New York looking to ban use of food stamps for soda

[Harold Mansfield]

Interesting concept. New York is looking to ban use of food stamps to buy soda, which is one of the top 3 foods responsible for American obesity:


“The world would be better, I think, if people limited their purchases of sugared beverages,” Mr. Hacker said. “However, there are a great many ethical reasons to consider why one would not want to stigmatize people on food stamps.”

Source: http://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/nyregion/07stamps.html

My first reaction is the same, why pick on people using food stamps and why single out soda when the other foods that made the top 3 list are baked goods, and pizza?

But on the other hand, since food stamps are governed by the Dept of Agriculture, is it really so bad to require that they be used to buy healthy foods and not empty calories and treats?

One could argue that cookies, sodas, and other sugary treats are luxury, non necessity items that are not nourishing, and that the whole point of assistance with food stamps is to provide the staples that people need to feed themselves to survive.

I can see both sides of the argument, but if you are receiving Gov assistance, doesn't the Gov have a right to say how you can use it and require that you use it for necessary food items?

Usually this is the type of thing that would get my liberal hairs up in outrage, but I really don't see this as any kind of invasion or unfair treatment.

My concern is, is this the first step to separating such items to tax the bejesus out of them in the future? If we start putting Pepsi and Oreos in the same category as Alcohol and Cigarettes, how much will we pay for them in the future if the Gov demonizes them?

What do you guys think?

[Lyrafire]

Regarding food stamps, I believe nutritional value is what counts (or ought to). You can't use them to buy candy either, and soda is just liquid candy. Pizza can be nutritious, and I certainly wouldn't fault someone for buying a frozen pizza with food stamps. Maybe that's the closest that family can get to an entertaining pizza night. Soda will never receive my stamp of approval.

[nealrm]

I agree, soda is just liquid candy and I have no problem with banner it's purchase with food stamps. Food stamps are to help those in need to get the nutrition they need. Both on a nutrition and on the economic level soda fails. Not only does it fail to bring in nutrition it takes resources away from buying nutritious products.

As for pizza, you can make nutrutious pizza at home for cheaper than frozen. However, it will take about 30 minues longer than throwing a frozen pizza in the oven.

[Harold Mansfield]

What about cookies and other sugary treats? No one really needs Oreos, (lord knows I don't, but I can't live without them), but do you tell a family that they can't use food stamps to buy a couple of cheap sweet potato or pumpkin pies for a holiday meal?
And if we go down this road, where does it end? Ice Cream? Chocolate Milk? Whole grain cereal and no Count Chocula for the kids?

Again, food stamps is a tax funded hand out. It's not a loan and you don't pay into the system like unemployment so do you really have a right to scream about your liberties and freedoms when you are getting a straight hand out?

[Lyrafire]

I agree--you can make nutritious pizza at home, but not more cheaply than frozen. A bag of cheap mozzarella will cost as much as the whole frozen pizza. Personally, I loathe processed foods. I make almost everything from scratch. But I try not to judge struggling people who might be trying to simulate a night out, free from cooking.

I once had to use food stamps--I left my first husband who was a farmer. We lived out in the country. He killed a cow because she wouldn't go in the barn, and he blinded another. He also abused the dog. Then he pulled the wires on the car so I couldn't go anywhere. That's when I left with two small children, $11 in my pocket, and nothing but the clothes we were wearing and some textbooks. Someone came and got me, and I was put into a safe house and on food stamps. All the food shelf had to offer was frozen donuts. If I had seen pizzas on sale somewhere, I would have been thinking, OK--I can get one small meal for each of us (if I eat only one piece and give the kids the rest) for only $4, cheaper than making it from scratch and more nutritious than Ramen noodles. They'll feel like they're having a treat, and they won't be hungry. Preventing hunger was even more important than nutrition at that low point in my life. You never want your kids to go hungry because you can't afford to buy all the stuff you need to make it from scratch.

But almost immediately, the county took the food stamps away from us because I was a full-time student (honors, senior year) with only a part-time job. Never mind that in a few months, I would be free of my poverty. Never mind my two kids. To get food stamps, I would have had to quit school. Really--that's what they demanded. So the safety net I should have had to help us over the hump was gone. But if I had quit school and worked at a low-wage job that would have kept us permanently on food stamps, that would have been hunky dory. For the short time I had them, I have to say, it was utterly humiliating. People judge you and treat you harshly.

How did I get by? When some members of the faculty at my school heard I had left my husband (until then, they had no idea about my life off campus), they started writing checks. I kept my part-time job. The judge ordered child support ($35 a week per child). For living funds, I took out a student loan for the following and final semester of my undergrad work. Scholarships and grants covered my tuition. Then I went off to grad school (full ride and a whopping $5400 annual stipend in exchange for teaching 2 courses a semester on top of my own course work). I never went on food stamps again. I paid all my old faculty members back. I worked and raised my family. But I remember the humiliation, and I am very careful not to judge if I see a frozen pizza or container of ice cream in the cart of someone on food stamps.

The point is, remember that not everyone on food stamps is lazy or stupid. Many are just trying to stave off hunger while hoping for nutritional balance. A little splurge on frozen pizza? Go for it. It's food. Make the kids happy on a Friday night, and keep them fed while you're at it.

[KristineS]

I'm not sure where I come down on this issue. On one hand, I don't drink soda, precisely because it is so void of nutritional value. I also believe that it causes health problems and other issues. So I can see where there could be some real value to saying you can't purchase soda if you're buying it with government subsidized money.

On the other hand, I also understand where lyrafire is coming from. Not everyone who is on food stamps is on them because they want to be. Sometimes it is the only option. You also have to remember that a lot of stores put their frozen junk food or things like ramen noodles on sale for relatively inexpensive prices, which means you can get more meals when you buy the items that maybe aren't as nutritious. Ramen noodles may not be the best thing to eat, but when you can get ten packs for a dollar vs. several dollars for a nice cut of meat or one red pepper, I know what I'd pick.

I'm not sure what the right answer is on this. Regulating food is a little harder than making the call on soda. That doesn't have any nutritional value and it really isn't a necessity. You can't live without food. You certainly can live quite easily without soda.

[Lyrafire]

"I'm not sure what the right answer is on this. Regulating food is a little harder than making the call on soda. That doesn't have any nutritional value and it really isn't a necessity. You can't live without food. You certainly can live quite easily without soda."

Yep.

[Spider]

There's no question in my mind. The government should not be subsidizing unhealthy food and drink, no matter what the reason for the subsidy is. The government subsidizes tobacco farmers (which is ridiculous except they heavily tax the end product, so maybe it's a wash or even a gain to the treasury.)

Food stamps should be restricted to purchasing specific, healthy foods. A list of foods and beverages that the stamps CAN buy should be published by the issuing authority, not a list of foodstuff that cannot be purchased with them.

Freedom? Liberty? Yes, people should be free to spend their own money on what they wish, but not the money (or money equivalent) handed to them by government as a safety net. The government should not be in the business of poisoning its poorest citizens.

Is it social engineering? Yes, of course it is - and this is a legitmate purpose. People are free not to participate, if they wish.

[Harold Mansfield]

Interesting argument and I can't say I disagree with the general opinion, but you do bring up the hypocrisy of it all.
The Gov does subsidize unhealthy things like tobacco and corn...high fructose corn syrup is our number one sweetener in all of those sodas, cakes and cookies and the Gov subsidizes more corn farmers whose crops produce this sweetener than vegetable farmers.
This article is from 2006, but still a pretty good read:
How the feds make bad-for-you food cheaper than healthful fare | Poverty & the Environment: On the intersection of economic and ecological survival | Grist (http://www.grist.org/article/philpott7/)

[ParaTed2k]

When it's my money, or your money paying for the stuff we buy, the government should have little or no input in our consumer choices of legal products. However, when it's the taxpayers' money being used, it isnt' a question of personal choice anymore. While I am sickened by the calls for banning different kinds of junk foods, or ingredients (such as the New York ban on trans fats or their proposed ban on salt in restaurants), it IS the roll of government to specify how taxpayer funds should and shouldn't be spent.

If the Dept. of Agriculture deems soda pop innappropriate use of Food Stamps, so be it.

[Patrysha]

We don't have food stamps here...but eating healthy on a budget is hard. You don't have enough $ to stock up on sales. Coupons only save money if you eat the prepackaged type things...I've never seen a coupon for fresh meat, produce or dairy...and you can buy cheap to stretch further than the things that are actually good for you. Plus those with the least amount to spend on food are also usually without a vehicle, which makes it really hard to buy food inexpensively let alone good food. Without a vehicle there's no running out to the u-pick farm during harvest season...no ability to can or freeze even if there was a way to get a ride out and back. There's little room for storage in the homes of the perpetually poor. And while I don't see any nutritional value in pop, I am a coke-a-holic who will have to continue this train of thought later...my kid needs to get to his card game...

[billbenson]

Well, let's take two scenerios:

1. poor family who can cook at home.

2. Homeless.

Neither need soda which as stated above is candy. Orange juce in my book is fine.

However, one of the above has the ability to prepare foods, the other doesn't Most prepared foods don't qualify for food stamps. For the guy on the street, he can buy that pizza (or whatever and eat it). He can't cook it at home.Bad nutrition is still food to him. He has other options for the soda, so I don't think it should be permitted. Arguments for some prepared foods are hard to draw a line on. But then again, if your hungry, buy a can of spam and some OJ. Thats about as good as our soldiers eat in the field.

[Steve B]

Soda is bad - it should not be allowed. By the way, nobody mentioned diet soda (sans sugar), but it's arguable worse for you than the sugar sodas.

[Spider]

Spam and OJ? Have you not tried any of the current MREs present-day soldiers get? I've never been in battlefield conditions (thankfully) but a friend of mine has and keeps a stock of MREs in his garage "ready - in case!!!" These self-heating packs are almost gourmet quality meals, healthy and nutritious.

I don't know what the cost would be, but they should handout military MREs instead of food stamps.

[Steve B]

That's a great idea Spider! I used to work for the company that made the packaging for the MRE's - they would also think it's a great idea.

[huggytree]

soda is banned and CA is voting to make Pot legal....crazy world we live in

I dont like controlling anyones choices unless they want to kill their children....poor people arent going to get skinny because you take their soda away.

banning soda from food stamps wont accomplish anything but make some do gooders feel good for a day until they think of the next thing to take away

meanwhile we will take a percent or 2 away from a few soda manufacturing businesses in a down economy

hurt business, limit choices...i dont know how anyone votes for Democrats anymore...some day the product or activity that you like will be banned...it will never stop until we all live in the perfect liberal utopia....

in a way i dont mind the handing out of MRE's....the worse the food choices the less people will be on food stamps....im torn

i hear food stamps usage has doubled in the past 2 years....2x the poverty rate gets them...ive never seen a poor person who looks like they are from Ethiopia...when i work in the poor neighborhoods i see more over weight people than thin....lack of food doesnt seem to be a problem...

[Steve B]

I would have thought restricting the use of food stamps would have tended to be more popular with a conservative audience. I guess it can be looked at different ways.

[Blessed]

We were on food stamps for a brief period of time when I was growing up. My parents had 4 kids and my Dad had cancer - he was off work, on disability pay for 6 months. Food stamps helped with the grocery bill. I don't remember what kinds of things my mom bought - but things like frozen pizza and soda were always simply treats, they were never a staple on our dinner table.

I know there are people who are on food stamps for years, I know there are people who abuse the system, but I also know there are a whole lot of people who simply take government assistance for a short period of time to get by during a hard time for their family. I think that people who suggest that we ban things like soda from the list of things you can purchase with food stamps tend to forget that last group of people.

[nealrm]

HT - We are not talking about banning what food they buy, we are discussing having control of how they spend MY money. As long as I provide the cash, I have the right to say how it is spent. If they can't accept the conditions that come along with the money, then they need to find an alternative.

As for the MREs - not too bad. I have tried them myself on a few occasions. However, they are designed for a 3000-5000 cal diet. Plus, I really don't want to know how they keep the food good for several years under all temp conditions.

[billbenson]

We are helping people eat and stay healthy with food stamps. By spam and OJ I mean we should provide people access to a limited number of inexpensive healthy things to eat and drink. If it doesn't meet those criteria, I don't think we should be funding it. Soda is in no way healthy or inexpensive. Pizza usually isn't either. Also, I know someone who uses his food stamps to pay for peoples food at the store in return for cash. He then uses that cash for drugs. That would be much harder to do if it were spam and OJ (or some limited amount of inexpensive healthy products). I bet you could buy caviar with food stamps today - not sure though.

[Steve B]

Blessed - my thoughts on banning soda has nothing to do with how long or why someone is on food stamps. It's simply should not be conisdered a food any more than candy or cigarettes are considered food.

And, yes, if people are spending my money I would certainly like a bit of control on what it is spent on.

[ParaTed2k]

I wouldn't say "gourmet", but absotuly no worse than what you would get out of any can or packaged meal at a supermarket.... and Oh so much better than the dehydrated beef and pork patties we got in the first generation of MRE. ;~D

Unfortunatly, handing out MREs would be neither cost effective or nutritionally smart. MREs are packed with calories to fuel a very active day in the field, and nothing close to "inexpensive". Unless the homeless person plans to do some strenuous activities on a daily basis, they are better off eating a lot fewer calories.

Retired NCO

[ParaTed2k]

HT - We are not talking about banning what food they buy, we are discussing having control of how they spend MY money. As long as I provide the cash, I have the right to say how it is spent. If they can't accept the conditions that come along with the money, then they need to find an alternative.

As for the MREs - not too bad. I have tried them myself on a few occasions. However, they are designed for a 3000-5000 cal diet. Plus, I really don't want to know how they keep the food good for several years under all temp conditions.

Exactly, sodapop wouldn't be "banned" any more than cigarettes, alchohol, pre-prepared foods or anything else is "banned". The people on food stamps are free to use cash to buy any item, just like everyone else.

[Blessed]

Blessed - my thoughts on banning soda has nothing to do with how long or why someone is on food stamps. It's simply should not be conisdered a food any more than candy or cigarettes are considered food.

And, yes, if people are spending my money I would certainly like a bit of control on what it is spent on.

I can agree with that sentiment, but I wonder where we draw the line, how much money do we spend on developing the regulations, who decides what is healthy and what is not?

So we ban soda - do we also ban coffee and tea? what about kool-aid?

Actually I don't have a problem with the soda ban in and of itself - I'm just trying to look beyond that and am wondering about what precedence is being set.

[Patrysha]

While I agree that pop has no nutritional value...I do argue with the statement that it is not inexpensive. Pop is cheaper per litre than milk or juice. Right now pop is 97c for a 2 litre bottle plus bottle deposit and tax. works out to just over 50c a litre. Milk is (at it's cheapest) 98c a litre. Bottle water (in the big bottles) is cheaper at 33c a litre and of course practically free from the tap...but after having lived on reserves and in northern communities for so long I personally can't drink tap water...I'd rather dehydrate. Not that pop helps at all with hydration, but it's a wet, cold liquid...refreshing and addictive.

We have a system here where vouchers are given through community programs to families in need for things like milk, cheese, peanut butter, cereal, eggs and orange juice. I had no clue such things existed until I worked in a grocery store. They were very specific coupons and each family I rang through had more than enough decent food in their cart when using them that if they wanted to dig for a loonie and buy a bottle of pop they certainly could have without putting their families health in jeapordy.

[Spider]

...and nothing close to "inexpensive". Unless the homeless person plans to do some strenuous activities on a daily basis, they are better off eating a lot fewer calories...Great! That might help solve the cost objection. One MRE per family!

But, more seriously - if they were to be issued instead of food stamps, the quantity needed would be sufficient to make more appropriately balanced MREs for the poor economically viable.

[Spider]

...I'm just trying to look beyond that and am wondering about what precedence is being set.Agreed. And I think it is a great precedence. That the government is going to try to not poison its poorest people. That is a pretty good precedence, I think. Taking that further, the government already creates RDAs and demands that all food stuffs are labelled stating RDAs. Now they should follow through and provide food (where the government is providing it) that meets the standards it sets for the rest of the country.

[billbenson]

Now it would make sense "kinda" to have a gov't approved food list for food stamps. Of course to get on the list, manufacturers would make poor quality food, bribe the appropriate officials so their junk food is fed to the homeless and poor. The homeless and poor then spend more time in emergency rooms for problems related to malnutrition. Meanwhile, the government officials use the bribes they received to hire more illegal aliens as housekeepers. The illegal aliens in turn send more money home to help their families buy drugs to import to the US. The drugs are then brought into the US and customs officials are bribed to let them in. The customs officials then hire illegal alien housekeepers. Meanwhile police agencies hire more agents to to arrest more drug dealers. Taxes go up to support the cost of the additional police personel. The influx of drug dealers fill the prisons and are tasked with making MRE's to help keep our soldiers healthy in the field.

Sorry, just feeling a little cynical tonight.

I have seen shows on how bad the quality of our gov't controlled food is at public schools. If they can't give kids healthy foods; foodstamp people?

[Spider]

Yes, I've heard that school meals seem to be of low quality, and they might be encouraged to do a better job with them, too. Just because one program is a mess is no reason not to improve other programs, though. Perhaps we are smart enough to figure out how to get everyone to eat well.

I think the problem with the school meals is the people running the program eat badly themselves, so they have no inclination to provide nutritional meals for schools. The whole food situation needs a complete overhaul. Jamie - the Naked Chef - tried but his message seemed to fall on deaf ears.

[ParaTed2k]

Great! That might help solve the cost objection. One MRE per family!

But, more seriously - if they were to be issued instead of food stamps, the quantity needed would be sufficient to make more appropriately balanced MREs for the poor economically viable.

ROFL!

Yes, a more targeted concept like the MRE might be an idea.

But remember, if Food Stamps were about feeding the needy, they would be funded and run by Health and Human Services. There are reasons they fall under the Dept. of Agriculture, and those reasons aren't about needy families. ;~)

[billbenson]

Jamie - the Naked Chef - tried but his message seemed to fall on deaf ears.

I saw that show. The reality of it was pretty sad.

[Spider]

...if Food Stamps were about feeding the needy, they would be funded and run by Health and Human Services. There are reasons they fall under the Dept. of Agriculture, and those reasons aren't about needy families. ;~)

I'm afraid you may be right. Freedom - America's great cause - many times means freedom for the big business to the detriment of the populace.

[Harold Mansfield]

I think the problem with the school meals is the people running the program eat badly themselves, so they have no inclination to provide nutritional meals for schools.

The real problem with public school lunch programs is limited funds and low federal nutritional standards and guidelines. Public school lunches are only required to provide a portion of the recommended daily allowance of healthy vitamins and nutrients, not the whole thing. The National School lunch program is also overseen by the Department of Agriculture.

[Spider]

I saw that show. The reality of it was pretty sad.Do you mean the speech he gave at TED? - TED: Ideas worth spreading (http://ted.com)

It should still be there. It was frightening. Made me look again at my eating habits.

[Harold Mansfield]

..when i work in the poor neighborhoods i see more over weight people than thin....lack of food doesnt seem to be a problem...
Cheap food is fattening food, and healthy food is more expensive than not so healthy food. Just look at the prices next time you go shopping...anything low fat, low cal, low carb is more expensive than it's regular counter part


I know someone who uses his food stamps to pay for peoples food at the store in return for cash. He then uses that cash for drugs.
That's what addicts do. That's more of a problem of criminal behavior than a reflection of the program.
If it wasn't food stamps, it would be some other hustle to support his habit.

In all income levels, in every culture there are always people that look for ways to work or beat the system.
I can make that same argument for corporations that hide money in offshore accounts and pay less taxes, while still enjoying tax breaks.
There are cheats everywhere.

[Spider]

Here's Jamie Oliver at TED -- Jamie Oliver's TED Prize wish: Teach every child about food | Video on TED.com (http://www.ted.com/talks/jamie_oliver.html)