Title: The Case for Boosting SNAP Benefits in Next Major Economic Response Package | Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
Headings: The Case for Boosting SNAP Benefits in Next Major Economic Response Package
The Case for Boosting SNAP Benefits in Next Major Economic Response Package
Economists Rate SNAP Among the Fastest, Most Effective Options for Economic Stimulus
Higher SNAP Benefits Also Reduce Food Insecurity and Other Hardship During Economic Downturns
Temporarily Increase Maximum SNAP Benefits by 15 Percent
Nutrition Assistance to Territories, Emergency Food Network Also Needs Boosting
Retain 15 Percent Increase Until a Strong, Sustainable Recovery Is Clearly Underway
Include Other SNAP and WIC Changes in Next Major Stimulus Package
Preserving and Extending Eligibility for SNAP
Taking Precautions to Retain WIC Participants
Families First Act’s SNAP Provisions Last Only Through the Public Health Emergency; Exclude Nearly 40 Percent of SNAP Households
End Notes
Stay up to date

Content: 3] CBO and Moody’s Analytics rate SNAP expenditures as one of the most effective ways to boost economic growth and job creation in a weak economy. [ 4]
Every dollar in new SNAP benefits spent when the economy is weak and unemployment elevated would increase the gross domestic product by $1.54, a recent USDA study estimated. Previous studies have estimated this effect to be as high as $1.80 for every new dollar in SNAP benefits during a recession. [ 5] Increases in SNAP benefits have the largest effects on spending for food and durable goods, and on income and jobs in industries such as manufacturing, trade, and transportation. [ 6] As the USDA study explains: The impact of this increased spending by SNAP households “multiplies” throughout the economy as the businesses supplying the food and other goods — and their employees — have additional funds to make purchases of their own. This multiplier effect on the economy may extend well beyond the initial money provided to SNAP participants. SNAP, by design, operates as an “automatic stabilizer” because its participation and spending can expand automatically when the economy experiences a downturn that raises unemployment and reduces household incomes. The program experienced large but temporary growth during and after the Great Recession; caseloads expanded significantly between 2007 and 2011 as the recession and sluggish economic recovery dramatically increased the number of low-income households that qualified and applied for help.