Governor’s remarks on stigma draw criticism while new federal law shifts more program costs to states.
OKLAHOMA CITY — Gov. Kevin Stitt’s suggestion that some social stigma surrounding food assistance may be beneficial has drawn sharp criticism from Oklahoma anti-hunger organizations, reigniting debate over the state’s approach to helping low-income families just as Oklahoma prepares to assume greater financial responsibility for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
During an interview with Stateline discussing changes to SNAP under the recently enacted federal reconciliation law, Stitt argued that electronic benefit cards have made food assistance too easy to access and reflected on an earlier era when recipients obtained commodity foods through food banks.
“Maybe it’s going back to the day where there was a little stigma attached and you had to actually go to a food bank and pick up commodity cheese and commodity groceries, and it had a little stigma so you were a little bit embarrassed,” Stitt said. “Maybe we should go back to a little bit of that instead of just making it so easy.”
Stitt also said he believes churches, food banks and other charitable organizations can help meet the needs of Oklahomans facing food insecurity, adding that “nobody’s going to go hungry in Oklahoma.”
Why the debate matters
The controversy comes as Oklahoma prepares for one of the most significant changes to SNAP financing in the program’s history.
Beginning Oct. 1, 2026, the federal government’s reimbursement for SNAP administrative costs will be reduced, requiring Oklahoma to absorb a substantially larger share of the cost of operating the program.
One year later, beginning Oct. 1, 2027, states will begin paying a share of SNAP food benefit costs for the first time. Depending on each state’s SNAP payment error rate, states will be responsible for between 5% and 15% of benefit costs that historically have been paid entirely by the federal government.
The changes shift billions of dollars in costs from the federal government to the states and ensure that future Oklahoma governors and legislators will face budget decisions over how to finance the program.
Oklahoma organizations push back
The governor’s remarks prompted immediate criticism from Hunger Free Oklahoma and the Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma, both of which argued that charitable organizations already operate at capacity and cannot replace federal nutrition assistance.
According to Hunger Free Oklahoma, federal data show nearly 17% of Oklahomans experience food insecurity even while SNAP remains available. The organization said more than 500,000 Oklahomans—more people than the entire population of Tulsa, Oklahoma’s second-largest city—receive SNAP benefits each month. The program also brings approximately $103 million in federal food assistance into Oklahoma grocery stores every month.
Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma officials also rejected the suggestion that food assistance should carry greater social stigma.
“Hunger is difficult enough without adding shame to it,” Regional Food Bank spokeswoman Cassie Gilman told KFOR. She said food bank clients include veterans, seniors living on fixed incomes and working families who need temporary help making ends meet.
Chris Bernard, president and CEO of Hunger Free Oklahoma, also disputed Stitt’s assertion that no one would go hungry without SNAP, saying the program represents more than half of the nation’s food safety net and that food banks cannot absorb the loss of federal assistance on their own.
Legislature will face funding decisions
While the governor’s comments generated the immediate controversy, the policy changes themselves are likely to have a lasting impact on state government.
Beginning next year, the Oklahoma Legislature will decide whether to appropriate additional state funding to cover higher SNAP administrative costs. Beginning in 2027, lawmakers also may have to fund the state’s share of SNAP food benefits under the new federal formula.
The governor will propose budget priorities and ultimately sign or veto appropriations bills, but any increase in state spending will require legislative approval.
Exactly how much Oklahoma ultimately pays for SNAP benefits will depend in part on the state’s federally measured payment error rate, which determines whether a state falls at the lower or upper end of the new cost-sharing formula.
As chairman of the National Governors Association, Stitt has been among the Republican governors discussing how states will respond to the new requirements. His comments have since drawn national attention as states begin preparing for the law’s phased implementation.
A broader philosophical divide
The dispute reflects a longstanding debate over the role of government in addressing poverty and food insecurity.
Supporters of reducing reliance on government assistance argue public benefits should encourage self-sufficiency and that churches, charities and community organizations should play a larger role in helping families in need.
Anti-hunger advocates counter that SNAP primarily serves working families, children, seniors and people with disabilities, and argue that charitable organizations lack the resources to replace the federal program if benefits are reduced.
With Oklahoma preparing to assume greater financial responsibility for SNAP over the next two years, that philosophical debate is expected to move from public statements into the state’s budget process.
This story is based in part on reporting by Stateline and KFOR and includes additional reporting and context.
