(NewsNation) — A ban on using food stamps for candy and soda has been touted by supporters as a way to push users to make healthier choices and bring the program in line with its intended purpose, but opponents fear it’s part of a plan to eventually eliminate the program.
Momentum has never been higher to change the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), in part due to lobbying groups taking headwind from the “Make America Healthy Again” (MAHA) movement, spearheaded by President Donald Trump’s new Health Secretary, Robert F. Kennedy Jr., Karen Siebert, a public policy adviser for Harvesters, a Kansas food bank network, said.
For the last decade, groups opposing the food stamps program have been coming into states like Kansas to chip away at it, but this year their fight to push soda and candy bans feels especially like a “David and Goliath” situation, she said.
“Restricting food choices within SNAP is not going to have the health outcomes that people are looking for. It’s just not going to get you there, that’s a very, very complex problem,” Siebert said.
Kansas, along with 15 states including Idaho, Tennessee, Arizona, and Utah have put forth bills sponsored by state legislators and other parties asking the federal government to allow SNAP restrictions on candy and sugary drinks, citing the need for better nutrition.
“It is a ruse [by lobbying groups]…because any sort of harm to SNAP, anything that makes the program more difficult or stigmatizes it is a cut because it’s cutting off more people,” Gina Plata-Nino, a deputy director at the Food Research and Action Center, a nonprofit advocacy group, said.
Bills in at least 10 states, including in Kansas, have been backed by the Foundation for Government Accountability (FGA), a conservative Florida-based think tank, according to FRAC. FGA says it aims to promote work over welfare, reserving food stamps and other government programs for the truly needy.
“We’re very excited that legislators are concerned about the health of the residents and so when we are asked, we will get involved in those states,” Paige Terryberry, Senior Research Fellow with the FGA, told NewsNation, praising the MAHA movement for creating “momentum” for the issue.
Banning soda and candy under Make America Healthy Again’s momentum
The movement to ban candy and sugary drinks like soda has gained a significant boost since Trump announced Kennedy as his HHS pick.
Kennedy has called for the government to stop allowing the nearly $113 billion program that serves about 42 million Americans to use benefits to pay for “soda or processed foods,” which has been echoed by his MAHA political action committee.
The committee did not return a request for comment by NewsNation.
While SNAP is run by the Department of Agriculture, not HHS, Agriculture Chief Tom Vilsack has proposed a “Make America Healthy Again” commission to consider the ban.
GOP Sens. Katie Britt (AL) and Mike Lee (Utah) have also introduced the federal Healthy SNAP Act, which excludes certain snacks and drinks from being purchased with SNAP benefits.
“We see the food stamps program as not fulfilling its purpose of providing this more nutritious diet to enrollees so we’re really excited about the Make America Healthy Again movement and the solutions that it’s bringing to some of these problems,” Terryberry told NewsNation.
The enthusiasm appears to deviate from Trump’s first term when his administration denied a request from the state of Maine in 2018 that would have placed similar restrictions on its food stamp program.
The x-factor now appears to be MAHA, anti hunger advocates said.
“I do believe they are taking advantage of a broader discussion in the culture and a lot of frustration that a lot of people have about the food system and health issues…and they’re using that to their advantage to achieve their actual goals, which are to reduce these federal programs that help people in need,” she said.
Will soda and candy bans get at the root cause?
While the bans may seem intended to promote healthier choices, anti-hunger groups argue it doesn’t get to the root cause, and will further strain the SNAP system.
“These proposals kind of miss the bigger picture, and that is that the biggest barrier that staff participants actually face to achieving a healthy diet is the cost and availability of healthy foods,” Katie Bergh, a senior policy analyst for the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, a nonpartisan research group, said.
The most common barrier overall, reported by 61% of SNAP participants, was the affordability of foods that are part of a healthy diet and harder to find in low-income areas, according to a 2021 USDA survey.
“If you really care about the nutrition piece of making people healthy, can we talk about how there are not enough grocery stores within walking distance for individuals? Can we talk about the high price of vegetables and eggs?” Plata-Nino said. “If you really care about this issue, look at the systemic root causes.”
Food restrictions also come with a high price tag of converting codes and categorizing food that will steer some food vendors away from SNAP, she adds.
Under Arizona’s bill, SNAP participants could be prevented from buying granola bars and some cereals, while allowing them to buy potato chips, while the Kansas legislation defines candy as something that doesn’t contain flour, allowing Twizzlers and Twix but not a Clif energy bar.
“Members of Congress are trying to destroy the program without taking into account that anything cut, anything that they do is the states that have to implement it, and many states are already at capacity,” Plata-Nino said.
But the FGA says implementing food restrictions is a “negligent factor” as grocers already regularly update their system for SNAP and ban items like alcohol and tobacco.
“There’s dozens of new products that come onto shelves at grocery stores and convenience stores every day and those are never going to be the problem. Those have to go through the same kind of sorting system whether they’re EBT eligible or not,” Terryberry said.
Proposed SNAP budget cuts
Along with proposed bans, SNAP is facing its biggest budget reduction in 30 years, Bergh said.
The budget resolution that the House plans to take up directs the House Agriculture Committee to cut programs by at least $230 billion through 2034, with these cuts expected to come largely or entirely from SNAP which serves more than 40 million Americans.
“It’s interesting that some of the same people who are advocating to restrict what SNAP participants can buy – when their biggest barrier is the affordability of healthy food – are also advocating to reduce the size of the benefit that people are getting,” she said.
But the FGA says while SNAP is an important “safety net” it’s also very expensive and needs more accountability that should be geared towards reducing government dependency.
“We’ve watched the growth and we’re very concerned about getting those resources to those with a true need,” Terryberry said. “As a part of this effort, we’re very focused on making sure that it’s actually fulfilling its goal of providing nutrition, that’s one thing that we have seen the program depart from that purpose.”
