This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME’s politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox.
As the government shutdown reaches the one-month mark, the country is about to hit two milestones that are set to make it feel all too real for many Americans. On Saturday, Nov. 1, food stamp benefits will dry up just as open enrollment begins for those purchasing health insurance for the next year, complete with steep, double-digit rate hikes.
[time-brightcove not-tgx=”true”]
The impact is going to be felt by millions of Americans. Some will find it tougher to put food on the table as soon as next week. Others will wonder if they can still afford health insurance for themselves or loved ones. Many will find themselves in both groups.
Neither challenge is likely to be resolved soon. Players on both sides believe they are “winning” this fight and thus don’t need to reach across the aisle. The shutdown that began Oct. 1 is being discussed as a problem to be solved mid-November or even into December, according to sources on the Hill and on K Street who are universally dug in. This is a shutdown without consequence, at least on the surface.
But many Republicans in Congress are just starting to realize their constituents are going to be hit harder than the Democrats on both of these issues. And what Democrats are realizing is that President Donald Trump 2.0 is not the same pliable neophyte they faced in his first term and that the disparate effects on his MAGA base is unlikely to move him. It’s a mismatched understanding that leaves at least 40 million Americans watching as their meals, medical tests, and savings accounts all stand to be pressure-tested in short order.
Here’s a look at how the loss of SNAP funding loss and Obamacare subsidies are going to hit red and blue states differently.
Feeding Vulnerable Americans
There are two major conversations taking place among lawmakers and influence-peddlers right now. The first is a program commonly known as food stamps. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is used by about one-in-eight Americans, or 42 million people, and offers a meager lifeline to poor families. The Department of Agriculture says it is going to shut off SNAP’s aid for November—about $9.2 billion—starting Saturday. Economists predict that will have a down-stream effect on everything from farmers and grocery stores to truck drivers and gas stations. According to most studies, the return on investment for every $1 in direct aid to poor Americans is $1.50 to $1.80 to the economy.
While the SNAP cutoff will reverberate from coast to coast, red states may feel it more acutely. In the 30 states that Trump carried last year, 25 of them were more reliant on SNAP than the national average. While the national average of SNAP recipients stands at 12%, an analysis from the Center for Policy and Budget Priorities shows that deep-red states like Louisiana—home to House Speaker Mike Johnson—surpass that with 18%.
Drill down a little more in those Trump states, and it’s easy to imagine some of those numbers in future campaign ads against Republicans. South Dakota—home to Senate Majority Leader John Thune—has a smaller total roll but 70% of it is for families with kids. In 29 of the 30 Trump states, the proportion of SNAP recipients with kids passes the national average of 62%. That total share under 18 nationally? That’s 20 million kids.
The Trump Administration says the SNAP program is out of money and officials have no choice. It’s a novel read on the situation given that under past funding lapses—including one as recently as this summer—agencies have been able to restack cash to keep this spigot open for needy families. Congress actually built into the budget a multi-year safety valve for exactly this situation. Yet the Trump Administration is claiming the current standoff leaves them no choice.
Obamacare Subsidies Expire
The second point of a fight is the health care system. In order to pay for tax cuts this summer, Trump used some budget gimmicks: he pulled subsidies for low- and middle-income families included in a Joe Biden-era pandemic-relief package to cover the costs of a $3.4 trillion trillion law that disproportionately helps the richest Americans. Trump says those subsidies for single individuals making more than $64,000 were no longer needed now that Covid-19 is over. It’s just an added bonus that the health program most benefited by the subsidies is known as Obamacare, named for a longtime Trump nemesis.
If 22 million people losing access to those subsidies was palatable on its own, those who have unsubsidized health care are going to get hit, too. Congress’ scorekeepers estimate 4 million of those subsidized Americans will choose to go without coverage, further pushing up costs for those who stay in the insurance pool. Preventing that exodus comes with a hefty cost: $350 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office.
On Wednesday, an early look at rates for next year showed insurers upped rates in federal plans by about 30% and state plans by about 17%. While the prices for insurance could still drop, so far it does not look likely. Insurers have to work on the assumption that Congress will not get its act together in time for new insurance terms to kick in before the sign-up deadline. And, in normal times, insurers like to have rates settled shortly after Labor Day. These, of course, are not normal times.
Trump states again are the biggest losers if things go as planned. Nationally, the Urban Institute’s state-by-state modeling estimates there will be a 38% decrease in subsidized health care coverage. But in Georgia—where Rep. Majorie Taylor Green has been sounding the alarm from inside the MAGA revival tent—that number hits 53%. In Louisiana, the dip reaches 61%. And in Texas, a staggering 60% of Lone Star State residents enrolled in a subsidized health plan will be cut out.
What that will look like to red state lawmakers is a spike in uninsured constituents. In Mississippi, the number of folks choosing to drop coverage is projected to spike 65%, per the Urban Institute’s numbers. Half of South Carolina subsidized families would drop insurance if the help expires. In Tennessee, the numbers would be a sizable 41%. In Texas, 39%. In West Virginia, 35% of subsidized Americans would do without if the aid goes away.
All of these red state constituents seeing red—both in rage and in their bank statements—make clear why even some conservative warriors alike are starting to look for an offramp from the shutdown. Sen. Josh Hawley of Missouri is still favoring a clean re-opening but is publicly trying to whip votes to do a stand-alone extension of SNAP. That so far has gone nowhere.
The same is true for a stand-alone extension of the Obamacare subsidies. Senate Republicans, though, are hinting to colleagues that those could be in the mix as a stand-alone measure—but only if both sides can come to a deal that keeps the government open for a good while, perhaps long enough to take this sort of brinksmanship off the table until after the midterms.
It’s now Thursday. The healthcare cost increases are real and published on the government’s main clearinghouse for Obamacare plans. Harried parents are realizing their EBT cards may not work when they do grocery shopping this weekend. And here in Washington, there is the persistent disconnect between lawmakers who want to win the fight and families who just want the government to have their backs.
Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter.