Editor’s Note: Claudia Bonilla Keller is the chief executive of Second Harvest Food Bank of Orange County. Mark Lowry is director of the Orange County Food Bank at the Community Action Partnership of Orange County.
In representing Orange County’s two food banks, we recognize and value the fact that the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (or SNAP, known as CalFresh in California) is America’s largest anti-hunger program. It is that, but it is also something more: a subtle yet essential part of our local economic infrastructure.
Understanding this duality is critical right now because changes to SNAP/CalFresh resulting from the passage of H.R. 1 (also known as “The One Big Beautiful Bill”) last summer threaten to weaken the program at a time when many local households are already stretched thin.
The effects of these program changes will not only be felt by the families who lose benefits, but they will also ripple outward to grocery stores, retailers, employers and the broader business community. In short, cuts to CalFresh are not just a social service issue. They are a business issue.
The scale of this infrastructure is significant. Roughly 300,000 Orange County residents rely on CalFresh benefits, which inject $62 million into the county’s economy every month—nearly $744 million annually—that is spent locally. Furthermore, $1.79 in economic activity is generated for every $1 in CalFresh benefits redeemed.
This purchasing power is a stabilizing force, especially in a county where high average incomes can obscure real financial strain. United Way’s Real Cost Measure reveals a hidden vulnerability: while the median household income here exceeds $110,000, one in three households struggles to meet basic needs. Crucially, nearly all of those households include at least one working adult.
Hard to Detect
For an employer, this means food insecurity is hard to detect. An employee worried about feeding their family is an employee who cannot be fully present at work. That shows up in productivity, in customer service and, ultimately, in turnover.
In a tight labor market, the hidden costs of recruiting, hiring and training replacements far exceed the preventative costs of ensuring a community’s basic needs are met.
While much of the debate around SNAP/CalFresh focuses on recipient eligibility, the broader economic impact deserves equal attention. SNAP/CalFresh is one of the most efficient economic stimulus programs in the state. Cuts included in H.R. 1 are projected to result in a $1.6 billion loss in economic activity in California alone—dollars that would otherwise have gone directly to local businesses. For Orange County, this means fewer consumer dollars circulating through the economy and less revenue for the businesses that serve local families every day.
The food needs in Orange County are already high. In the last fiscal year, the combined Second Harvest and Orange County Food Bank network distributed 71.5 million pounds of food—an increase of nearly 10 million pounds from the year before. And that growth in need happened before the full impact of H.R. 1 has even taken effect.
As community members who previously relied on SNAP/CalFresh benefits see those benefits go away, folks will turn to the emergency food system to supplement their monthly food budgets, and demand on local food banks and nonprofit providers will inevitably rise.
It is a compounding effect: Less governmental support in the form of SNAP/CalFresh dollars means more local food needs. More local food need means greater pressure on food banks to supplement that need.
The Effects on Food Banks
Food banks, however, cannot replace the SNAP/CalFresh program at scale. For every meal a food bank provides, SNAP/CalFresh provides nine. Greater pressure on the emergency food system translates into increased calls on local philanthropy and corporate giving to fill the gap.
The burden does not disappear; it shifts. That strain shows up in concrete ways: more appeals from nonprofits, greater demand on employee assistance programs and a growing expectation that the private sector will absorb the costs of a weakening public safety net. It becomes a corporate line item, one way or another.
The H.R.1 implementation timeline makes this issue urgent. SNAP/CalFresh eligibility changes for certain groups, including refugees and asylum seekers, took effect in California on April 1.
Time limits on work requirements for an expanded group of adults, including veterans and seniors aged 55-64, begin taking effect June 1. It will put an estimated $135 million-plus in annual CalFresh benefits at risk in Orange County.
To be better able to meet the increased food demand, California food banks are advocating for $60 million in the fiscal year 2026-27 California state budget, along with a one-time $50 million investment, for the CalFood program—a program that will help strengthen the emergency food system by allowing California food banks to purchase California-grown and produced goods.
This is not simply a request for funding; it is an investment in stabilizing our community in a time of great need. The U.S. Senate will also soon consider reauthorizing the Farm Bill, which provides the best opportunity to address cuts to SNAP/CalFresh.
Orange County business leaders have always understood that strong communities drive strong commerce. The SNAP/CalFresh changes passed under H.R. 1 are not distant Washington issues.
They are local economic headwinds that will be felt in our grocery aisles, on our payrolls and in the stability of the communities where we do business.
Factoring these SNAP/CalFresh cuts into corporate giving strategies and voicing support for state-level food investments are straightforward ways business leaders can safeguard the economic infrastructure that benefits every sector.
