An analysis that the debt limit deal would expand food stamp spending is solidifying opposition to the bill among some conservative Republicans.
The nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office released its cost estimates for the bipartisan debt ceiling deal, negotiated by President Joe Biden and House Speaker Kevin McCarthy (R-CA), on Tuesday night. The plan would slash the federal deficit by $1.5 trillion over the next decade, according to the congressional scorekeeper — but another estimate, about a key safety net program, is also getting attention on Capitol Hill.
DEBT LIMIT DEAL: WHERE IT STANDS AND WHAT IS STILL TO COME
The CBO found that, on balance, the changes to work requirements for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program negotiated as part of the plan would increase direct spending by more than $2 billion over the next 10 years and expand SNAP eligibility by about 78,000 people.
That slight expansion comes even as Republicans were able to beef up work requirements as part of the deal, which might have been expected to result in an overall contraction of food stamp spending. Right now, those “capable” and aged 18-49 without dependents must report work. The new plan would increase the age limit to 54 — still down from the GOP’s original plan to raise that limit to 56.
But in return for those increased work requirements, Democrats were able to score exemptions for veterans, homeless people, and 18-year-olds that have been living in foster care. Those exemptions drove the overall increase in spending.
Brian Riedl of the Manhattan Institute told the Washington Examiner that the scoring on the scoring on the work requirements may further complicate some GOP support for the current debt ceiling agreement.
“House Republicans were adamant about imposing tougher work requirements on Medicaid and SNAP. This was perhaps the highest priority for House Republicans other than the discretionary spending caps,” Riedl said. “And so I think Republicans were very surprised to find out that the net effects of this bill is more dependency on government.”
Riedl said the scoring and issues with work requirements might not single-handedly cost McCarthy votes but is “one more straw on the camel’s back.”
“The Biden-McCarthy deal expands welfare. Heckuva negotiation, guys,” tweeted Rep. Dan Bishop (R-NC), adding “#NoDeal.”
Even before the scoring was released, some House conservatives expressed skepticism about the exemptions included with the expanded work requirements.
“The work requirements are so minor,” Rep. Andrew Clyde (R-GA) told HuffPost. “When you have a temporary increase in age but yet you have permanent increases in eligibility, [that] could very well go backwards for us in what SNAP is going to end up costing.”
“They put exclusions for different categories [of people],” said Rep. Ralph Norman (R-SC). “That doesn’t make sense.”
Bishop, Clyde, and Norman are all among a growing pool of "no" votes on the McCarthy-Biden deal.
Still, other conservatives argue the inclusion of beefed-up work requirements still constitutes a win and is a salient talking point for the caucus. In some senses, focusing squarely on the number of people on benefits is missing the forest for the trees, they contend.
Matthew Gagnon is the CEO of the Maine Policy Institute, a conservative free market think tank that advocates work requirements for social welfare programs in Maine. Gagnon told the Washington Examiner that the imposition of broader work requirements within the agreement is a bigger deal than the estimate by the CBO.
“At the end of the day, having welfare programs sort of attempting to incentivize transitions into work is really the goal of doing things like that. It’s not necessarily to have fewer people on the program … the institution of that requirement, whatever its effect on the overall total enrollment, I think is probably a worthwhile policy goal,” Gagnon said.
“And whatever the ultimate CBO score is on the number of people that might be on it because of other aspects of the provision, I’m not terribly convinced that’s going to have a terribly big effect on the overall opinion of whether or not that would a good thing to do,” he added.
House Financial Services Chairman Patrick McHenry (R-NC) addressed the scoring during a press conference Tuesday night. He said he was skeptical that the CBO numbers were even accurate.
“The simple answer is the CBO got it wrong,” he said. “These populations are already included. And most states, under the 12% cap that they currently have, which says even if they have all these currently excluded populations, that are not required to be in work or seeking work, they can have up to 12% of their population exempted. We reduced that number down to eight.”
McCarthy has also dismissed the CBO numbers and asserted that the plan will actually end up saving money.
“Come see me in a year, and I’ll show you how much we actually saved,” McCarthy said while leaving a late-night meeting on Tuesday, according to Fortune. “You watch — a lot of people are going to get jobs now.”
On the flip side, Democrats could see this as a victory in negotiations despite the imposition of stricter work requirements being a policy plank they oppose.
“I think Democratic negotiators are probably feeling like they hoodwinked the Republicans,” Riedl said. “And this makes the bill safer for Democrats to vote for the bill without being attacked by allies for kicking people off government programs.”
CLICK HERE TO READ MORE FROM THE WASHINGTON EXAMINER
During a recent press conference, Shalanda Young, the director of the Office of Management and Budget, said she thinks the number of people who might end up leaving the food stamps program because of the bolstered work requirements is about on par with those who will be newly protected by the exemptions that the White House pushed for and achieved during negotiations.
“So those numbers are going to be very close to each other, meaning a wash in those affected who go on and who are phased on over years and those who come off of the requirements,” Young told reporters during a Tuesday briefing at the White House.