The Capitol LedgerEvery move in Congress, on the record
HomeBillsRecordsLedger AI

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

AboutFAQFeedbackTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

The Capitol Ledger

Built from the Congressional Record and Congress.gov. Every summary links to its source.

The projectAboutFAQFeedback
LegalTerms of ServicePrivacy Policy
Follow us onlineInstagram

Summaries are AI-generated from primary sources. Verify anything important against the original record.

All bills
H.R. 6986·119th Congress·Introduced Jan 8, 2026

COLAs Don’t Count Act of 2026

IntroducedAgriculture and FoodSubstantive
View bill text
Sponsor
Rep. Moore, Gwen [D-WI-4]
Committees
Agriculture Committee (primary)
Last action
May 20, 2026

Bottom line

The bill aims to protect low-income seniors, veterans, and individuals with disabilities from losing SNAP benefits when their other federal benefits increase due to COLAs or state supplements.

What it actually does

This bill amends the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to prevent cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) from reducing Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits or eligibility for certain recipients. Specifically, it excludes COLA increases from Social Security, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Railroad Retirement, and certain Veterans' benefits from being counted as income for SNAP purposes, provided the household was already eligible. It also excludes state supplementary payments for SSI recipients from SNAP income calculations.

Proponents argue

Proponents argue that this bill prevents the 'benefits cliff' phenomenon, where a modest COLA designed to help beneficiaries keep pace with inflation instead leads to a reduction or loss of essential SNAP benefits. They contend it ensures that vulnerable populations, including seniors, veterans, and people with disabilities, can maintain their purchasing power and access to nutritious food without being penalized for federal benefit adjustments.

Opponents contend

Opponents might argue that excluding these income sources from SNAP eligibility calculations could increase federal spending on the program and expand the pool of eligible recipients beyond what current law intends. They may contend that all income, including COLA increases, should be considered to ensure the program targets those with the greatest need based on their total financial resources.

The bill is very short and clear, making it highly accessible for a quick read and understanding of its core purpose.

Section 2(1), amending Section 5(d)(12) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008

Exclusion of Cost-of-Living Adjustments (COLAs) from SNAP Income

prominently featuredstraightforward

This provision modifies existing law to ensure that increases in income resulting from annual cost-of-living adjustments (COLAs) to Social Security, Supplemental Security Income (SSI), Railroad Retirement benefits, or certain Veterans' benefits are not counted as income when determining eligibility for or the amount of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. This exclusion applies through September 30 of any fiscal year if the COLA was effective on or after January 1st of that fiscal year, and the household was already receiving SNAP or certified eligible.

GroupImpactMechanismScale
GroupLow-income seniorsImpactPositiveMechanismPrevents reduction or loss of SNAP benefits due to Social Security COLAs.ScalePotentially millions of households
GroupIndividuals with disabilities receiving SSIImpactPositiveMechanismPrevents reduction or loss of SNAP benefits due to SSI COLAs.ScalePotentially millions of households
GroupLow-income veteransImpactPositiveMechanismPrevents reduction or loss of SNAP benefits due to certain Veterans' benefits COLAs.ScaleThousands to tens of thousands of households
GroupLow-income railroad retireesImpactPositiveMechanismPrevents reduction or loss of SNAP benefits due to Railroad Retirement COLAs.ScaleThousands of households

Supporters argue

Supporters argue that this exclusion is crucial for maintaining the economic stability of vulnerable households. Without it, the very adjustments designed to help them cope with inflation can paradoxically lead to a net reduction in their overall benefits, forcing them to choose between food and other necessities.

Critics contend

Critics might argue that while the intent is good, such exclusions can complicate the SNAP eligibility process and potentially lead to some individuals receiving benefits who, based on their total adjusted income, might otherwise be deemed less in need. They may also raise concerns about the cumulative fiscal impact of such exclusions.

Tradeoffs

The provision balances the goal of protecting vulnerable populations' purchasing power against concerns about program integrity and overall federal spending. It addresses the 'benefits cliff' but introduces a specific carve-out in income calculations.

Section 2(4), inserting new Section 5(d)(19) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008

Exclusion of State Supplementary Payments from SNAP Income

mentioned in summarystraightforward

This provision adds state supplementary payments received under Section 1616 of the Social Security Act to the list of income sources that are excluded when determining eligibility and benefits for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). These payments are typically provided by states to supplement the federal Supplemental Security Income (SSI) benefit.

FOUND

The COLA exclusion is time-limited within a fiscal year, applying 'through September 30 of any fiscal year any increase in income attributable to a cost-of-living adjustment made on or after January 1st of such fiscal year'.

Section 2(1), amending Section 5(d)(12) of the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008

Why it matters:This is standard legislative practice for specifying the precise temporal application of an amendment, ensuring it interacts correctly with annual budgeting and benefit cycles.

Case for: Supporters would argue this precise timing is necessary for administrative clarity and to ensure the COLA disregard functions as intended within the federal fiscal year framework, providing consistent protection for beneficiaries.

Case against: No specific opposition is typically raised against the technical timing of such a provision, as it's an administrative detail. However, critics of the overall policy might see it as adding complexity to benefit calculations.

Estimated impact: This timing mechanism ensures that the COLA disregard is applied consistently for a specific period each year, impacting all beneficiaries who receive a COLA within that timeframe.

About this analysis. AI-Generated from the official bill text and available committee reports. Gaps in available data are noted explicitly. Verify important details with the official Congress.gov record.

On this page

  • Executive summary
  • Key provisions
  • Buried treasure
  • Follow the money
  • Critical analysis
  • Questions to ask
Ask Ledger AI about this