protecting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
Protect SNAP.
Occurrences
Rep. Sykes is a proud co-sponsor of the Restoring Food Security for American Families and Farmers Act, which would repeal these harmful SNAP cuts.
asking him why he has not taken legal action to protect Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits for Ohioans
Evidence
legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown
Representative Emilia Sykes (OH-13) voted against the Republican Farm Bill, saying it "moves in the wrong direction" and that the bill "lacks nearly $187 billion for Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)"; the release says she is a proud co-sponsor of the Restoring Food Security for American Families and Farmers Act, which would repeal the SNAP cuts.
legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown
Sykes said, "I'm focused on results — lowering grocery costs, protecting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), and investing in proven programs that prevent illness before it starts." The release also says SNAP participation in Ohio had declined from 1,389,247 in July 2025 to 1,292,669 in December 2025 after the "Big Ugly Bill" passed.
legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown
GovInfo's enrolled H.R. 6500 text says the Act makes continuing FY2027 appropriations, includes the Agriculture appropriations act among the continued accounts, runs the temporary authority through December 11, 2026, and provides that activities under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 shall continue at a rate to maintain program levels under current law.
legacy_unverified · Source version not recorded · locator unknown
The House Clerk's roll call for H.R. 6500 records that the motion to concur in the Senate amendments passed 370-48 on September 1, 2026, and lists Rep. Sykes, Democrat of Ohio, as voting Yea.
Assessments
Sykes took same-term actions consistent with protecting SNAP, including voting against a farm bill she said would harm SNAP, co-sponsoring repeal legislation, and voting for a continuing appropriations measure that temporarily maintained Food and Nutrition Act activities at current-law levels. But the evidence does not show a completed broad protection of SNAP or repeal of the cited SNAP restrictions, and reported enrollment losses continued after the earlier cuts. This supports partial credit rather than full delivery.
Sykes took clear same-term actions to protect SNAP, including voting against legislation she said would cut SNAP and co-sponsoring repeal legislation. However, the evidence does not show that SNAP was actually protected; it reports continued enrollment losses after the bill passed and frames SNAP protection as an ongoing priority rather than a completed outcome. Under the standard, a serious but unsuccessful legislative effort is not full delivery, so this is a failed promise with an effort badge.