Governors across multiple states are considering emergency measures to counter the potential impacts of a California are contemplating special legislative sessions to address what could amount to hundreds of millions in additional costs.
According to even floated a controversial pocket rescission tactic to lock in certain cuts. The bill proposes approximately $300 billion in cuts to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and projects to remove 7.6 million people from Medicaid, potentially saving $800 billion over a decade.
Minnesota Governor Tim Walz’s statement reflects the urgency felt by many Democratic state leaders, saying “we will definitely be back in a special session to deal with” the reconciliation package if the House-ed version is adopted. Similar sentiments have been echoed by other governors, including New York’s Kathy Hochul, who has indicated readiness to reconvene lawmakers to address any federal changes.
States scramble to address potential fiscal impact
While the SNAP-related provisions wouldn’t take effect until 2028, states are already preparing for immediate actions. Most states begin their fiscal years on July 1, and their current budgets were created based on existing conditions. Officials are now looking at various options to minimize the potential impact of the federal legislation.
The concern crosses party lines, with some Republican officials even expressing worry about the bill’s downstream effects. Alabama’s Republican Agriculture Commissioner, Rick Pate, has noted that his state would struggle to generate the necessary funds to SNAP if the bill es. Even symbolic gestures, like an upside-down U.S. flag flown outside the State Department, have amplified signs of distress and broader backlash within federal ranks.
State treasurers and financial officers are particularly vocal about the potential consequences. New Mexico Treasurer Laura Montoya, a Democrat, has described the bill as “destructive,” warning it could destabilize entire program networks. In Connecticut, Democratic Treasurer Erick Russell has indicated that a special session would likely be necessary to adjust state policies if the federal budget significantly shifts costs to states.
Some states are considering specific measures to address the potential funding gaps. Connecticut’s governor and legislative leaders are exploring the possibility of declaring a fiscal emergency to raise the spending cap. In New York, state legislators are discussing the possibility of raising taxes on wealthy residents to cover potential Medicaid cuts. California lawmakers have also indicated their willingness to return for special sessions to protect vulnerable programs, with some representatives stating they would convene at any time necessary to address the crisis.
The response to the bill highlights a growing divide between federal and state-level governance, with states increasingly preparing to take on responsibilities traditionally handled by the federal government. According to Brian Sigritz from the National Association of State Budget Officers, states will need to make difficult choices, potentially including benefit cuts, tax increases, or drawing from rainy day funds, as they cannot fully absorb all the projected costs.
Published: Jun 11, 2025 01:37 pm