Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States Department of Agriculture should use its contingency funds and interchange authority to finance the supplemental nutrition assistance program.
- Bill Number
- H.Res. 856
- Origin Chamber
- House
- Congress
- 119th Congress, Session 1
- Policy Area
- Agriculture and Food
- Status
- Introduced
- Latest Action
- 2025-12-02: Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition and Foreign Agriculture.
- Last Updated
- 2026-06-04T08:08:14Z
AI-Generated Summary
Purpose
This House Resolution (H. Res. 856) expresses the non-binding opinion of the House of Representatives that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) should use its existing contingency funds and "interchange authority" (the ability to transfer funds between certain nutrition programs) to continue funding the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as food stamps) during a potential lapse in federal appropriations, such as a government shutdown.
Key Provisions
- Urges use of contingency funds: The resolution states that the Trump administration is legally obligated to tap into over $5 billion in SNAP contingency funds (appropriated in 2024 and 2025, available through 2026 and 2027) to cover program operations and benefits if funding lapses.
- Encourages interchange authority: It highlights the Secretary of Agriculture's discretion under the 1944 Department of Agriculture Organic Act to transfer funds between nutrition programs, as recently done for the WIC program (Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children).
- Specific recommendations: The administration should immediately fund SNAP through November 2025 to support about 42 million recipients, including 16 million children, 8 million seniors, 4 million people with disabilities, and 1.2 million veterans.
- Extension to territories: Similar challenges apply to nutrition assistance block grants in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands, implying the same funding mechanisms should be used.
The resolution includes "Whereas" clauses providing background on SNAP's history (established in 1964 to combat hunger), its scale (serving 1 in 8 Americans), past uses of contingency funds (e.g., during the 2018-2019 shutdown), and legal requirements (SNAP as an "appropriated entitlement," meaning the government must pay eligible recipients if funds are available).
Significant Changes to Existing Law
This is a resolution, not a law, so it introduces no changes to existing statutes. It reaffirms and interprets current authorities, such as the contingency fund appropriations and section 702(b) of the 1944 Organic Act, without amending them.
Potential Impacts
- On citizens: Ensures uninterrupted food benefits for vulnerable populations, preventing hunger and related issues like impaired child learning or health declines among seniors and disabled individuals. Without action, a shutdown could disrupt benefits for 42 million people.
- On government agencies: Pressures the USDA to act swiftly, potentially avoiding administrative disruptions in state SNAP operations. It could also reduce legal liabilities, as the Government Accountability Office has noted USDA's obligation to fund entitlements.
- On international relations: No direct impact, though it indirectly supports U.S. territories like Puerto Rico, which have unique federal funding ties.
- Broader effects: Maintains program stability during fiscal crises, avoiding the economic fallout from hunger (e.g., reduced productivity or increased healthcare costs).
Main Stakeholders Affected
- SNAP recipients: Primarily low-income families, children (16 million), seniors (8 million), people with disabilities (4 million), and veterans (1.2 million), who rely on the program to avoid hunger.
- USDA and federal government: The agency must decide on fund usage; the administration faces political and legal pressure to comply.
- State and local governments: Administer SNAP and would benefit from continued federal funding to maintain operations without state budget strains.
- Residents of U.S. territories: People in Puerto Rico, American Samoa, and the Northern Mariana Islands receiving block grant nutrition aid, facing similar funding risks.
- Advocacy groups and cosponsors: Over 40 House members (mostly Democrats) introduced it, representing interests in hunger relief and social services.
Notable Legal, Constitutional, or Political Implications
- Legal: Reinforces SNAP's status as an entitlement, where the government is liable for payments to eligible people if appropriations exist (per Government Accountability Office guidance). It cites USDA's discretionary powers but argues they create an obligation during shutdowns, potentially setting a precedent for future interpretations without court involvement.
- Constitutional: Touches on Article I's appropriations clause by urging use of reserved funds during lapses, avoiding debates over impoundment (withholding funds), but as a non-binding resolution, it doesn't resolve constitutional questions.
- Political: Applies direct pressure on the Trump administration amid potential 2025 shutdown risks, highlighting partisan divides on spending. It could influence negotiations on appropriations bills or public opinion on social safety nets, though its "sense of the House" nature limits enforceability.
This summary was generated by AI and may contain inaccuracies. Refer to the official source document for the authoritative text.
Sponsor
Rep. Bonamici, Suzanne [D-OR-1]
Cosponsors (51)
Rep. Hayes, Jahana [D-CT-5], Rep. McIver, LaMonica [D-NJ-10], Del. Norton, Eleanor Holmes [D-DC-At Large], Rep. Landsman, Greg [D-OH-1], Rep. Salinas, Andrea [D-OR-6], Rep. Tlaib, Rashida [D-MI-12], Rep. Beatty, Joyce [D-OH-3], Rep. Smith, Adam [D-WA-9], Rep. Jackson, Jonathan L. [D-IL-1], Rep. Davis, Danny K. [D-IL-7], Rep. Moulton, Seth [D-MA-6], Rep. Mullin, Kevin [D-CA-15], Rep. Lee, Summer L. [D-PA-12], Rep. Tonko, Paul [D-NY-20], Rep. Magaziner, Seth [D-RI-2], Rep. Kamlager-Dove, Sydney [D-CA-37], Rep. Ivey, Glenn [D-MD-4], Rep. Wilson, Frederica S. [D-FL-24], Rep. Adams, Alma S. [D-NC-12], Rep. Lee, Susie [D-NV-3], Rep. Ross, Deborah K. [D-NC-2], Rep. DelBene, Suzan K. [D-WA-1], Rep. Stevens, Haley M. [D-MI-11], Rep. Latimer, George [D-NY-16], Rep. Tran, Derek [D-CA-45], Rep. Bishop, Sanford D. [D-GA-2], Rep. Chu, Judy [D-CA-28], Rep. Brownley, Julia [D-CA-26], Rep. Simon, Lateefah [D-CA-12], Rep. Lynch, Stephen F. [D-MA-8], Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-1], Rep. Pocan, Mark [D-WI-2], Rep. Watson Coleman, Bonnie [D-NJ-12], Rep. Sorensen, Eric [D-IL-17], Rep. Fields, Cleo [D-LA-6], Rep. Vargas, Juan [D-CA-52], Rep. Bell, Wesley [D-MO-1], Rep. Garamendi, John [D-CA-8], Rep. Friedman, Laura [D-CA-30], Rep. Olszewski, Johnny [D-MD-2], Rep. Cisneros, Gilbert Ray [D-CA-31], Rep. McGarvey, Morgan [D-KY-3], Rescom. Hernández, Pablo Jose [D-PR-At Large], Rep. Budzinski, Nikki [D-IL-13], Rep. Pappas, Chris [D-NH-1], Rep. Carter, Troy A. [D-LA-2], Rep. Torres, Ritchie [D-NY-15], Rep. Sykes, Emilia Strong [D-OH-13], Rep. Huffman, Jared [D-CA-2], Rep. Jayapal, Pramila [D-WA-7] and 1 more
Recent Actions
- 2025-12-02: Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition and Foreign Agriculture.
- 2025-12-02: Referred to the Subcommittee on General Farm Commodities, Risk Management, and Credit.
- 2025-11-04: Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
- 2025-11-04: Submitted in House
- 2025-11-04: Submitted in House
Bill Versions
- Expressing the sense of the House of Representatives that the United States Department of Agriculture should use its contingency funds and interchange authority to finance the supplemental nutrition assistance program. — issued 2025-11-04 — PDF (4 pages)