The man-child in chief did not get what he wanted, so he declared a government shutdown. And guess who pays the price? Average Americans who are just trying their best to make ends meet.
The government shutdown has dragged on over a month because Democratic and Republican lawmakers in Congress have failed to agree on a spending plan.
When a government decides to tighten its belt, the question isn’t just how it saves money, but who ends up paying the price. And in President Donald Trump’s push to cut the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program — better known as SNAP — the answer is painfully clear.
The poor will pay. The elderly. Working-class families must fight to stay fed.
On Nov. 4, Trump threatened to withhold food stamps from struggling Americans in a post on Truth Social.
“SNAP BENEFITS … will be given only when the Radical Left Democrats open up government, which they can easily do, and not before,” the President wrote.
Despite two federal judges ruling against the SNAP freeze, the Trump administration is adamant about denying millions of Americans one of their basic human rights: access to food.
For a program that currently feeds 42 million people — many of them employed or caring for dependents — this is not just a policy tweak. It is a statement about priorities and values in a country where food insecurity still plagues millions.
Over 600,000 families in the Bay Area rely on SNAP. They, and millions of Americans around the nation, now have to rely on food pantries and similar organizations to combat food insecurity until the shutdown is over.
Food banks alone will not be able to fill in the gaps for SNAP recipients.
Children will starve. Panic will ensue. Crime rates may go up. Food insecurity has never produced positive outcomes. The Trump administration knows this and it is safe to say that they do not care.
While Americans lose their lifelines, U.S. billionaires continue to see their net worths rise. Since Trump’s return, their wealth has grown by $700 billion. Making the nation’s wealth gap even wider than it already is.
It is both disheartening and embarrassing to be part of the richest nation on the planet, where leaders prioritize the rich and punish the poor. The United States of America has the ability to lift millions out of poverty. However, that has never been the priority of most presidents, especially not for Donald Trump.
Crime rates — notably theft — may rise due to funding delays and food banks unable to meet demands. Individuals, including those with dependents, may feel that they have to steal food out of necessity.
Several TikTok users have posted videos threatening to loot grocery stores if their EBT cards do not go through. And it’s not just TikTok. Instagram users have also posted content stating “If you see someone stealing food, no you didn’t.” Some have even used the hashtag #NoSnitchNovember in solidarity with food insecure individuals.
Now, I am not one to endorse the act of shoplifting, or any crime for that matter. However, if crime goes up as a result of Trump’s actions, he has no one to blame but himself.
After the court ruling, the Trump administration has said that partial funding will be given to SNAP on Monday. Due to the shutdown, November payments will be delayed for millions of Americans. This goes against Trump’s campaign promise to serve the American working class.
It is evident that his campaign promise was nothing but a hollow pledge.
Many SNAP recipients are already working — often full time. Others are seniors or people with disabilities. To cut their aid is to cut off support for people who are already struggling to stay afloat.
The consequences of a shrunken or less accessible SNAP are not abstract. Food insecurity rises, health outcomes worsen and childhood development suffers. Seniors relying on minimal benefits, parents trying to stretch grocery money for the week, families choosing between rent and food — these are the people affected. Cutting aid does not make them more self-reliant. It forces them to make impossible choices.
There is also a strong economic case for keeping SNAP fully funded. Every dollar in food assistance circulates through local economies — grocery stores, supply chains and jobs. Studies have found that each $1 billion in SNAP benefits generates thousands of full-time jobs.
Cutting the program doesn’t just harm individuals. It slows down local economies, especially in rural and low-income areas that depend on the spending. Calling that “fiscal responsibility” — a common republican talking point — misses the point entirely.
Politically, the cuts reveal where priorities lie. Corporations and the wealthy seem to be safe from the chopping block, but programs that feed millions of Americans face constant scrutiny. The administration’s rhetoric paints SNAP users as dependent or undeserving, rather than as workers, parents and neighbors trying to make ends meet.
At its core, this is more about morality than economics. A society’s values show in how it treats those who have the least. Cutting food aid in one of the wealthiest nations on Earth says, “We can afford everything but compassion.” No one should have to prove their worthiness to eat.
It is reasonable to want government programs to be efficient and fair, but that is not what concerns Trump and his cronies. The Trump administration has done nothing but undermine one of the country’s most effective anti-hunger programs.
SNAP has lifted millions out of poverty and supported families through recessions and crises since its inception. Gutting it does not promote responsibility or save meaningful money; it punishes the poor for simply being poor.
By targeting SNAP recipients — many of whom are children, seniors or working Americans — the administration’s actions send a message about whose struggles count. And if hunger becomes an acceptable cost of policy, then we have lost sight of something bigger than a budget line: our sense of decency.
***
TOP PHOTO: The President refusal to fund SNAP is proof he doesn’t care about poor people, contends columnist Sabrina Hossain. (Photo courtesy of Envato Elements)
Sabrina Hossain is the Opinions Editor for The Express. Follow her on X, formerly Twitter @WritersBlock678.
