Should the Government Force Food-Stamp Users to Eat Better?

New research shows that a soda ban would reduce obesity and type 2 diabetes.

NEW YORK, NY - OCTOBER 17: Lori Middleton drinks a large soda on October 17, 2013 in the Brooklyn borough of New York City. New York's Court of Appeal has agreed to hear New York City's appeal of a lower court ruling that blocked Mayor Michael Bloomberg's campaign to stop fast food restaurants from selling super-sized, sugary drinks. In a recent ruling, which dealt a blow to the campaign to improve the health of New Yorkers, the lower court said the city Board of Health exceeded its authority by putting a 16-ounce size limit on high-calorie sodas and soft drinks. 
National Journal
Clara Ritger
See more stories about...
Clara Ritger
June 2, 2014, 12:05 p.m.

Food-stamp users would be much health­i­er if they were for­bid­den to spend fed­er­al dol­lars on soda, but sub­sid­iz­ing part of the cost of their fruits and ve­get­ables would not have a sig­ni­fic­ant im­pact on obesity and dia­betes, ac­cord­ing to a new re­port from Stan­ford Uni­versity.

The Stan­ford re­search­ers are the first to eval­u­ate the im­pact these gov­ern­ment ac­tions would have on the 46 mil­lion Amer­ic­ans who par­ti­cip­ate in the Sup­ple­ment­al Nu­tri­tion As­sist­ance Pro­gram, known as SNAP. Pub­lic health of­fi­cials are search­ing for ways to im­prove the nu­tri­tion of SNAP par­ti­cipants, who have high­er rates of obesity and type 2 dia­betes than Amer­ic­ans of the same in­come level who aren’t in the pro­gram.

Ac­cord­ing to the study, “SNAP par­ti­cipants con­sume al­most twice as many cal­or­ies from sug­ar-sweetened bever­ages as they do from ve­get­ables and fruit.” There’s a grow­ing body of evid­ence that li­quid cal­or­ies can do more dam­age to the body than reg­u­lar junk food, and Basu said that’s a key reas­on why ban­ning the pur­chase of sug­ar-sweetened bever­ages would have a sig­ni­fic­ant im­pact on the health of SNAP users.

“We ob­served that the re­stric­tion from pur­chas­ing sug­ary bever­ages could pre­vent 400,000 cases of obesity and 250,000 cases of type 2 dia­betes over the next dec­ade,” said lead re­search­er San­jay Basu, an as­sist­ant pro­fess­or of medi­cine at Stan­ford Uni­versity.

Mean­while, giv­ing SNAP par­ti­cipants 30 cents back for every dol­lar they spend on fruits and ve­get­ables is not ex­pec­ted to have any im­pact on obesity and dia­betes rates. But Basu said their study found that the sub­sidy could still double the num­ber of SNAP par­ti­cipants who meet the nu­tri­tion­al guidelines for fruit and ve­get­able in­take, en­sur­ing that they are eat­ing the re­com­men­ded vit­am­ins and nu­tri­ents, a not­able health im­prove­ment among the pop­u­la­tion. This pro­duce pro­gram is already be­ing tested in a pi­lot pro­ject at the U.S. De­part­ment of Ag­ri­cul­ture.

While the find­ings are im­port­ant con­sid­er­a­tions for poli­cy­makers look­ing to im­prove the SNAP pro­gram, they’re not likely to be im­ple­men­ted any time soon. Just this year Con­gress cut $8.7 bil­lion from the pro­gram in the farm bill.

Basu says im­ple­ment­a­tion isn’t the next step any­way.

“We need to have USDA au­thor­iz­a­tion to do a pi­lot study,” Basu said. “Be­fore we change any­thing for 46 mil­lion Amer­ic­ans, we need to do a ran­dom­ized tri­al to see if this has the ex­pec­ted be­ne­fit.”

{{ BIZOBJ (video: 4974) }}

What We're Following See More »
Clinton Ahead by 13 in Early Going
15 minutes ago

"As Donald Trump captures the mantle of presumptive Republican nominee, a new poll finds he begins his general election campaign well behind Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton. The new CNN/ORC Poll, completed ahead of Trump's victory last night, found Clinton leads 54% to 41%, a 13-point edge over the New York businessman, her largest lead since last July. Clinton is also more trusted than Trump on many issues voters rank as critically important, with one big exception. By a 50% to 45% margin, voters say Trump would do a better job handling the economy than Clinton would."

Wall Street Journal, Kristol Reflect Schism on the Right
23 minutes ago

In an editorial, the Wall Street Journal sets out to relieve conservatives of the temptation to back a third-party candidate over Donald Trump. "The thought is more tempting this year than most, but it’s still hard to see how this would accomplish more than electing Hillary Clinton and muddling the message from a Trump defeat. ... The usual presidential result is that the party that splinters hands the election to the other, more united party." But in the Weekly Standard, Bill Kristol is having none of it: "Serious people, including serious conservatives, cannot acquiesce in Donald Trump as their candidate. ... Donald Trump should not be president of the United States. The Wall Street Journal cannot bring itself to say that. We can say it, we do say it, and we are proud to act accordingly."

The Trump Triumph: How’s It Playing?
1 hours ago
  • Nate Cohn, New York Times: "There have been 10-point shifts over the general election season before, even if it’s uncommon. But there isn’t much of a precedent for huge swings in races with candidates as well known as Mr. Trump and Mrs. Clinton. A majority of Americans may not like her, but they say they’re scared of him."
  • Roger Simon, PJ Media: "He is particularly fortunate that his opposition, Hillary Clinton, besides still being under threat of indictment and still not having defeated Bernie Sanders (go figure), is a truly uninspiring, almost soporific, figure. ... She's not a star. Trump is. All attention will be on him in the general election. The primaries have shown us what an advantage that is. What that means for American politics may not all be good, but it's true."
  • The editors, The Washington Examiner: "At the very least, Trump owes it to the country he boasts he will 'make great again' to try to demonstrate some seriousness about the office he seeks. He owes this even to those who will never consider voting for him. He can start by swearing off grand displays of aggressive and apparently deliberate ignorance. This is not too much to ask."
Humana Will Also Exit Obamacare Exchanges
1 hours ago

Humana announced it plans to "exit certain statewide individual markets and products 'both on and off [Obamacare] exchange,' the insurer said in its financial results released Monday." The company also said price hikes may be forthcoming, "commensurate with anticipated levels of risk by state." Its individual-market enrollment was down 21% in the first quarter from a year ago.

Priebus Asks Party to Unite Behind Trump
13 hours ago