Efforts by three states to exclude soft drinks and candy from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps in the US, are “misguided” and could “create chaos and confusion” at grocery stores and among consumers, food industry stakeholders warn.
Republican governors in Arkansas, Indiana and Idaho, along with USDA leadership and several public health advocates and NGOs, counter the proposals confront diet-related chronic disease “head on” by removing the products from the SNAP program and encouraging low-income beneficiaries to “eat better.”
Arkansas Gov. Sarah Huckabee triggered what could become a domino effect across states when she filed a waiver yesterday with USDA to prohibit the use of state SNAP funds to buy all types of soda – including low and no-calorie – as well as fruit and vegetable drinks with less than 50% natural juice or other “unhealthy drinks” and candy, including confections made with flour. The exclusion, which will begin in 2026 and last for five years, will not include flavored water, carbonated water or sports drinks.
“Helping Arkansans improve their health is a top priority for our agency across all programs, and encouraging people to use their SNAP benefits for healthier foods is an important step that we believe will be truly beneficial to the people we serve,” Kristi Putnum, secretary of he Arkansas Department of Human Services, said in a statement.
USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins echoed this sentiment, noting in a statement that she welcomed the waiver, looks forward to moving it through the approval process swiftly and encourages more states “to follow the bold lead of states like Arkansas” and the larger Make America Healthy Again initiative.
Indiana and Idaho already are acting on her recommendation.
Indiana Gov. Mike Braun, R, also announced efforts to “change our food system” through nine sweeping executive orders, including provisions for a pilot program to remove candy and soda from the items SNAP covers and requiring disclosures of dyes in foods.
“Despite the program’s purpose of providing a more nutritious diet to low-income households, soda is the number one commodity purchased with SNAP benefits, and purchases of sweetened beverages, desserts and candy exceed the combined sales of fruits and vegetables with SNAP benefits,” the executive order alleges.
Idaho Gov. Brad Little also signed legislation directing the state to apply for a waiver to remove soda and candy from the eligible items covered by state SNAP funding.
“Assistance from the government should go towards healthy foods, not foods that cause so many health problems,” he said in a statement.
State level SNAP changes could create ‘new program inefficiencies, longer grocery store lines’
Food and nutrition advocacy groups have long fought to empower consumer choice, rather than restrict it – an approach that FMI – The Food Industry Association reiterated in a response to the announcements from federal and state agencies.
“FMI and our member companies support the goal of encouraging customers to utilize SNAP dollars to purchase nutrient dense foods,” the trade group’s President and CEO Leslie Sarasin said.
But, she added, “we have found that the best results are those that make resources available – like dietitian-supported recipes or curated shopping experiences and programs that enhance their ability to economically purchase fruits and vegetables and dairy while recognizing the limitations of the current average $6-per-person-per-day SNAP benefit.”
She also argued that that “while pilots and waivers may have an important role, it is critical not to create chaos and confusion both in individual stores and through a jumbled mixture of varying state requirements – creating new program inefficiencies, longer grocery store lines and customer frustration.”
Accurate information, not restricted choice is a ‘better way’ to improve Americans’ health, argues American Beverage
The trade group American Beverage was more pointed in its assessment – characterizing the waivers as a move to generate headlines but little more.
“Restricting SNAP purchases or banning safe ingredients won’t make anyone healthier – they create headlines. Rather, they are punitive policies that leverage fearmongering and misinformation while taking decisions away from” consumers and “giving them to the government.”
It added the “better way” to improve Americans’ healthy is to provide consumers with “more choices along with clear, transparent information.”
SNAP beneficiaries are not more likely to buy candy than non-recipients
The National Confectioners Association also criticized the state-level policies as “misguided and not needed when it comes to chocolate and candy.”
NCA Senior Vice President of Public Affairs Chris Gindlesperger argued, “SNAP participants and non-SNAP participants alike understand that chocolate and candy are treats – not meal replacements.”
He added candy purchasing patterns are “basically equivalent” between SNAP and non-SNAP families – with only 2% of SNAP purchases being candy, according to the most recent data from USDA from 2016.
An added complication for the confectionary industry is there is no single definition of candy – rather it varies state by state, which could further complicate compliance if retailers that operate in multiple states must navigate a patchwork of regulations.