gordon (22:17.41)
Right. Carly, thanks so much, and for those listening and watching, you can read Carly’s paper at CRCMish dot org. Carly, thanks so much. And as always, if you appreciate the unbiased, very objective approach and the analysis that you find here at the hashtag factsmatter podcast, you might want to consider going to our webpage CRCMish. org and making a small donation. We would sure appreciate it and ensures that this fact tank won’t run on.

Karley Abramson (22:27.127)
Thank you.

Guy Gordon (22:46.392)
fumes. Until next time, I’m Guy Gordon. Take care.