By Chris Bernard, President & CEO
New federal data show that Oklahoma’s SNAP enrollment has dropped significantly over the past year, with roughly 100,000 fewer Oklahomans participating in the program each month than a year ago. There are some national and local voices saying this is something to be celebrated and it’s a sign we are doing things right. To avoid any confusion, I want to be as clear as possible, those people are wrong. At Hunger Free Oklahoma, we want everyone who needs SNAP to have access to it. We also want to see fewer people need SNAP because they are earning enough to afford food and meet their basic needs without assistance. The current decline in participation does not reflect that reality.
Food insecurity remains a serious challenge across Oklahoma. Families continue to face rising costs for groceries, housing, utilities, and transportation, stretching household budgets and forcing difficult decisions. Most importantly, the number of people eligible for SNAP based on income has not declined. If incomes haven’t increased, and the need for food assistance hasn’t declined, yet SNAP participation has dropped, we should be asking why.
The decline in participation is directly linked to the policy and administrative changes enacted through H.R. 1 and related administrative actions. In short, Congress changed the rules, and participation declined as a result. They didn’t lift people out of poverty, they didn’t change the level of need, they simply decided certain people should not get benefits even if they need them. That’s part of the drop.
Another portion of the drop is likely from administrative changes made by our state government because of new costs and incentives placed on them by H.R. 1.
Across the country, states have been under pressure to reduce SNAP payment error rates or risk having to pay portions of the total SNAP benefits in their states. In Oklahoma, that could be as much as $270M. The predictable response to that pressure was adding more checks, more documentation requirements, and other procedures that delay application processing time. With each of these changes and barriers, we lose people who qualify for benefits because they either give up, can’t find the right documentation, or are rejected out of caution.
The challenge facing Oklahoma is not simply ensuring program accuracy. It is ensuring that eligible families can successfully navigate the process and receive the support for which they qualify. We need a system that balances accuracy with timeliness and customer support, and we have lost that balance under H.R. 1 in Oklahoma and across the country. The scale is now severely tipped towards erring on the side of rejection, placing countless hurdles in front of potential applicants, and reducing state costs.
Oklahoma continues to face some of the highest rates of food insecurity in the country. When participation drops as need remains high, it creates additional pressure on families and on the community organizations working to fill the gaps.
SNAP remains the nation’s largest and most effective anti-hunger program, helping families, older people, veterans, and people with disabilities afford groceries while also supporting local economies. When fewer eligible households successfully access benefits, the impact extends beyond individual families. Food banks, schools, healthcare providers, and community organizations often experience increased demand as households seek other forms of support. Local grocers lose revenue and cut jobs or hours, thus creating more need. Nonprofit organizations are already operating with limited resources. As fewer people receive SNAP benefits, those organizations may be asked to do more with the same or fewer resources. The drop of 100,000 per month in Oklahoma also means $19M less being spent at our local grocery stores every month. Over the course of a year, that adds up to more than the combined annual budgets of Oklahoma’s two food banks and Hunger Free Oklahoma. It is not something the charitable sector can absorb.
A decline in SNAP participation may sound like good news, but numbers alone don’t tell the whole story. If a household cuts its grocery budget by 15% because family income has increased, that’s a success worth celebrating. If that reduction happens because meals are being skipped or family members are going without food, no one would call it progress.
Before we celebrate a decline in SNAP participation, we need to ask a simple question: Why did it happen?