Shutdown Threatens Food Security for Millions as USDA Data Collection Halted
As the federal government shutdown stretches into its second week, a deepening crisis looms for vulnerable populations reliant on food assistance programs. Nutrition experts are sounding the alarm that women and children are particularly at risk of losing critical grocery benefits amidst a politically charged funding impasse in Congress. Compounding the immediate threat, the Department of Agriculture (USDA) has moved to eliminate the Household Food Security Report – the nation’s primary tool for tracking food insecurity – effectively dismantling the infrastructure needed to address rising hunger in America.
The timing of this decision is particularly alarming, as food prices remain elevated and the nation’s social safety net faces increasing strain. According to data from the Bureau of Labor Statistics, food prices are at their highest in five years, up 29 percent since 2020.
“If you want a functioning country where people are food-secure, this is the survey that gives you an indication of how food-secure people are. And that data shows us that food insecurity has gone up,” explains Zia Mehrabi, a data scientist researching climate change and food insecurity at the University of Colorado Boulder. “So, actually, as a country, the government response to that should be, ‘How do we fix that?’ rather than say, ‘Oh…let’s cut the whole survey altogether.’”
The immediate impact of the shutdown could be felt by nearly 7 million American pregnant women, new mothers, infants, and young children who depend on the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (WIC). The National WIC Association has warned that the program is on the verge of running out of funds, with the USDA informing state agencies last week that their quarterly WIC allocations would be suspended due to the lack of federal funding, as reported by CNN.
The White House announced on Tuesday its intention to utilize revenue generated from tariffs imposed during the Trump administration to cover the WIC budget shortfall. However, details regarding the amount of funding and the implementation strategy remain unclear. A USDA spokesperson stated that while “Democrats continue to vote to prolong the government shutdown, blocking funding for mothers and babies who rely on WIC, USDA will utilize tariff revenue to fund WIC for the foreseeable future.” The spokesperson offered no further clarification on the broader impact of the shutdown on nutrition funding or the specifics of the tariff revenue plan. The White House declined to comment further.
Legal experts question the feasibility of the White House’s proposed solution. According to Mitch Jones, managing director of policy and litigation at Food & Water Watch, utilizing tariff revenue requires an act of Congress to appropriate the funds, making the plan “likely impossible.” Food & Water Watch has mapped the areas most vulnerable to benefit cuts, identifying Puerto Rico, California, and New York as having the highest proportion of at-risk children. “It is poor women and children who will feel the impacts first and worst,” Jones emphasized.
A Systemic Problem, Not a Production Issue
Food insecurity in the United States is not a matter of insufficient food production – the nation grows and imports more than enough to feed its population. Rather, it is an economic and social issue. Research consistently demonstrates that when low-income households are forced to prioritize essential expenses like rent, utilities, and transportation, food is often the first item to be cut.
The 2023 Household Food Security Report revealed that 13.5 percent of American households – roughly 47.4 million people – struggled to afford adequate food. Alarmingly, nearly 14 million of those affected were children. The report, based on a nationally representative sample of approximately 30,000 households, also showed a 3.2 percent increase in food insecurity among children compared to the previous year.
The origins of the Household Food Security Report can be traced back to the Reagan administration, when activists and policymakers recognized the need for comprehensive data to track the economic factors contributing to hunger. At the time, the administration sought to reduce nutrition assistance funding based on seemingly stable federal benefit usage numbers, despite reports from food banks and media outlets indicating a surge in demand.
In 1990, Congress passed legislation mandating nutritional monitoring and research, formally establishing the annual food security survey conducted by the USDA’s Economic Research Service (ERS). For decades, the report has been considered the most accurate and reliable measure of national food insecurity and economic well-being.
“I think that it is on the same level as the unemployment rate and the poverty rate. It’s one of those central measures,” said Colleen Heflin, a professor at Syracuse University specializing in food insecurity, nutrition, and welfare policy.
The USDA’s decision to terminate the survey on September 20th was met with criticism. The agency characterized the report as “redundant, costly, politicized, and extraneous,” claiming it served only to “fear monger.” Shortly after the announcement, approximately a dozen ERS staffers were placed on administrative leave.
“Removing this data specifically—it silences the reality of hunger in America,” Heflin stated.
While other federal datasets capture some indicators of food insecurity, Heflin argues they are inadequate substitutes for the comprehensive annual report. The Household Trends and Outlook Pulse Survey, collected bi-monthly, offers a limited scope of inquiry. Heflin also strongly refuted the USDA’s claims about the report’s purpose, stating, “Clearly the person that wrote that announcement has never read the food security report. It is a very, very dry and clearly written report that just describes the statistics. There’s nothing about fear-mongering. [That’s] so far from the truth.”
The USDA defended its decision, noting that trends in food insecurity have remained “virtually unchanged” despite increased spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). A USDA representative asserted that the 30-year-old study, initially created to support SNAP expansion, had produced only “subjective, liberal fodder.” When asked about future plans for tracking food insecurity, the spokesperson indicated the agency would prioritize statutory requirements and utilize “a bevy of more timely and accurate data sets.”
Heflin warns that the loss of the report will create a significant gap in understanding the prevalence and drivers of food insecurity. “It really leaves a huge hole in our understanding of who is food insecure, where food insecurity is most prevalent, and how changing economic conditions and policy conditions are impacting the American population,” she said. “I think of it as driving without your speedometer. We’re not going to have accurate information to guide our reactions, both from a federal policy level and community level…We really are driving blind.”
The current crisis is further exacerbated by the shrinking social safety net. The Trump administration’s One Big Beautiful Bill Act cut an estimated $186 billion from SNAP and imposed stricter work requirements, reducing eligibility for benefits.
“People are struggling to put food on their tables, and farmers are losing support, and food banks are being pushed beyond capacity,” said Jenique Jones, the executive director of the nonprofit WhyHunger. “Removing this data specifically—it silences the reality of hunger in America.”
Climate Change and the Future of Food Security
Adding to the complexity, climate change is driving up food costs and destabilizing supply chains. Experts at the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations identify climate change as one of the biggest threats to global food security, citing the increasing frequency of extreme weather events, global warming, the spread of diseases and pests, and migration and conflict.
Furthermore, rising carbon levels are diminishing the nutritional value of crops, making it harder for individuals to obtain essential micronutrients. “There’s really clear evidence that things like zinc, vitamin A, iron, these really important micronutrients that we are really dependent on, are going to go down with climate change,” Mehrabi explained. “Climate change is putting up the price, and pushing down the nutritional content. So what do you think that’s going to do to low-income households that are trying to feed kids that need their micronutrients?”
The government shutdown has left thousands of workers nationwide without income, increasing the risk of falling behind on bills and facing the “hunger cliff.” Without the national hunger dataset, Mehrabi warns that tracking the long-term effects of government policies and the shutdown’s impact on food assistance will be exceedingly difficult.
“The government wants to reduce accountability. This is the big picture of what’s happening right now. You’d be blind to think this is just the USDA, just one thing. This is a whole systematic attack,” he said. “There’s a story being told that this is going to make America great again. Actually, this is going to make America worse.”
- The Antideficiency Act, Explained: The Law Behind Every Shutdown (daybreakwire.com)
