Fact check: Has the House passed a continuing resolution or separate SNAP funding bill in 2025?

1. A House fix for SNAP exists — but it’s just on paper and politically isolated

The House introduced the Keep SNAP Funded Act of 2025 to ensure uninterrupted SNAP payments during a government funding lapse, signaling a legislative attempt to firewall benefits from a shutdown. The bill’s introduction demonstrates a focused effort by some House members to target hunger relief directly rather than coupling SNAP to omnibus funding packages; however, introduction is not passage, and the measure remained uncertain in its trajectory as House leaders concentrated on broader appropriation battles. The introduction alone does not create authority to distribute benefits; it requires House passage, Senate concurrence, and presidential approval to take effect, leaving SNAP recipients dependent on whether Congress can translate the bill into law amid competing priorities ^[1].

2. The Senate’s refusal to advance funding left the House measure stranded from effective relief

By Oct. 28, the Senate had, for the 13th time, failed to advance a House-passed funding measure, illustrating a persistent Senate blockade that undercut prospects for any stopgap measures tied to full-year funding or targeted fixes. Reports show only three Democrats voted to advance the measure in that procedural maneuver, and the repeated stalling meant Congress had little practical forward movement to restore government operations or to clear a path for standalone fixes like the House SNAP bill to be considered in the Senate. The procedural gridlock in the upper chamber therefore magnified the risk that even narrowly scoped bills would not be enacted in time to prevent benefits interruptions ^[2].

3. The shutdown milestone mattered — SNAP benefits had a looming cutoff date

With the government shutdown entering its fourth week by Oct. 28, 2025, lawmakers across parties warned that SNAP benefits could begin to expire on Nov. 1 absent legislative action, turning the abstract risk into an immediate deadline for millions of beneficiaries. The timing underlines why House members prioritized a Keep SNAP Funded Act: a discrete, time-sensitive program like SNAP operates on monthly benefit cycles that do not automatically continue during appropriations lapses. The warning about Nov. 1 created political pressure to act quickly, but the Senate’s repeated blocks of the House’s broader measures left little runway for the standalone bill to be converted into enforceable relief before benefits began to lapse ^{[3] [2]}.

4. Political dynamics explain why a targeted SNAP bill remained unlikely to advance alone

The introduction of a targeted SNAP continuity bill occurred against a backdrop of high-stakes funding fights that centered on larger appropriations packages and partisan leverage. The House’s separate proposal reflects a strategic choice by some legislators to isolate popular programs from broader funding controversies, yet the Senate’s unwillingness to advance the House-passed funding vehicle for the 13th time signaled that institutional obstruction and partisan calculus limited the pathway for any discrete solution. The repeated procedural failures indicate that even widely appealing, narrowly tailored fixes can be sidelined when chambers prioritize leverage over granular program continuity ^{[2] [3]}.

5. What the record shows and what it omits — facts, timing, and unanswered questions

The sourced reporting confirms three core facts: the Keep SNAP Funded Act was introduced in the House; the Senate repeatedly failed to advance a House-passed funding bill through late October; and lawmakers warned SNAP benefits could begin expiring on Nov. 1 if Congress did not act. The coverage does not indicate that the House-passed standalone SNAP measure became law, nor does it report Senate enactment or presidential signature, leaving the practical outcome — continuous SNAP payments after the lapse date — unresolved. The immediate omission is whether subsequent floor action, conference negotiations, or executive measures occurred after Oct. 28; absent newer records, the legislative introduction and the Senate’s 13th failed advancement remain the determinative public facts ^{[1] [2] [3]}.