This story was originally produced by the Concord Monitor. NHPR is republishing it in partnership with the Granite State News Collaborative.
A mist of uncertainty hung over the state’s food pantries when Elsy Cipriani toured them this summer.
Congress had just passed President Donald Trump’s budget reconciliation bill into law, introducing changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program that downshifted some costs from the federal government to state governments and restricted the program’s eligibility requirements.
The cost-sharing changes came with discreet, foreseeable deadlines. But states had a period of 120 days, ending on Nov. 1, to implement eligibility changes that expand the work requirement to able-bodied adults up until the age of 65 and exclude many noncitizens — mainly refugees, asylees and human trafficking survivors. Undocumented immigrants have never had access to government food assistance.
The New Hampshire Food Bank, which works with 400 partner organizations across the state and executes New Hampshire’s SNAP outreach program, didn’t know when those changes would come.
“We understand the state, in particular the Department of Health and Human Services, are just waiting for guidance from the federal government, as with many other states. So the uncertainty comes from the state to us,” said Cipriani, the Food Bank’s executive director.
Cipriani’s outreach team struggled to assuage fears that applicants eligible under current requirements would be stripped of their food assistance dollars whenever the new requirements went into effect.
Food pantries in both Hillsborough and Merrimack counties told Cipriani they’d already noticed their immigrant client base diminish.
“Regardless of their legal status, they are not coming to our programs as often as they used to. Even people that are here legally are afraid,” she recalled.
They worried for their clients and held their breaths knowing that more stringent SNAP eligibility requirements would create greater need and strain their capacity to help.
“Sadly, people are going to be pushed to come to us and to go to our partners,” she said. “If all these changes take place and we put a lot of pressure on the emergency food distribution system, we are not going to be able to supply what the need is. We will be ready, but it’s too much to expect from the emergency food system in New Hampshire, that it’s going to fill the gap that the SNAP cuts are going to leave.”
With the Nov. 1 deadline approaching, the New Hampshire Food Bank is reaching out to other hunger relief organizations in the state to prepare for what’s coming.
In the legislature, some lawmakers also appear to be considering the implications of these changes to SNAP.
Beginning on Oct. 1, 2026, states will pay a larger portion of the administrative costs associated with operating SNAP. Similarly, the mandate that states contribute to the cost of benefits, formerly paid in full by the federal government, will go into effect the following year.
A recent report from the New Hampshire Fiscal Policy Institute estimated these changes would cost New Hampshire $14 million over that time frame.
Rep. Mark Pearson considers his Legislative Service Request to make “a supplemental appropriation to DHHS for SNAP” a placeholder until the state knows more about the precise financial drain these changes could pose. He expects more information to be available by the time his proposed bill makes it to the Health and Human Services Oversight Committee in February of 2026.
“Right now, it looks like we won’t have as much money available to do the things we want to do,” he said.
A Hampstead Republican and nearly-lifelong clergyman, Pearson said he was branded a “bleeding heart conservative” when he was first elected. He chooses to treat the label as a compliment.
“Very often when we come to political questions, either we are very frugal and cautious or we’re very compassionate to the needs there. When it’s made an either-or thing, we get battles, but if we can see that there are many things that can be done to meet genuine need and if down the road they’re cost-effective, my God, let’s go for those,” he said.
Other lawmakers have targeted different aspects of SNAP: Republican Rep. Michael Harrington drafted legislation that would limit SNAP recipients’ liberty to purchase junk food with food stamps.
His proposed bill would have DHHS submit a waiver to the Department of Agriculture to restrict junk food purchases. At least 12 states have submitted similar waivers, which go into effect in 2026.
“I don’t see how anyone can be opposed to it — it’s supplemental nutritional, it’s not supplemental junk food,” Harrington said. “I don’t think it is a partisan issue. It doesn’t cut the pennies; it just makes sure benefits are used with nutritional food. You can buy all the chicken and green beans you want.”
Other proposed SNAP-related bills include a request by Rep. Lilli Walsh, similar to Harrington’s. There’s also a request “relative to food and drink purchased under SNAP” by Rep. Lisa Freeman and a request “relative to the funding of the SNAP program by DHHS” by Sen. Daryl Abbas. None of the legislators returned the Monitor’s interview requests.
Legislative Service Requests are formal requests state senators and representatives can file with the Office of Legislative Services to draft the language of a new bill. They typically include little information and can be vague in their wording.
For a complete list of all Legislative Service Requests for 2026, visit https://gc.nh.gov/lsr_search/LSR_Results.aspx.
