SNAP Should Buy Groceries, Not Candy and Soda

As of this year, several states are blocking food stamp dollars from being spent on soda and candy. That change is overdue. Taxpayer-funded welfare exists to prevent hunger and malnutrition. It is not meant to subsidize junk food.

This shift builds on reforms enacted last year, when Congress and President Trump tightened SNAP eligibility to reduce fraud and abuse. Those changes reinforced a basic principle: welfare programs should be targeted, conditional, and focused on genuine need. Limiting what taxpayer dollars can buy is the next logical step.

States are acting under new federal flexibility that allows tighter definitions of what qualifies as an eligible purchase under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. As USA Today reported, states including Arkansas, Iowa, and Utah have moved forward with restrictions on soda and candy purchases using SNAP benefits.

This reform matters because most Americans do not realize how SNAP dollars are actually spent.

Soda Is the Top SNAP Purchase

Nationwide, soda is the single largest item purchased with food stamps by total dollar amount. It exceeds spending on milk, meat, fruits, or vegetables.

When soda tops the list, SNAP is no longer functioning as a nutrition program. Taxpayers are not funding food security. They are funding empty calories.

Welfare Has Conditions for a Reason

SNAP has never been a blank check. The program already bans purchases of alcohol, tobacco, and hot prepared foods. Extending those limits to soda, candy, and chips follows the same logic as last year’s eligibility reforms.

If taxpayer dollars are involved, they should go toward real food:

• Lean meats and fish

• Eggs and dairy

• Fruits and vegetables

• Whole grains

  
  

Those foods support health, reduce downstream medical costs, and align with the program’s stated purpose.

Responsibility Should Be Part of the Deal

Welfare policy should reflect basic standards. Assistance should be limited to citizens and legal residents. Able-bodied adults should be working or preparing to work. Those expectations protect the program’s credibility and preserve public support for helping people who truly need it.

Nothing about these rules eliminates personal choice. Anyone who wants soda, candy, or chips can still buy them. They just should not expect taxpayers to cover the cost.

A Modest Reform With Big Impact

Restricting junk food purchases under SNAP is not punitive. It is pro-nutrition, pro-taxpayer, and pro-integrity. Combined with last year’s eligibility tightening, these changes move the program back toward its original mission.

Welfare should help families put food on the table. It should not underwrite soda companies.