Spring 2025 Issue

Social Safety Net: Dismantling the Social Safety Net
By Sue Coyle, MSW
Social Work Today
Vol. 25 No. 2 P. 30

The Trump Administration and Project 2025’s plans may significantly impact important aspects of the United States’ social safety net, affecting many more individuals and families than most realize.

In the first months of the Trump Administration, the president and his team have charged forward with actions that closely align with the plans/goals described in Project 2025, the right-wing political initiative published by the Heritage Foundation in 2023. The Administration’s moves, as well as the additional details in Project 2025 and Republican budget discussions, have left many concerned about the future of a number of vital programs in the United States—programs like Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

They are a part of what makes up the country’s social safety net, a system of programs and policies that offers support to individuals and families. The impact of eliminating, limiting, or significantly altering various aspects of the social safety net could be hard felt by millions of Americans, as 30% of the country, or 99.1 million individuals, utilized the social safety net in 2019 alone.1

As the Trump Administration continues to make its agenda clear and attempts to implement that agenda, it is important to know not only what may change but the impact these actions could have, as well.

Social Safety Net
While many may be aware of specific programs within it, the social safety net as a whole is not as commonly understood. In fact, it would likely surprise some of the 99.1 million who utilized the safety net in 2019 to know that they had. This is because the social safety net is not just one program or policy. It encompasses many different types of support.

“The social safety net, at a federal level, is a combination of several programs and policies that provide direct cash benefits, as well as resources,” explains Lauren A. Schuyler, PhD, assistant research director of family welfare research at the University of Maryland School of Social Work. This includes economic support programs like the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit (CTC), income maintenance programs, such as Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF), Social Security Income and Unemployment Compensation, as well as non-cash benefits like Medicaid, housing, and Free and Reduced School Meals.

Though the most widely known aspects of it are created on a federal level, the federal government is not solely responsible for the safety net. State and local governments are heavily involved, as well. In fact, some of the national programs vary in terms of implementation from state to state. For example, the Affordable Care Act included a Medicaid expansion that opened up coverage to nearly all individuals earning up to 138% of the federal poverty level. However, only 40 states and Washington, D.C. have adopted the expansion to date, leaving 10 states with different eligibility specifications.2

The programs also vary in terms of size. SNAP, for instance, is utilized by about 40 million individuals, while TANF reaches about two million, Schuyler says.

All told, as aforementioned, about three in 10 individuals in the United States take part in some way in the social safety net each year, including nearly 50% of all children.

What’s Being Targeted
Despite the large usage, the current administration as well as many Republican members of the House of Representatives and Senate have made it clear that numerous aspects of the social safety net are likely to be altered in the coming years.

Most widely discussed at present are potential cuts to Medicaid. While members of the Republican Party vocally state that there will not be a significant impact on this program, analysts note that the Republican budget plan, adopted on February 25 of this year and supported by President Trump, calls for $880 billion in cuts from the House Energy and Commerce Committee over the next 10 years.3 The committee has jurisdiction over Medicare, Medicaid, and the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP). At the very least, Medicaid, if not the other two insurance programs, must be included to meet those goals. According to the House Committee on the Budget, this was confirmed by the Congressional Budget Office (CBO).

“Over the next decade, after excluding Medicare, Medicaid, and the CHIP, CBO’s analysis shows that mandatory spending within the Energy and Commerce Committee’s jurisdiction totals $381 billion. Of this amount, only $135 billion is available for cuts,” the Committee stated in a March 5 press release, further adding that “the only way to meet their target for the Energy and Commerce Committee is through deep, damaging cuts to Medicaid.”3

SNAP may also be in line for changes, including possible budget cuts and increased restrictions. The February 25 budget plan calls for cuts from the Agriculture Committee, which has jurisdiction over SNAP. As with the Energy and Commerce Committee and Medicaid, the Agriculture Committee would not be able to meet the outlined goals without targeting SNAP. Additionally, Project 2025 called for increased work requirements, eliminating categorical eligibility, and a rollback of the Thrifty Food Plan.4,5 Any of these changes would make it more challenging for individuals and families to qualify for food assistance.

Other programs and policies at risk or mentioned in Project 2025 include but are not limited to those supporting housing, childcare, and educational needs for families throughout the country.

What’s Not
That is not to say that all aspects of the social safety net are being targeted for cuts, however. There are some pieces of it that are either not a focus of budget cuts or have bipartisan support.

Schuyler notes that TANF is not heavily mentioned in Project 2025, for example. “There is an understanding that this is a tiny program. It’s less than one-half a percentage of the budget,” she says. Cutting or reforming it would not have the same impact on the budget that larger programs would and that Republicans are seeking out.

The CTC is also not currently being prominently discussed as a possible cut. However, this has less to do with its size and more to do with the bipartisan support it maintains, including support from the president. “President Donald Trump and his 2024 campaign signaled support for expanding the Child Tax Credit, echoing the pro-CTC stance of his first term. While Trump himself hasn’t detailed a specific number, Vice President JD Vance publicly floated more than doubling the CTC to $5,000 per child as an ideal target. Furthermore, Trump promised to make the 2017 tax cuts permanent, which include the current $2,000 CTC (set to drop back to $1,000 if the law expires),” says Leah Hamilton, MSW, PhD, a professor of social work at Appalachian State University.

Positive press, however, does not necessarily mean that this is a part of the safety net that will remain consistent or improve. The CTC is, as Hamilton mentioned, set to revert back to $1,000 per child at the end of 2025. The American Family Act, which was recently reintroduced in the House, would make the 2021 expansion of the CTC permanent. But even with this bill introduced, there is no guarantee, as something like this does not align with the Republican budget plan.

“Its chances of passing depend on bipartisan support, which remains uncertain. While some Republicans have expressed interest in expanding the CTC, they often prioritize versions that include work requirements or exclude the lowest-income families,” Hamilton says.

Impact
No matter what parts of the social safety net are changed, the impact will be significant, with a disproportionate effect on communities of color as they are disproportionately represented within the social safety net. For example, a report sponsored by civil rights organizations throughout the country specified that “Nearly 42 million people of color rely on Medicaid, including 20.3 million Latinos, 13.3 million African Americans, and millions of Asian Americans, Native Americans, and Pacific Islanders.”6 Forty-two million is more than half of the 70 million individuals receiving Medicaid.

For SNAP, Schuyler says that communities of color would, again, be disproportionately affected, as well as families and rural communities where incomes tend to be lower.

It’s important to note, as well, that these impacts would not only be felt in the short term but also in the long term. Each of these programs has been well-documented to improve long-term outcomes. SNAP is closely associated with better health outcomes for adults who had access to it in childhood and has been shown to have a positive effect on local economies.7

The CTC has also shown a significant impact “The 2021 expansion of the CTC was unprecedented in its reach,” Hamilton says. “This expansion lifted 3.7 million children out of poverty in December 2021 alone, reducing child poverty by nearly 30%. In January 2022, after the expanded CTC payments ended [reverting back to $2,000 annually], child poverty spiked by 41% in a single month.”

Should any of these programs be significantly cut or eliminated, there are no resources available elsewhere to fill the gaps. “It’s impractical to think that 40 million people could start showing up to the foodbank on the weekend to support their families,” Schuyler says. “It’s not a reality that can exist” on either the local or the state levels. States simply do not have what they need to pick up the tab the federal government would leave behind.

It is unclear exactly what will happen next, but what is clear is that without key elements of the social safety net, many millions of Americans will suffer.

— Sue Coyle, MSW, is a freelance writer and social worker in the Philadelphia suburbs.

References
1. The Assistant Secretary for Planning and Evaluation. How many people participate in the social safety net? https://aspe.hhs.gov/sites/default/files/documents/18eff5e45b2be85fb4c350176bca5c28/how-many-people-social-safety-net.pdf. Published January 20, 2023.

2. Status of state Medicaid expansion decision. KFF website. https://www.kff.org/status-of-state-medicaid-expansion-decisions/. Published February 12, 2025.

3. Nonpartisan CBO analysis proves Republicans are lying about Medicaid cuts. House Committee on the Budget website. https://democrats-budget.house.gov/news/press-releases/nonpartisan-cbo-analysis-proves-republicans-are-lying-about-medicaid-cuts. Published March 5, 2025.

4. Project 2025 outlines devastating changes to USDA and the federal nutrition programs. Food Research and Action Center website. https://frac.org/blog/project-2025. Published September 6, 2024.

5. Millions of low-income households would lose food aid under proposed House Republican SNAP cuts. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities website. https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/millions-of-low-income-households-would-lose-food-aid-under-proposed-house. Published February 24, 2025.

6. Medicaid cuts would rip away coverage from millions of Americans, disproportionately harming people of color. Unidos US website. https://unidosus.org/publications/medicaid-cuts-would-rip-away-health-coverage-from-millions-of-americans-disproportionately-harming-people-of-color/. Published March 13, 2025.

7. SNAP is linked with improved health outcomes and lower health care costs. Center on Budget and Policy Priorities website. https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/snap-is-linked-with-improved-health-outcomes-and-lower-health-care-costs. Published December 14, 2022.