(Illustration by Washington Post staff/The Washington Post; iStock)
President Donald Trump, bipartisan unifier? The idea may seem far-fetched, but one of his least discussed yet arguably most important reforms is finding support across the political spectrum.
The action is simple: The administration is finally allowing states to restrict the purchase of soda, sugary snacks and other junk food with the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), more commonly known as food stamps.
A handful of states — Republican- and Democrat-led alike — have wanted to do this for decades. But they needed a waiver from the Agriculture Department, which runs the food stamp program at the national level, and previous administrations refused.
Early last year, that changed. The Trump White House announced that states could put health first, and as I show in a new paper, 30 states and counting are doing just that. They range from Hawaii to Connecticut, Colorado to Wisconsin, and Florida to Texas to name a few. Eighteen have already received federal approval, and at least 12 more have told the administration they’ll submit a waiver. Nearly 18 million Americans are on food stamps in these states combined, and they’ll all find it more difficult to make unhealthy choices.
The food stamp program may have the word “nutrition” in its formal name, but in practice, it’s a dead letter. All told, nearly $1 in every $4 of food stamps pays for sugary drinks, candy or snacks — about $25 billion every year. Soda is actually the No. 1 item bought with food stamps, and taxpayers in 2023 were projected to spend more than $60 billion on those sugary drinks over the next decade.
These foods are proven to contribute to obesity — one of the leading predictors of major health problems in children and adults alike. They increase the likelihood of everything from diabetes to heart disease to a slew of other chronic conditions. Sure enough, research shows that adults on food stamps have a higher obesity rate than their peers. Kids on food stamps have elevated disease risk, too. They also drink 43 percent more sugary beverages than kids who aren’t on food stamps.
No wonder 30 states are working to limit junk food. They don’t want to fund people’s descent into sickness and even death. Just the opposite: They want to help lower-income people make healthier choices that lead to longer, happier lives.
The health benefits are justification enough for this reform. But so are the benefits for health care spending. Seventy-eight percent of food-stamp recipients are also on Medicaid, which means taxpayers are picking up the tab for their obesity-related treatments. Government-run health care programs already spend at least $60 billion a year dealing with obesity and its health complications. Yet as more people eat healthier, they’ll probably need less taxpayer-funded health care. That makes this reform a true win-win, improving both public health and the public treasury.
Still, this reform is not without its critics. On both sides of the aisle, there are concerns that the federal government is unfairly restricting individual freedom, and others worry that the way these reforms are implemented can be contradictory.
But that doesn’t mean the policy itself is wrong. States are experimenting in different ways to decide what works best for their citizens, reflecting their varying needs and nuances. Putting restrictions on how food stamp dollars can be spent is hardly an imposition on individual freedom, rather, it is an exercise in good stewardship of taxpayer funds. Since food stamps are funded by taxpayers, policymakers have a duty to ensure the money is well spent, especially since unhealthy purchases can theoretically lead to higher Medicaid spending. The old system contributed to not just one but two crises. The government has a duty to correct those wrongs.
Thirty states and counting are doing exactly that. They deserve praise for bringing nutrition back to food stamps, and the Trump administration deserves praise for letting them. Lawmakers are working together to protect taxpayers and make America healthy again. That’s a bipartisan achievement worth celebrating.
