Our current federal program that supports food assistance needs serious updates. The way it works now, it can harm the health of many Americans and waste billions of taxpayer dollars.
One simple change that could help improve health is to stop subsidizing junk food. Right now, many people use food stamps to buy unhealthy items like candy and soda. This includes at least ten states that are asking for help to change this, recognizing the necessity for better health choices among low-income families.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is a major source for Americans to purchase junk food. Foods that are high in sugar and fat, like soda and candy, contribute significantly to obesity and related health issues. These health problems include diabetes and heart disease, placing a burden on taxpayers who help cover the costs through Medicaid and other programs.
In fact, a large portion of SNAP benefits—around 23%—goes toward unhealthy foods. This amounts to about $25 billion spent annually on items like sweetened beverages and snacks. The future spending could soar beyond $60 billion just for soda, according to data from the Department of Agriculture.
Research shows that SNAP recipients tend to buy more sugary drinks compared to those with similar incomes who do not rely on food assistance. Consequently, obesity rates are higher among SNAP participants.
Several states are leading the charge for reform. For example, Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders is pushing for permission to restrict junk food purchases with SNAP. She highlights that a significant portion of the population in her state struggles with obesity and related health issues, particularly affecting lower-income families who depend on food assistance.
Experts believe these restrictions could significantly improve public health. Dr. Jay Bhattacharya from Stanford University estimates that eliminating sugary drinks from SNAP could save many children and adults from obesity and type 2 diabetes. If we also restrict other unhealthy options like candy, the health benefits could be even more substantial.
Despite the potential advantages, federal resistance to these reforms has been strong, influenced by food lobbyists. A report from 2007 even suggested that there are no clear standards for healthy versus unhealthy foods, which seems outdated given the current evidence.
Legal changes, like the Healthy SNAP Act proposed by Representative Josh Brecheen, aim to stop food assistance for sugary drinks and candy. While it may take time to pass such laws, the Department of Agriculture can act faster by allowing states to set their own rules regarding food purchases made with SNAP benefits.
It’s a well-accepted idea that SNAP should support nutritious eating rather than junk food. Delaying these changes only let the problems get worse, affecting both taxpayers and low-income Americans struggling with health issues.
Calley Means and Tarren Bragdon are advocates for improving public health through better nutrition policy.
Check out this related article: Unlocking the Future of Pet Care: The 2025-2033 US Pet Food Market Report on Premium & Organic Trends, Health Awareness, and Humanization
Source linkFood,Stamps,SNAP,Medicaid,Robert,F.,Kennedy,Jr.,Obesity,Columnists’,Opinions,Politically,Center,Right,Donald,Trump,Sarah,Huckabee,Sanders,U.S.,Department,of,Agriculture,Opinion,Content,Opinion,Collection,USAT,Content,Sharing,-,Opinion,Overall,Negative,Welfare,\u0026,Unemployment,Politics,Health,Policy,Nutrition,Executive,Branch,Local,Affiliate,-,Food,Local,Affiliate,-,Health,and,Wellness,Food Stamps,SNAP,Medicaid,Robert F. Kennedy Jr.,Obesity,Columnists’ Opinions,Politically Center Right,Donald Trump,Sarah Huckabee Sanders,U.S. Department of Agriculture,Opinion Content,Opinion Collection,USAT Content Sharing – Opinion,Overall Negative,Welfare \u0026 Unemployment,Politics,Health Policy,Nutrition,Executive Branch,Local Affiliate – Food,Local Affiliate – Health and Wellness
