H.R. 9359

H.R. 9359: To amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to provide for the reissuance to households of supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits to replace benefits stolen by identity theft or typical skimming practices, and for other purposes.

Introduced Grace Meng (D) HOUSE_BILL — 119th Congress
Plain English Summary

H.R. 9359 aims to amend the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 to allow households to receive replacement Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits if their benefits have been stolen through identity theft or skimming practices. This legislation seeks to ensure that individuals and families do not suffer food insecurity due to fraudulent activities that compromise their benefits.

Positive Media Summary

Media coverage has highlighted the bill as a necessary response to the increasing incidents of fraud affecting vulnerable populations. Advocates for food security have praised the legislation for protecting low-income households from the repercussions of theft, emphasizing that it could help maintain access to essential nutrition for those in need.

Negative Media Summary

Some critics argue that the bill may not adequately address the root causes of fraud and could lead to increased costs for the SNAP program. Concerns have also been raised about the potential for abuse of the reissuance process, which could undermine the integrity of the program.

Conflict of Interest Analysis Deep Analysis
2/10
Risk Level
Low
Total Donations
$0
PAC Percentage
0%
Policy Area
Agriculture and Food

The analysis of H.R. 9359, which aims to amend the Food and Nutrition Act to address benefits stolen through identity theft or skimming, reveals no direct overlaps between the sponsor Grace Meng's top donor industries and the bill's subject matter. The top donor industries do not appear to have a vested interest in the specifics of nutrition assistance programs. The lobbying activity in this policy area, while notable, primarily involves healthcare and technology sectors that do not directly correlate with the provisions of the bill. For instance, OSF Healthcare System has contributed $60,000, but its focus is on healthcare rather than nutrition assistance. Thus, the risk of conflict of interest remains low as the financial contributions do not suggest a direct influence on the bill's intent or provisions.

Lobbying Activity — Who's Pushing?

Organizations that lobbied on issues related to this bill's policy area.

Client Lobbying Firm Amount
OSF HEALTHCARE SYSTEM OSF HEALTHCARE SYSTEM $60,000
EGAN-JONES RATINGS COMPANY INVARIANT LLC $50,000
GRADIUM MEGA COIN HARTWELL CAPITOL CONSULTING $50,000
DRAI HEALTH HARTWELL CAPITOL CONSULTING $50,000
VALTHOS INC. INVARIANT LLC $40,000
SANDY BAY PARTNERS, LLC GRACE BAY STRATEGIES, LLC $20,000
ORGANOGENESIS DONOVAN STRATEGIES LLC $15,000
ANTENNA RESEARCH ASSOCIATES DONOVAN STRATEGIES LLC $15,000
NETSCOUT DONOVAN STRATEGIES LLC $10,000
ALLLIANCE OF MARINE MAMMAL PARKS AND AQUARIUMS MEA STRATEGIES LLC undisclosed
REGIONAL FISHERIES ENHANCEMENT GROUP COALITION ALL OF THE ABOVE CONSULTING, LLC undisclosed
JACKSON WALKER LLP ON BEHALF OF SAN MIGUEL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE, INC. INVARIANT LLC undisclosed
ANTHEIA INVARIANT LLC undisclosed
RAILROAD INVESTIGATION PROJECT GROUP EAGLE 1 RESOURCES, LCC undisclosed
EAGLE 1 RESOURCES, LCC EAGLE 1 RESOURCES, LCC undisclosed

Source: Senate Lobbying Disclosure Act (LDA) filings, 2026

Sponsor's Top Donor Industries

Top industries funding Grace Meng, ranked by total contributions.

Health Professionals $120,000,000
Individuals: $120,000,000 PACs: $0
Retired $37,500,000
Individuals: $37,500,000 PACs: $0

Source: OpenSecrets.org (Center for Responsive Politics)

TheBillRoom is free and independent. No ads, no subscriptions, no political funding. If this analysis was useful, reader support keeps it running.
Support Us