If they ever finish arguing about immigration and the budget, members of Congress can be expected to turn to food stamps, which conservative Republicans want to cut and Democrats don’t. For their own sake and to promote public health, both sides might want to focus on a simple reform that deserves bipartisan support: Require that food stamps be used for food.
According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, households receiving federal food-stamp benefits spend more money on soft drinks than on any other grocery item. Overall, they devote 9.3 percent of their food budgets to “sweetened beverages,” which include sodas and iced teas, compared to 7.1 percent for households that don’t receive benefits.
Because low-income shoppers typically use their own money to supplement government benefits, it’s impossible to know precisely how much the $74-billion Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program is subsidizing soda consumption. But even a modest amount is too much, given the correlation between sugary drinks and obesity, diabetes and heart disease.
Despite such findings, the government has resisted calls to restrict SNAP benefits to food. Opponents say that placing additional limits on what food stamps can buy is both cumbersome and paternalistic. The junk-food industry has also lobbied heavily against restrictions.
Food stamps have proved to be an effective tool for helping to lift millions of Americans, especially children, out of poverty. The government can do more to ensure that those who receive them also gain the benefits of a more healthy diet.