February 20, 2025: The following letter has been sent to the entire MA congressional delegation. Download the Opposition to Safety Net Cuts letter (pdf) to see the entire letter, with signatories (DignityMA included).
“As Massachusetts state-wide and community-based organizations that serve low-income residents of the Commonwealth, we wish to thank the Massachusetts Congressional Delegation for your leadership and steadfast commitment to protect and defend crucial federal safety-net programs. We, the undersigned 150 organizations, urge you to oppose any actions that would weaken or undermine access to vital anti-poverty programs.
Congress is currently considering severe cuts to safety-net programs, including SNAP, Medicaid, and TANF, through Budget Reconciliation. These programs reduce poverty and food insecurity, enhance health, and bring billions of federal dollars in economic stimulus per year into Massachusetts.
Medicaid (MassHealth) covers over 2 million people: more than a quarter of Massachusetts residents and almost half of all children in the state. MassHealth makes up about 50% of revenues for community health centers and nursing homes, and is also the main source of federal revenue to Massachusetts: in FY2025, approximately $12.3 billion (86% of all federal revenue) was generated by Medicaid and CHIP. Another 280,000 Massachusetts residents are able to afford private insurance through the Health Connector with the help of over $1 billion in federal premium tax credits.
About 670,000 MA families – 1 in 6 residents – are connected to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to help put food on the table. The average SNAP benefit is $10.80 per household per day, $330 per month – bringing $2.7 billion federal nutrition dollars to Massachusetts per year. These food dollars are spent at over 5,000 local grocery stores and provide significant economic stimulus to local economies.
The federal Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) block grant provides funding Massachusetts uses to provide cash assistance to help meet the basic needs of 45,000 families, including 75,000 children, with no income or extremely low income. TANF also provides millions of dollars in critical funds for early education and care for the Commonwealth’s children so their parents can work.
Federal proposals to cut, structurally harm, or weaken any of these programs would devastate Massachusetts families, local economies, and our state’s efforts to end hunger and poverty.
We are opposed to massive cuts contemplated in a possible Budget Reconciliation bill. At the same time that Congressional Republicans are proposing to shred the safety net, they are proposing tax cuts for the wealthy. Many of the harmful proposals explicitly cut federal matching rates, restrict program eligibility rules or reduce benefits; others cut benefits under the guise of failed policies like work reporting requirements.
We strongly object to efforts to add or expand harsh and ineffective rules that condition assistance on meeting burdensome work reporting requirements. Decades of evidence have shown that work requirements don’t work. In fact, work requirements have been shown to push families deeper into poverty.1 Work requirements – the origins of which are directly linked to racist and misogynist myths about the deservingness of welfare recipients2 – ignore the systemic barriers that make it difficult for low income adults to get and keep jobs that pay a living wage: education barriers, employers with inconsistent hours, lack of affordable childcare, and wages that don’t keep up with housing and living costs. Further, work rules add bureaucratic red tape to complex government programs – throwing eligible families off critical programs and adding to state administrative costs.
We urge you to speak out forcefully in opposition to any proposals that would harm SNAP, TANF, or Medicaid, and the millions of Massachusetts residents who rely on them. We stand firm and united in our shared commitment to protecting these essential benefits. We can readily provide you data, stories, and expertise to use when strongly opposing damaging proposals.”