When Congress cuts Medicaid by an estimated $863 billion and SNAP by $295 billion over a decade — taking food and healthcare from millions — what do religious teachings about "the least of these" and constitutional principles about the general welfare actually require?
Religious traditions speak with rare unanimity about the obligation to feed the hungry and care for the sick — and judge communities by how they treat the most vulnerable. The Constitution leaves spending decisions to Congress, which can legitimately weigh competing demands on public resources. The honest debate is about how to provide assistance well, not whether to provide it at all. Cuts that remove healthcare from 10.9 million Americans and food assistance from 13 million low-income households at this scale and speed fail the religious traditions' fundamental test, regardless of any policy goals they aim to achieve. The general welfare is a constitutional purpose, not just an aspirational phrase.
Religious perspectives
Religious traditions are nearly unanimous on the obligation to feed the hungry and care for the sick — and they are remarkably specific about how communities are judged by how they treat the most vulnerable.
Christianity: Matthew 25:31-46 — Jesus's most direct teaching on judgment — describes the criterion: "I was hungry and you gave me something to eat, I was thirsty and you gave me something to drink, I was a stranger and you invited me in... I was sick and you looked after me." Those who failed to do these things are condemned. Notice: Jesus does not say "deserving" hungry. Hungry. The means-testing was added later by humans.
Judaism: Tzedakah (justice, often translated charity) is obligatory, not optional. The Torah commands leaving the corners of fields unharvested for the poor (Leviticus 19:9-10) — a structural redistribution mechanism, not occasional generosity. Maimonides ranked the eight levels of charity, placing systemic provisions that help people become self-sufficient as the highest form. Cuts to programs that prevent hunger fall on the same population the Torah commands to be protected.
Islam: Zakat (mandatory charitable giving) is one of the Five Pillars — 2.5% of wealth annually, redistributed to the poor and needy. The Quran states: "And in their wealth there is a recognized right for the needy and the deprived" (51:19). The "right" language is significant: the poor have a claim, not a request.
Catholic Social Teaching: The principle of "preferential option for the poor" — articulated formally by Pope John Paul II and consistently reinforced by Pope Francis — holds that policies must be evaluated by their impact on the most vulnerable. Cuts that remove food and healthcare from low-income families fail this test by definition.
The honest counterweight: Religious traditions also teach personal responsibility, work, and stewardship of resources. Many would distinguish between sustaining the temporarily struggling and creating long-term dependency. But this distinction does not justify cuts of the scale and timing currently underway, which fall on populations that include children, the elderly, the disabled, and working families whose wages are insufficient to cover food and healthcare.
Constitutional & legal framework
The Constitution does not require any particular level of social spending — but it does establish the framework within which spending decisions are made and the principles that guide them.
The Preamble: "We the People... in Order to form a more perfect Union, establish Justice, insure domestic Tranquility, provide for the common defence, promote the general Welfare, and secure the Blessings of Liberty to ourselves and our Posterity, do ordain and establish this Constitution." The general welfare is named as a constitutional purpose.
Article I, Section 8: Congress has the power "to lay and collect Taxes... to pay the Debts and provide for the common Defence and general Welfare of the United States." Spending decisions are constitutionally Congress's domain.
The One Big Beautiful Bill Act (May 22, 2025):
- Medicaid: Estimated $863 billion in cuts over fiscal years 2025-2034. Mandatory work reporting requirements for adults ages 19-64 covered through Medicaid expansion by end of December 2026.
- SNAP: Estimated $295 billion in cuts — a 36% reduction by 2034. Includes blocking a revision to incorporate basic internet costs (cutting food assistance by ~$10/month for ~13 million households). States required to cover 75% of SNAP administration costs starting October 1, 2026, shifting cost burden to state budgets.
- ACA: Cuts to enhanced subsidies (which expired November 2025).
CBO projections: The Congressional Budget Office projects 10.9 million additional Americans will become uninsured — through Medicaid losses or ACA marketplace coverage losses.
Who is affected: The combined Medicaid and SNAP populations include approximately 70 million Americans — roughly 21% of the country. The largest groups are children, the elderly in long-term care, the disabled, and working families whose jobs do not provide adequate wages or benefits.
Work requirements analysis: Studies of state-level Medicaid work requirements (Arkansas, Georgia, others) consistently find that they reduce coverage primarily through paperwork burdens rather than by increasing employment. Most affected adults are already working, exempt, or unable to work. The administrative costs frequently exceed the savings.
The federalism shift: Pushing 75% of SNAP administrative costs to states transfers fiscal pressure to state legislatures. States with limited budgets may further restrict access to comply with federal requirements without bearing the cost.
The constitutional process question: The cuts were enacted through a budget reconciliation process that allows passage with a simple majority in the Senate. Reconciliation was designed for budget-balancing measures with limited substantive policy implications; its use for sweeping policy changes affecting tens of millions of Americans is procedurally permitted but raises questions about deliberative process.
See: Article I, §8 (Spending Power) → | Congressional Budget Office →
Sources cited:BibleTorahConstitution