PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Foreign Agriculture, and Horticulture.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Jun 15, 2023
No Welfare for the Wealthy Act of 2023
This bill requires all households participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to meet the program's income and asset requirements.
Federal requirements generally provide two pathways for SNAP financial eligibility. A household may meet program-specific federal eligibility requirements, which include both income eligibility and an asset test. A household may also be automatically or categorically eligible for SNAP based on eligibility for or receiving cash benefits from other specified low-income assistance programs (e.g., Temporary Assistance for Needy Families [TANF]). Under this categorical eligibility, households that already meet financial eligibility rules in a program like TANF are not required to go through another financial eligibility determination in SNAP.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Further, a majority of states also provide broad-based categorical eligibility (BBCE), a policy that makes most households with an income below a certain threshold categorically eligible for SNAP. Under BBCE, these states typically make households categorically eligible through receiving or being authorized to receive a minimal non-cash TANF benefit or service (e.g., a pamphlet). A state may set its own BBCE financial eligibility requirements for a household so long as the income requirement is below a certain level. A state's requirements do not have to match SNAP program-specific eligibility requirements. For example, most states that provide BBCE do not have an asset test for SNAP eligibility.
The bill requires all SNAP households, including those that qualify under categorical eligibility, to meet the SNAP program's income and asset requirements. These requirements take effect one year after the bill's enactment and do not apply to certification periods that begin before the effective date.
People & committees
Rep. Cline, Ben [R-VA-6] · R–VA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Nutrition, Foreign Agriculture, and Horticulture.
Referred to the House Committee on Agriculture.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
No related bills are listed in this snapshot. This does not establish whether the proposal has appeared in earlier Congresses.
Source last updated: Mar 21, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4154 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4154 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4154 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4154 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.