If proposed cuts to Medicaid and nutrition programs make it through Congress and receive the president’s approval, Arkansas could face devastating economic consequences, according to a recent report from the Commonwealth Fund. The cuts would cost the state thousands of jobs, strip away hundreds of millions of dollars in federal and state revenue, and cause a significant decline in the state’s gross domestic product (GDP). Here’s how these cuts could impact Arkansas:
Table of Contents
Medicaid and SNAP Cuts: A Potential Disaster for Arkansas’ Economy
The U.S. House of Representatives passed a budget resolution in February that could pave the way for $4.5 trillion in deficit spending to fund tax cuts, primarily benefiting wealthier Americans. As part of this proposal, Congress is expected to look for $880 billion in spending cuts over the next decade, including significant reductions to Medicaid and the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
The Commonwealth Fund report warns that if these cuts are implemented, Arkansas would lose $763.2 million in Medicaid funding and $129.7 million in SNAP funding by 2026. This loss in federal support could decimate essential services that millions of Arkansans rely on. Medicaid currently covers 875,153 residents, while 235,927 Arkansans benefit from SNAP.
The proposed cuts would not only threaten the well-being of the most vulnerable but could also significantly impact the state’s economy. According to the report, Arkansas’ GDP would shrink by nearly $1 billion by 2026 as a result of the cuts. This represents a loss of $1.66 billion in economic output from Medicaid cuts alone, plus $119.4 million in SNAP-related economic output.
Job Losses and Economic Ripple Effects
The proposed cuts would also lead to a dramatic increase in unemployment. The Commonwealth Fund estimates that Arkansas could lose around 109,000 jobs, with about 5,600 of those jobs directly tied to the healthcare sector. These jobs include positions at hospitals, nursing homes, and clinics that serve Medicaid beneficiaries. Another 600 jobs related to SNAP would be lost, particularly in sectors like agriculture, food retail, and food processing.
The ripple effect would reach other sectors of the economy as well. The loss of $763 million in Medicaid funding could lead to the closure of healthcare facilities in rural areas, where the impact would be felt most acutely.
Strain on Rural Communities and Health Providers
Rural areas in Arkansas, which rely heavily on Medicaid for healthcare coverage, could see devastating impacts. The Commonwealth Fund’s report highlights the severe strain on rural healthcare providers, who may not be able to survive without Medicaid funding. These facilities could be forced to cut back services, lay off staff, or close altogether, putting many low-income Arkansans at risk of losing access to care.
With a high concentration of elderly and disabled individuals on Medicaid in rural Arkansas, the state’s most vulnerable populations would bear the brunt of these cuts. According to the Georgetown University report, Arkansas ranks among the top ten states with the highest number of children relying on Medicaid, particularly in rural areas. The loss of Medicaid coverage could disproportionately affect these children and their families.
SNAP Cuts and Growing Food Insecurity
SNAP is another lifeline for Arkansas residents, with approximately 235,927 Arkansans relying on the program for food assistance. However, if federal funding for SNAP were reduced, the state would see a drop in the number of families able to participate in the program. As a result, more people could turn to food banks and pantries for assistance, straining an already overburdened charitable food network.
Arkansas already has one of the highest food insecurity rates in the country, with nearly 19% of its population facing hunger in 2023. The loss of SNAP benefits would only worsen this crisis, particularly for families with children, the elderly, and individuals with disabilities. A report from the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance highlights the devastating combination of Medicaid and SNAP cuts, noting that it would force families to make impossible choices between healthcare and food, exacerbating the state’s food insecurity problem.
Proposal to Cut SNAP Benefits Would Hurt America’s Poor While Enriching the Wealthiest
Who Will Receive $292 in SNAP Food Stamps in the First Week of March?
SNAP Restrictions on Food in 2025: What You Can and Cannot Buy with Food Stamps
SNAP Benefit Increase 2025: Higher Food Stamp Rates, Eligibility Updates, and Payment Dates
A Call to Action for Arkansas’ Leaders
As Arkansas’ government continues to prioritize feeding children and addressing hunger, Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders has implemented policies aimed at reducing food insecurity, such as providing free school breakfasts for all students. However, if the proposed federal cuts to Medicaid and SNAP move forward, the state’s efforts to combat food insecurity could be undermined.
Both Laura Kellams from Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families (AACF) and Sylvia Blain from the Arkansas Hunger Relief Alliance have emphasized the importance of urging federal lawmakers not to approve these cuts. Without federal support, the state would face an even more significant burden, with residents increasingly dependent on local food banks and charitable organizations.
Governor Sanders has also been advocating for the elimination of the state’s grocery sales tax to ease the burden on Arkansans struggling to afford food. While this tax relief would help, it would not make up for the large-scale cuts in federal funding, which would leave the state in a precarious financial situation.
Conclusion
The proposed cuts to Medicaid and SNAP would not only harm Arkansas’ most vulnerable populations but also devastate the state’s economy. With significant job losses, revenue shortfalls, and an increase in food insecurity, these cuts could have long-lasting consequences for the people of Arkansas. As federal lawmakers continue to debate these changes, it is critical for state leaders to speak out against the cuts and work to protect the economic stability and well-being of their constituents.