Oh SNAP!

No to junk food and yes to a healthier SNAP

Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds submitted a waiver request to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to remove taxable food items from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) in Iowa. Among the targeted items are candy, gum, some granola bars, pop (I am an Iowan, so I said pop), and some juices. Last week, Trump’s Department of Agriculture approved the waiver. The new limits will take effect in 2026.

Predictably, some have criticized these actions. Niclole MCAlexander, vice chair of the Iowa Hunger Coalition, said:

The only thing we know this will do is increase stigma for SNAP participants and perpetuate misconceptions about hardworking, hungry Iowans.

In the old days, we called them food stamps. There was a time when they actually looked like stamps, but later, they were issued in different denominations in tear-out booklets. They were slightly smaller than dollar bills and were printed in various colors, much like European currency. To use them, you had to go to a grocery store and tear out 10, five, or one-dollar coupons to pay for your groceries. In those days, no one used credit or debit cards to pay for groceries; people either paid in cash or wrote checks. If you used food stamps, everyone in the checkout line could see you count them out, rip them from their booklets, and hand them to the cashier.

You might ask, how I know all this. Well, in the 1980s, I was married, a young father, I had dropped out of college, and I was either unemployed or underemployed. I know about them because my family used them. I can remember standing in line at the grocery store, separating the eligible food items from things like paper products. I do not remember feeling stigmatized by using food stamps, but my family relied on them until I found more stable employment.

Even back then, there were limits on the types of food covered by the program. Prepared foods, even healthy ones like rotisserie chickens, were not covered. I don’t have specific memories of all the things we used them for. I do drink a lot of pop, so I am pretty sure that we used food stamps to purchase Pepsi. As parents, we probably also bought candy or other treats for our kids.

Even so, I support Reynolds’ waiver request.

Today, SNAP benefits are distributed electronically, using a card like a debit or credit card. Cash registers automatically recognize SNAP-eligible and ineligible items. So, adding items to the restricted list will not create a burden for grocers.

There really is no good reason for the program to pay for foods with little or no nutritional value. Nothing prevents recipients from using other moneys to buy pop, candy, or even cigarettes and alcohol. But, with the epidemic of obesity and related diseases like Type 2 diabetes, it is clear to me that taxpayer-funded food assistance should nourish, not harm.

I say that as someone who knows the cost of unhealthy habits. I am obese. I have Type 2 diabetes. Under the care of a doctor and a dietitian, I have managed to lose over 100 pounds and keep my blood sugar under control. Yes, I take medications, and I exercise regularly, but that was not enough. It wasn’t until I made a serious commitment to healthy eating that I saw meaningful improvements in my health.

We already have a model of a food assistance program that provides nutritious food and helps recipients make healthy choices. That program is Women, Infants and Children (WIC). The WIC program is designed to help mothers with young children. WIC does more than just pay for food. Participants meet regularly with counselors, and education is available on topics ranging from breastfeeding to home buying. WIC has strict limits on nutrition. For example, WIC can be used to buy cereal, but many sugary cereals are excluded from the program. I have talked to multiple people who have been on WIC and almost all of them speak of positive experiences with the program.

We shouldn’t be afraid to expect more from our public programs — especially when it comes to health. SNAP can still provide flexibility and dignity without subsidizing soda and candy. Gov. Reynolds’ waiver isn’t about shaming anyone; it’s about aligning our assistance programs with what we know leads to better outcomes.

David Chung is a Gazette editorial fellow. david.chung@thegazette.com