Overview:
Many states have banned junk food from being purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The reactions from the American people vary from surprise to repulsion. The repercussions of this decision could affect those that rely on SNAP for food assistance.
At a rural corner store in Florida, a young mother stared at the checkout screen in disbelief as the cashier quietly told her that chips and candy in her cart wouldn’t be covered-her SNAP card had just run into the state’s new ban “junk food.”
Various states, such as Florida, Colorado, Arkansas, Louisiana, and many others, have banned the purchase of soda, sugary drinks. Waivers The U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins signed waivers to redefine what kind of food could be purchased by SNAP in these states. The Trump administration has approved of such changes made to the usage of SNAP cards.
Rollins also signed six food choice waivers for the following states: Florida, West Virginia, Louisiana, Colorado, Texas, and Oklahoma. It was an attempt to remove “unhealthy” food products from SNAP benefits. It is aligned with the government’s initiatives to promote better and healthier eating habits for children.
“Six new states are joining the MAHA movement! Yesterday at the Great American Farmers Market, @secrollins and @seckennedy signed food choice state waivers for West Virginia, Florida, Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma and Texas to remove unhealthy foods from SNAP,” Rollins said on her Twitter page.
The Reasons Behind SNAP’s Junk Food Ban
With the help of President Trump, Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F Kennedy implemented an initiative called “Make America Healthy Again.” This initiative is an attempt by Kennedy to ensure that healthy food is accessible and available for people. Especially younger children. It is estimated that 40% of SNAP recipients are children, whom will be impacted by this initiative.
According to the Centers for Disease Control, 19.7% of American children between the ages of 2-19 were overweight or obese from 2017 to 2020. Those from lower-income and black and Hispanic backgrounds are disproportionally affected. Children from lower income backgrounds tend to be recipients of SNAP more so than other socio-economic backgrounds.
While children are one of the primary targets, Kennedy wants to “incentivize” Americans to eat healthier. He believes that starting with the youth is one of the best measures to promote healthy eating and living throughout the life span. Adults aren’t off the hook. He believes that banning adults from using SNAP to purchase junk food could influence them to buy healthier alternatives, instead.
At a White House press conference, Kennedy said:
“If you want to buy a sugary soda, you ought to be able to do that. I think U.S. tax payers should not pay for it.”
Alternating Viewpoints
Some Americans approve of this push to promote eating healthy through banning purchasing unhealthy foods through SNAP. There is a belief that Kennedy and the Trump administration are acting out on the best interests of Americans. Particularly in regards to their health.
Fox 35 news anchor, Mike Emanuel interviewed an unidentified man at a farmer’s market about his stance on the issue.
“Lighten up some regulations and allow way more local food to be eaten,” the man said.
Though unidentified, the man believes that it is a step in the right direction—more people will consider buying and eating organic food from farmer’s markets. This initiative could lead to the loosening of regulations on farming and food that promotes and supports organic food.
Food Stamps Act 1964 repeat
On the other hand, critics like The Oregonian’s Kelly Johnson isn’t convinced of the initiatives’ ability to promote healthy living through banning SNAP’s covering of soda and chips. Johnson said it wasn’t the first time that such problems arose. The original draft of the Food Stamps Act in 1964 prohibited its usage for buying soft drinks and “luxury” food items, but it was dropped. Johnson went on and explained more information about its background.
“It was dropped from the bill before it was passed,” Johnson said, “Because, “the idea of restricting the use of food stamp benefits may be appealing on its face.” However, upon closer examination, serious concerns emerge regarding the feasibility and rationality for the proposed restriction.”
Restrictions
She went on to say that such restrictions will increase the costs of funding and complexity of the SNAP programs. There wasn’t any evidence of the usage of SNAP contributed to childhood obesity. Or that there was a clear standard of what is considered healthy and unhealthy food. Such restrictions wouldn’t change what the food stamp recipients buy, not changing their dietary habits.
Johnson cited a 2013 USDA study that said that those who used SNAP had a 23% greater likelihood of consuming fresh fruit than before. However, their intake of apples and oranges and green vegetables only changed a little bit. The restrictions wouldn’t affect the accessibility of fruits and other healthy foods.
Effects
With varying opinions, there are benefits and downsides to the ban of the purchase of junk food from SNAP. Recipients have more access to fresh fruits than those who didn’t have it before. It could motivate more SNAP recipients to buy healthy foods and practice better eating habits. Or they could consider buying at farmer’s markets. Yet it isn’t a guarantee that a farmer’s market would accept SNAP benefits as a form of compensation for organic fruits.
On the other hand, critics believe that the restrictions will increase the costs of sustaining the SNAP program, doesn’t have a clear definition of what is considered healthy or unhealthy food choices, and doesn’t affect the accessibility of fruits and other foods.
Either way, many Americans are affected by the changes made to the SNAP program. More Americans could find themselves buying healthier foods for their benefit, but could taxes be raised to sustain the program. With the benefits and setbacks of the restrictions on SNAP, how will Americans’ well-being be affected? Only time will answer these questions.
More at Presence News:
