Republican Senator Takes Aim at Fast-Food Giant's Government Windfall
In a striking political development, a senior Republican senator is challenging a substantial government benefit currently enjoyed by McDonald's, the fast-food behemoth famously endorsed by Donald Trump. The former president's very public affinity for the chain, including his recent appearance at the McDonald's Impact Summit where he joked about being a former fry cook turned president, has made the company an unlikely icon in the 2024 political landscape. However, this relationship is now under scrutiny as Senator Joni Ernst of Iowa moves to alter a key nutrition assistance programme.
The Legislative Challenge to the Restaurant Meals Program
Senator Ernst's proposed legislation, dubbed the 'McSCUSE ME Act', seeks to reform the Restaurant Meals Program (RMP), a component of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This programme currently permits SNAP funds, intended for nutritional support, to be spent on prepared meals at fast-food establishments. Ernst argues that the initiative has strayed from its original purpose, which was to aid homeless individuals without access to kitchen facilities.
'SNAP is supposed to keep food on the table for hungry Americans, not be a golden goose for the Golden Arches,' Senator Ernst exclusively told the Daily Mail. She emphasised that while fast food is convenient, the 'N' in SNAP stands for nutrition, a principle she believes is being compromised.
Data from the USDA reveals a significant expansion of the RMP under the Biden administration, growing beyond its initial mission to now funnel hundreds of millions of dollars to national fast-food chains. From June 2023 to May 2025, over $475 million in taxpayer dollars was spent at fast-food restaurants in California alone, with the total RMP expenditure reaching $524 million.
Programme Expansion and Political Implications
The RMP is currently active in several states, including Arizona, California, Illinois, Maryland, and others, but its growth in California has been particularly dramatic. State officials and the USDA authorised more than 5,800 restaurants to accept SNAP benefits, with the vast majority being large chains like McDonald's, Burger King, KFC, and Pizza Hut. Many of these establishments now openly advertise with signs stating 'EBT Accepted Here!'.
Ernst's bill proposes three key changes: it would continue allowing homeless, elderly, and disabled individuals to participate but would remove automatic spousal eligibility. It also mandates an annual public report detailing the number of participating vendors and beneficiaries, as well as total programme costs—a move for greater transparency, as the exact number of RMP users is not currently known.
The debate over SNAP usage entered public discourse more prominently during the recent government shutdown. The broader SNAP programme provides monthly funds via a debit card to 42 million Americans and is administered by the USDA. The Trump administration has signalled its intent to 'completely deconstruct' the programme, with pending changes including a recertification of eligibility and crackdowns on fraud, though a timeline remains undetermined.
The political stakes are high, intertwining nutrition policy with corporate interests and presidential allegiances. The White House has so far declined to comment on Ernst's legislation, and the bill currently lacks co-sponsors, leaving its future uncertain. However, the conversation highlights a growing scrutiny over how taxpayer-funded assistance programmes are implemented and who ultimately benefits.
