As the U.S. government enters a contentious shutdown in October 2025, the consequences are already being felt by the most vulnerable populations across the country—children, the elderly, and low-income families. The ongoing standoff in Congress over budget allocations has triggered a chain reaction, putting millions of Americans at risk of losing access to essential food assistance programs, namely SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) and WIC (Women, Infants, and Children).

The Impact of SNAP and WIC Cuts on Vulnerable Americans

With federal funding in limbo, 42 million Americans who rely on SNAP are facing an uncertain future. The program, which is the nation’s largest hunger-relief initiative, supports low-income individuals and families by providing monthly food assistance. The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has warned that SNAP benefits may not be paid in November unless the shutdown ends. This puts nearly 1 in 8 Americans at risk of losing access to food, including 13 million children, who are disproportionately affected by food insecurity.

For children and elderly individuals, the stakes are even higher. A 2024 study by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities (CBPP) found that 1 in 6 children in the U.S. already lives in a household that struggles to afford adequate nutrition. A prolonged loss of SNAP funding would push even more families into poverty, with experts predicting that food insecurity could increase by as much as 20% in the first month of a shutdown.

Additionally, WIC, a program that provides nutritious food, breastfeeding support, and healthcare referrals to low-income pregnant women, infants, and children up to age 5, faces a potential cutback as well. If funding remains frozen, 7 million women and children could lose access to vital nutritional resources, further exacerbating the risks of maternal malnutrition and infant mortality.

In a country where 1 in 4 children is already at risk of developmental delays due to poor nutrition, the implications of WIC cuts could be catastrophic for future generations.

In my home state, West Virginia, the 4th poorest state in the country, these cuts will affect 16% of the population.

Political Gamesmanship: Using Vulnerability as Leverage

As the shutdown drags on, it is becoming increasingly clear that these cuts are not simply a product of budget constraints but a political strategy. House Speaker Mike Johnson (R-LA) and other Republicans have made clear their goal is to shift blame for the funding crisis onto the Democrats. However, despite claims that the funding shortfall is due to Democratic inaction, a closer look at the numbers reveals a different story.

For one, the USDA is sitting on $6 billion in unallocated funds, which was specifically earmarked by Congress to prevent a situation like this. Yet, Speaker Johnson has refused to call Congress back into session to release those funds or negotiate a resolution, exacerbating the hardship on millions of American families. Meanwhile, the federal government has found $20 billion to support the administration’s ally, Javier Milei in Argentina, and President Donald J. Trump has continued to demand millions for his personal projects, including a $230 million renovation of the White House East Wing to create a gold-plated ballroom. In the face of these misplaced priorities, blaming Democrats for the SNAP and WIC funding shortfall becomes not only misleading but deeply cynical.

As the shutdown continues, it’s clear that the Trump administration is using the suffering of vulnerable families—both domestically and abroad—as a political ploy, leveraging the very real hardships of those who rely on federal assistance to further a partisan agenda.

But let’s not forget that, domestically, before this shutdown, the government proposed and enacted significant changes to nutrition assistance programs.

SNAP Cuts

  • A recent law backed by the Trump administration (July 2025) is projected by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) to reduce food-stamp (SNAP) benefits for 2.4 million people by expanding work-requirement thresholds, especially for parents of older children, adults aged 55–64, veterans, and others. (theguardian.com)

  • The proposed changes would shift costs to states and reduce benefits for low-income households. For example, households earning less than $24,000 annually are projected to lose about $1,200 in resources. (theguardian.com)

  • A broader piece of legislation would further cut SNAP benefits by $6 billion over the next 10 years, affecting roughly 600,000 households and more than 500,000 children. (cbpp.org)

WIC Cuts

  • The proposed Trump budget for FY-2026 included deep cuts to WIC’s “Cash Value Benefit” (CVB) for fruits and vegetables: for toddlers and preschoolers, benefits would drop from $26/month to $10; for pregnant or postpartum women from $47 to $13; and for breastfeeding participants from $52 to $13. (cbpp.org)

  • A House Agriculture Appropriations bill would cut WIC food benefits by more than 12% (about $800 million) relative to the amount needed to maintain current benefits, affecting 1.5 million pregnant/postpartum/breastfeeding participants and 3.5 million children aged 1–4. (cbpp.org)

Foreign Aid Cuts in Africa: The Human Cost

Meanwhile, in Africa, the Trump administration’s cuts to USAID (United States Agency for International Development) have been equally devastating, with far-reaching impacts on healthcare, food security, and humanitarian relief efforts. The loss of aid in countries like Somalia and Sudan is already having catastrophic consequences, with millions of lives at risk.

USAID Cuts and their Impact on Health and Development

In early 2025, the Trump administration enacted sweeping cuts to U.S. foreign aid, including reducing USAID’s health and humanitarian contracts by more than 90%. Many African countries, particularly Somalia, Sudan, South Sudan, and Ethiopia, which had long relied on U.S. aid for critical public health services, are now reeling from these reductions.

These cuts come at a time when the need for foreign assistance is greater than ever. Conflict, drought, and displacement have left millions across Africa in desperate need of help. USAID funding previously accounted for a large share of health services and emergency response programs, and now its absence is throwing these fragile systems into crisis. (semafor.com)

Impact on Global Health

USAID cuts are resulting in the closure of healthcare facilities and clinics that serve vulnerable populations, leaving 20 – 35 million people without access to the life-saving services.

  • 5 million Sudanese will lose access to healthcare after aid suspensions.
  • 2.4 million Ethiopians will lose basic food and health services.
  • 13 million Africans will be affected by the malaria prevention cuts
  • 2 to 4 million deaths annually if donor aid cuts persist, according to Health Policy Watch

Loss of Save the Children Clinics and WFP Reductions

One of the most direct effects of the USAID cuts has been the closure of vital healthcare centers and nutrition programs.

  • In Somalia, 121 nutrition centers run by Save the Children are scheduled to close by June 2025, impacting at least 55,000 children who would otherwise receive critical care for malnutrition. (savethechildren.org)

  • Save the Children has also reported the closure of several clinics in South Sudan, where the health system has been further strained by the loss of foreign funding. These closures leave children vulnerable to preventable diseases like cholera and pneumonia. (savethechildren.org)

  • In Sudan, USAID cuts have resulted in the suspension of vaccine programs, which had previously prevented outbreaks of diseases like measles, resulting in a potential spike in preventable infections. (washingtonpost.com)

In addition to the health sector, the World Food Programme (WFP) has been forced to reduce its food aid to millions of people across Africa. The WFP’s Southern Africa office, which provided critical food security support to countries such as Zimbabwe, and Zambia.

A Transactional Legacy: The Global and Domestic Costs

These cuts to domestic and international aid reflect a deeply transactional approach to governance, where priorities are often driven by short-term political advantage rather than long-term humanitarian or national interests. The Trump administration’s stance on slashing funding to vulnerable populations, both at home and abroad, illustrates a philosophy that prioritizes political gain at the expense of human lives.

At home, the cuts to SNAP and WIC are direct attacks on the safety net for millions of low-income Americans, especially children, the elderly, and mothers, whose health and well-being depend on these programs. These cuts undermine the very foundation of American social support systems and, in the long run, will lead to increased poverty, hunger, and social instability, which can further strain the healthcare system and escalate public welfare costs. Meanwhile, globally, the U.S.’s withdrawal of support from countries already facing humanitarian crises, such as Somalia and Sudan, diminishes America’s leadership role and soft power, fostering resentment and a rise in geopolitical instability. As these countries struggle without critical aid, the global perception of the U.S. as a reliable partner erodes, leaving a vacuum that adversarial nations like China or Russia are eager to fill.

In the end, these cuts will not only harm the most vulnerable domestically and abroad, but will also have far-reaching consequences for the U.S.’s international reputation, its strategic interests, and its long-term economic and political stability. By treating humanitarian aid as a political bargaining chip, the administration risks weakening the very social and global frameworks that have long supported American power and influence on the world stage. The transactional nature of these policies underscores a dangerous cycle: short-term political gain achieved at the cost of long-term societal and geopolitical losses.