advocacy, federal policy
Anti-Hunger Advocacy in DC
May 26, 2026
Forty-seven million people in this country are hungry, including over 100,000 Alaskans. Hunger in the United States is a policy choice, and it is one that people from every corner of the nation are working hard to change. In late April, I traveled to Washington, D.C., alongside nearly a thousand anti-hunger advocates from across the country for the National Anti-Hunger Policy Conference, sponsored by the Food Research & Action Center (FRAC). While in the Capitol, we asked questions and listened, sharing information and strategies. We gathered to consider the opportunities and the challenges facing a shared goal to end hunger in America. Underlying everything was a belief that strong communities, economies, and national security all depend on ending hunger.
My notes span pages, and here I want to share some key takeaways that I hope will inspire and strengthen your resolve to join the efforts to end hunger in your community and in Alaska.
SNAP is a critical safety net under pressure
Food access support is a critical safety net across the country. SNAP has been cut and changed in historic ways that continue to sow confusion and create immense challenges for families and administrators alike. SNAP provides enormous support for working families, elders, veterans, and community members who are disabled or struggling. With food costs and costs of living rising sharply just about everywhere, protecting access to SNAP and ensuring a functional program was top of mind for everyone in attendance.
Changes from H.R. 1 (also referred to the “One Big Beautiful Bill”, passed by Congress in July 2025) have thrown states into disarray, scrambling to find more funding in the face of unprecedented federal cost shifts for the program. The law changes eligibility requirements while simultaneously (but differently) overhauling Medicaid requirements. Guidance from the USDA has been murky and shifting, with tight timelines for compliance and additional state financial responsibility layered on top. All of this is happening while gas prices skyrocket and state agencies across every region of the country struggle to meet the public’s needs with increasingly strained revenues. States are facing difficult decisions that will decrease food access in order to meet a wildly fast implementation timeline. As a result of efforts from Sen. Murkowski, Alaska has secured a delay for many of these provisions but we are still looking at similar decreases in food access as the Department of Health works to reduce our error rate and implement historic changes in both SNAP and Medicaid.
Alaska, Hawaii, Puerto Rico: Shared Vulnerabilities
Isolated from the Lower 48, we share supply chain, policy, and budget vulnerabilities in our food systems. USDA is requesting comments on a food price study for Alaska, Hawaii, and the U.S. territories (deadline is June 8, find more here). We shared concerns about the sometimes extreme price differences between our urban centers and remote communities. We discussed the increased costs of goods from the Jones Act, acknowledging its long-standing support in Congress.
SNAP Choice Restrictions
There are numerous concerns around waivers and bills from states restricting various foods from SNAP. It’s a logistical nightmare, with products not cleanly falling into a “sugary drink” or other type of category. Consider flavored waters with added vitamins, sweetened yogurt, or juice-based sports drinks – are they food or a sugary beverage? The answer isn’t obvious, and the rules aren’t clear. The cost of implementation and enforcement has not been spelled out, but the confusion is rampant.
Ultimately, these policies are rationalized through demands for increased public health, but they act on individual choice without any accountability measures for success or impact. To many advocates, these restrictions feel like reactive, top-down, feel-good measures that divert attention away from manufacturers and laser-focuses scrutiny on our most vulnerable neighbors. One advocate asked a pointed question: if we are so concerned with public money supporting harmful sugary beverages, are we providing tax-funded subsidies to the industries making those beverages cheap to produce in the first place?
We understand the state of Alaska is applying for a waiver to restrict sugary beverages from SNAP, and we continue to ask how this will be defined, and who will bear the burden of enforcement – our grocery stores? The Department of Health? Whoever it is will spend time and money to make it happen, while pressing needs, including real concerns around health outcomes and nutrition, go unmet and our underlying economy and high cost of living continues to challenge working families to put food on the table.
Legal Action to Protect Access to Food Assistance
Legal action was highlighted as a sometimes necessary strategy to try and preserve some of the integrity of SNAP for food access. We have seen this in Alaska, with lawsuits forcing correction action plans at the Division of Public Assistance as a result of our persistently large SNAP backlog. Federal shutdown and refusing to use contingency funds, requiring states to implement EBT skimming protections.
SNAP Rhetoric vs. Reality
Waste, fraud, and abuse. We’ve heard it time and again, but echoed from across the country we know this rhetoric is both harmful and untrue. What actually exists is understaffing, administrative errors, and a complex system that has been thrown into chaos by rapid, top-down changes. Millions of Americans are trying to climb out of poverty and put food on the table. The rhetoric being weaponized against them is distracting and, ultimately, unproductive.
The History of Food Assistance in America
It is worth remembering that food assistance programs have deep roots in military readiness, farmer support, and economic stabilization. Programs like the Commodity Supplemental Food Program, the Temporary Emergency Food Assistance Program, and the National School Lunch Programs were born out of a history of malnourished children, national security concerns around military readiness as a result, market supports for America’s farmers, and the need to stabilize families through economic downturns.
School Nutrition
Serving breakfast in the classroom is a proven opportunity for schools to increase participation, boosting both revenues and nutrition for kids. Related to this, the Community Eligibility Provision (CEP) allows schools and districts in high-poverty areas to offer free breakfast and lunch to all students with no individual family applications. Schools where a high percentage of students are identified as eligible through participation in other assistance programs (like SNAP or Medicaid) can opt in, simplifying administration and ensuring no child goes hungry during the school day. CEP eligibility is under threat when we consider changes to SNAP and Medicaid that will remove families from the programs despite ongoing poverty.
Meeting with Alaska’s Congressional Delegation
Finally, I joined Rachael and Grace from the Food Bank of Alaska to meet with Alaska’s Congressional Delegation. We emphasized the opportunities and importance of functional, effective partnerships between federal, state, and local governments to provide services ensuring a healthy, strong population. We shared information about our Food Value Chain work, the importance of USPS Bypass Mail, our priorities for reauthorizing farm-to-food assistance programs, and farm investments that meet Alaska’s needs. While we shared enthusiasm for the new Office of Seafood at USDA, we stressed the importance of staffing and funding to ensure good work can come from that administrative expansion. We shared the cost of food in Alaska, from Anchorage to Nome, Iliamna to Tok and how those costs compare to Washington DC – widely considered a high cost of living city. Thanks to those of you who shared your grocery cart, and we would love to continue this effort moving forward.
