Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced legislation Thursday that would eliminate the federal Restaurant Meals Program, barring restaurants from accepting SNAP benefits while preserving meal assistance through qualifying public and nonprofit organizations.
By yourNEWS Media Newsroom
Rep. Brandon Gill, R-Texas, introduced legislation Thursday that would prohibit restaurants from accepting Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, targeting a federal program that allows certain recipients to use food stamps for prepared meals.
Gill’s Ending Restaurant Purchases with SNAP Act would eliminate the Restaurant Meals Program, which participating states can use to allow eligible SNAP recipients to purchase hot, prepared food from approved restaurants, according to the New York Post.
“SNAP is supposed to help struggling Americans put nutritious food on the table, not stick taxpayers with the bill for fast food,” Gill said in a statement.
“More than half a billion dollars in SNAP benefits have gone to restaurants through this loophole in just two years while the Trump administration is working to get junk food out of the program,” he added.
The legislation would end restaurant participation in SNAP while retaining provisions that allow public and nonprofit organizations to provide meals to eligible beneficiaries, including home-delivered meals for elderly and disabled recipients.
The proposal follows a broader Republican effort to limit how SNAP benefits can be spent, with lawmakers increasingly focusing on prepared meals, soft drinks and other foods they argue fall outside the program’s core purpose.
In July, Gill joined a group of Republican lawmakers led by Sen. Joni Ernst, R-Iowa, in asking the departments of Agriculture and Health and Human Services to examine purchases made through the Restaurant Meals Program and determine whether its rules should be tightened.
The lawmakers argued that a program originally designed for people unable to cook or store food had expanded well beyond that purpose.
“What was originally intended as a narrow accommodation for individuals unable to store or prepare food, the program has grown and is now dominated by large national fast-food and quick-service chains,” they wrote in a letter to the departments.
Gill had also questioned Gina Plata-Nino, director of SNAP Policy and Advocacy at the Food Research and Action Center, during a congressional hearing in June about whether SNAP benefits should be available for purchases such as soft drinks.
“Do the American people need Coca-Cola to survive?” Gill asked.
“I think most people can rationally say that you don’t need Coca-Cola to survive,” he later added.
The restaurant issue has drawn additional scrutiny because of the amount of SNAP money spent through participating establishments.
Approximately $524 million in SNAP benefits was spent at restaurants in nine states between June 2023 and May 2025, according to data previously reported by the Post.
California accounted for approximately $475 million of that total, by far the largest amount among participating states.
Arizona recorded about $41.4 million in restaurant SNAP spending, while New York accounted for approximately $3.6 million.
Michigan, Rhode Island, Massachusetts, Illinois, Virginia and Maryland also participated in the program during that period.
The Restaurant Meals Program itself dates to the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977.
It was established to give certain SNAP recipients access to ready-to-eat meals when they may be unable to prepare food themselves or lack adequate cooking and food-storage facilities.
Under current federal rules, participation is optional for states.
Where the program is offered, eligibility is generally limited to certain SNAP recipients, including people who are elderly, disabled or homeless.
Gill’s legislation would remove restaurants from that system entirely while leaving other forms of prepared-meal assistance available through qualifying public and nonprofit providers.
The bill arrives as the Trump administration and congressional Republicans pursue broader changes aimed at restricting SNAP purchases they consider inconsistent with the program’s nutritional purpose.
If enacted, Gill’s proposal would mark a significant rollback of a nearly five-decade-old exception within SNAP by ending the ability of participating restaurants to accept food-stamp benefits from eligible recipients.
Original article
Comments