We need federal action to ban junk food in SNAP program

Wednesday, December 11, 2024

Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders sent a letter to Washington on Wednesday concerning new changes to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. The letter was sent directly to U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary-Designate, Robert F. Kennedy Jr. and U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Secretary-Designate, Brooke Rollins. CLICK ON THE LINK TO READ THE LETTER.

Posted by gracieamazed at 02:20 PM | 29 COMMENTS | permalink

Comments

I remember being a cashier in back in HS/College days. I was amazed at how many candy bars, individual sodas, single serving bags of chips, etc... I rang up for people paying with assistance benefits.

I don't begrudge anyone a snickers, but a mountain of them?

How about some veggies, rice, fruit, and meats?

#1 | Posted by kwrx25 at 2024-12-11 02:23 PM

Good luck with that. That's the basic food groups for your average Trumper. But seriously I don't see how this will work out too well. What constitutes junk food and who gets to decide if it's junk food or not.

Exactly!

To hell with those Walmart workers putting in 40-50 hours and getting paid dirt wages!

If they can't live on bread and water, who needs them?

"Dr. Jay Bhattacharya and his Stanford colleagues estimated that prohibiting sugary drinks and soda from SNAP would prevent obesity in 141,000 kids and Type 2 diabetes in 240,000 adults. Since joint state and federal healthcare spending is quickly approaching $2 trillion each year, we should embrace commonsense, preventative healthcare policies."

hard to argue with that.

WIC Has it figured out. SNAP should follow the WIC purchase requirements.

The sugar lobby will kill this legislation.

Don't mess with sugar.

They'll kill you and make it look like murder suicide.

Why stop with SNAP? Ban for all. Lots of obese people not on SNAP would benefit. Oh wait, we want to legislate other people's choices, leave ours alone.

"Oh wait, we want to legislate other people's choices, leave ours alone."

Republicans really show their creative energy discovering more refined ways to torment the poors.

-Define "junk food".

At the least, soda, and candy.

donuts, pastries, etc?

As long as we are moving towards a theocracy, ban all foods proscribed in the Bible.
bible.knowing-jesus.com

Everything Lewzer serves on his plane is junk food. Start there.

"At the least, soda, and candy."

Utah is gonna be pissed.

Candy is its own food group there.

And have you heard of "dirty soda"?

I didn't either until went to Utah.

"Simply put, a dirty soda is your typical fountain soda, but with added ingredients such as heavy creams, flavored syrups, candy pieces or fruit juices. Similar to an Italian soda, except the dirty soda uses popular soft drinks like Dr. Pepper, Coke, Sprite, or Mountain Dew vs. the traditional club soda that you would find in an Italian soda."

www.visitutah.com

I haven't heard of any of that. Is it some sort of accommodation of Mormons?

Hilarious that a fat, racist idiot like Graceless is worried about the eating habits of poor folk. How about putting down the fork, Porky?

Define "junk food".

#6 | Posted by Angrydad

You're joking, right?

This is something I agree with. Hell, I'd be OK with going back to the white label canned goods and such in place of simply giving out money on pre-charged cards.

Benefits should be limited to narrow food categories/items based on nutritional value and bang for buck, not empty calories and garbage.

I honestly don't understand why they don't move everything to WIC.

More controlled, less fraud.

"Oh wait, we want to legislate other people's choices, leave ours alone."

The simple mindset... smh

No one is looking to legislate someone's choice here. They are looking to put boundaries on what is able to be purchased with benefit money.

Acknowledging that someone is in need of aid, but not allowing them to waste the aid on candy and crap is not legislating their choices. You have to be half retarded to think it is.

"Banning SNAP use on bad' foods won't work - and could backfire"

thehill.com

I hate to agree with that cow, but I do here. And I've been on SNAP plenty of times. Back when you actually got books of coupons that I could take to the Chinese takeout place up the block and trade for weed.
But yea, I don't think food stamp money should be going to buy Little Hugs.
I also don't see this being popular with the bug business crowd.

More nanny state BS. People on benefits are adults. It's not good policy to restrict the use of snap to "approved" foods.

It's a recipe for selective interpretation of what "junk" food is to benefit certain sectors of the Economy selectively. A recipe for Corruption.

Frankly Snap should be replaced by Cash payments instead.

Why restrict the buying power to food only. Just Dole out the funds without Any Strings attached.

People know what they need.

Back when you actually got books of coupons that I could take to the Chinese takeout place up the block and trade for weed.

#21 | Posted by TFDNihilist

Bring back S&H Green Stamps.

#22 Yeah they are obviously crushing life and making all the good choices. Not to say that hard times can't hit anyone, but to claim that snickers and sugar water jugs might be wasting tax payer aid money is ridiculous.

So it's like Michelle Obama was trying to do but now it's the mean version?

So the critics are right when it comes to the Republican Party the cruelty is the point.

So not wanting aid money to not go to waste on poor nutrition food is cruel? No talk about reducing snap benefits or anything... just don't spend it on ----, and that's cruel?

So giving a homeless guy a sandwich to make sure he doesn't spend the $5 bucks I'd have given him on booze is actually cruel in your mind?

Republicans Declare Banning Universal Free School Meals a 2024 Priority (June 2023)
newrepublic.com

... As states across the country move to make sure students are well fed, Republicans have announced their intention to fight back. ...

House Republicans Pass a Hot Potato on Healthy Federally Subsidized Meals (2014)
time.com

... House Appropriators awoke Thursday to an op-ed in the New York Times by Michelle Obama warning them not to pass legislation that she says weakens healthy standards for school lunches passed in 2010.

"[S]ome members of the House of Representatives are now threatening to roll back these new standards and lower the quality of food our kids get in school," the First Lady wrote.

"They want to make it optional, not mandatory, for schools to serve fruits and vegetables to our kids. They also want to allow more sodium and fewer whole grains than recommended into school lunches." ...

@#26 ... So giving a homeless guy a sandwich to make sure he doesn't spend the $5 bucks I'd have given him on booze is actually cruel in your mind? ...

How $750 a month changed the lives of a group of homeless people in California (December 2023)
www.usatoday.com

... Can putting money directly in the hands of people experiencing homelessness make a difference? A new California study on basic income suggests it can.

Ben Henwood, a professor at the University of Southern California Suzanne Dworak-Peck School of Social Work, partnered with the nonprofit Miracle Messages to give 103 people in the San Francisco Bay area and Los Angeles County $750 per month for a year. The six-month report is preliminary, but Henwood said the findings provide insight into ways to help address the problem.

"They're just segments of the population given the income disparities, that despite having jobs and working, they're not making enough to just afford basic needs and they're getting priced out of the housing market," he said.

Miracle Messages CEO and founder Kevin F. Adler said the $2.1 million study grew out of a pilot program from the nonprofit that gave 14 unhoused people $500 per month. In that study, he said the funds donated funds allowed two-thirds of the people to secure housing.

"What we've seen is most of the money being spent on a mix of housing and food security," Adler said. "We've also had folks use money for family emergencies, child care, and other basic needs." ...

[emphasis mine]