NationStates

...from being purchased with food stamps.

http://news.yahoo.com/blogs/sideshow/go ... 58768.html

Newly proposed legislation in Congress would ban recipients of food stamps from buying junk food.

The Hill reports that a bill proposed by Rep. Phil Roe, R-Tenn., would require food stamp recipients to purchase only healthy food.

The Healthy Food Choices Act, H.R. 3073 is the latest salvo from Republican members of Congress who have criticized the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), also known as food stamps or the Women, Infants and Children program (WIC).

In August, it was reported that House Republicans hoped to cut some $40 billion from future SNAP budgets.

Roe’s legislation is specifically in response to a 2012 study, which showed that recipients from the food stamp fund spend approximately $2 billion a year on junk food.

“As a physician, I realize the importance of healthy eating, and as an obstetrician, I’ve seen how the WIC program helps empower families receiving assistance to use taxpayer dollars to purchase healthy, wholesome foods,” Roe said in a statement published on his congressional site. “If these guidelines are good and healthy enough for women and children, then SNAP recipients should also benefit from adhering to the same standards.”

In June, Roe voted in favor of proposed legislation that would apply work to welfare standards to food stamp fund recipients.

Critics of Roe’s proposal say that the tighter nutritional requirements would actually be more of a burden for low-income individuals and families who rely on SNAP funds. They also point out that Roe previously opposed efforts by first lady Michelle Obama to improve national school lunch nutritional standards.

Roe’s bill would require SNAP food purchases to adhere to the same nutritional guidelines required under the WIC program. But some critics have said that even WIC’s requirements are not based on science and need fine-tuning to ensure they are nutritionally sound.

Still, Roe said his intention is to improve the health of SNAP recipients by helping to ensure that they eat more nutritious meals with their funds.

“Already states like Wisconsin and South Carolina have shown interest in improving the healthfulness of choices in their SNAP programs,” Roe said. “By giving SNAP recipients more nutritious choices, we can take a meaningful step towards ending hunger in America.”

I can see the logic here, but personally I believe that there are bigger fights to be fought right now and that I really have to question why this is being proposed now.

I don't see any problem with it. If you want junk food, buy it with your own money.
This is the only recent GOP ruling on welfare and such that is sane. Why would you be opposed?

1. Aren't they all about "Freedom to choose!" Shit or whatever?

2. WHY IS MY OWN CONGRESS MAKING STUPID BILLS LIKE THIS AND TRYING TO REPEAL OBAMACARE FOR THE 47TH TIME? YOU WERE ELECTED TO GOVERN. START GOVERNING SHIT.

Alex the Philosopher wrote:I don't see any problem with it. If you want junk food, buy it with your own money.
This is the only recent GOP ruling on welfare and such that is sane. Why would you be opposed?

I'm not inherently opposed to the bill itself, and in fact a part of me wants to support it, but I'd rather they focus on shit that actually matters rather than...this.

Blasveck wrote:1. Aren't they all about "Freedom to choose!" Shit or whatever?

They also don't want there to be any welfare, since real Americans can somehow magically hoist themselves out of poverty and all poor people are just lazy. This seems to be some sort of compromise, which is somehow sensible, for once.

Blasveck wrote:2. WHY IS MY OWN CONGRESS MAKING STUPID BILLS LIKE THIS AND TRYING TO REPEAL OBAMACARE FOR THE 47TH TIME? YOU WERE ELECTED TO GOVERN. START GOVERNING SHIT.

Hey, at least they're getting something done. Usually they either bicker pointlessly or sit there with their thumbs up their asses.

Alex the Philosopher wrote:I don't see any problem with it. If you want junk food, buy it with your own money.
This is the only recent GOP ruling on welfare and such that is sane. Why would you be opposed?

Isn't this the kind of legislation that Conservatives say Liberals do?

Bezombia wrote:

Alex the Philosopher wrote:I don't see any problem with it. If you want junk food, buy it with your own money.
This is the only recent GOP ruling on welfare and such that is sane. Why would you be opposed?

I'm not inherently opposed to the bill itself, and in fact a part of me wants to support it, but I'd rather they focus on shit that actually matters rather than...this.

Considering the alternative is the big nothing they've been doing usually, I prefer this. At least something gets done.

Besides, this is actually a sensible bill. That's a bit hard to come by these days.

there is zero evidence that doing this would help the poor at all.

this is just another bog standard effort by conservatives to dismantle food assistance programs while framing themselves as defenders of the poor and hungry (even though republicans will always do everything in their power to blame and destroy the poor)

just ugh.

Yet again the GOP shows that it has absolutely no idea what financing is like for those that require programs such as food stamps to survive. Buying healthy is luxury that simply cannot be afforded by much of the lower class. People should certainly be encouraged to eat healthy, though the acceptable way to go about this would be actually ensuring that people are capable of eating healthy without fear of the expense

Threlizdun wrote:Yet again the GOP shows that it has absolutely no idea what financing is like for those that require programs such as food stamps to survive. Buying healthy is luxury that simply cannot be afforded by much of the lower class. People should certainly be encouraged to eat healthy, though the acceptable way to go about this would be actually ensuring that people are capable of eating healthy without fear of the expense

Playing devil's advocate here, but the right could argue that if people are no longer using food stamps to get junk food, the cost of junk food would go down.

Of course I don't believe it, just covering our bases here.

I'm sorry what was that about the GOP supporting 'economic freedom'?

Genivaria wrote:I'm sorry what was that about the GOP supporting 'economic freedom'?

Economic freedom for the ones that deserve it. i.e. the rich.
*nods*

if the gop were to actually ban all junk food impartially, wouldn't its own members starve to death and thus cease to exist?

Cameroi wrote:if the gop were to actually ban all junk food impartially, wouldn't its own members starve to death and thus cease to exist?

^^this guy didn't read the op

Bezombia wrote:

Threlizdun wrote:Yet again the GOP shows that it has absolutely no idea what financing is like for those that require programs such as food stamps to survive. Buying healthy is luxury that simply cannot be afforded by much of the lower class. People should certainly be encouraged to eat healthy, though the acceptable way to go about this would be actually ensuring that people are capable of eating healthy without fear of the expense

Playing devil's advocate here, but the right could argue that if people are no longer using food stamps to get junk food, the cost of junk food would go down.

Of course I don't believe it, just covering our bases here.

And in the meantime the poor starve. I prefer letting people eat than getting cheaper chips.

Genivaria wrote:I'm sorry what was that about the GOP supporting 'economic freedom'?

Conservatives see welfare as the poor stealing their money, so they would argue that they get to choose how it is spent.

Honestly, though, banning the use of food stamps in purchasing junk food makes sense. Everyone deserves a square meal, but if you want junk food, spend your own money on it.

The Party of Small Government, ladies and gentlemen!

Bezombia wrote:

Threlizdun wrote:Yet again the GOP shows that it has absolutely no idea what financing is like for those that require programs such as food stamps to survive. Buying healthy is luxury that simply cannot be afforded by much of the lower class. People should certainly be encouraged to eat healthy, though the acceptable way to go about this would be actually ensuring that people are capable of eating healthy without fear of the expense

Playing devil's advocate here, but the right could argue that if people are no longer using food stamps to get junk food, the cost of junk food would go down.

Of course I don't believe it, just covering our bases here.

Well you can counter that with a sugar tax, or something.

Hmm, should I use my stamps on healthy food, or shit?

Blasveck wrote:1. Aren't they all about "Freedom to choose!" Shit or whatever?

2. WHY IS MY OWN CONGRESS MAKING STUPID BILLS LIKE THIS AND TRYING TO REPEAL OBAMACARE FOR THE 47TH TIME? YOU WERE ELECTED TO GOVERN. START GOVERNING SHIT.

This.

You should really specify in the title food stamps.
I was about to get off my ass and go do something. Jeeze!

I approve.

Makes good sense, provided they are willing to issue more stamps and higher limit food cards to cover the increased cost.

Alex the Philosopher wrote:

Genivaria wrote:I'm sorry what was that about the GOP supporting 'economic freedom'?

Conservatives see welfare as the poor stealing their money, so they would argue that they get to choose how it is spent.

Honestly, though, banning the use of food stamps in purchasing junk food makes sense. Everyone deserves a square meal, but if you want junk food, spend your own money on it.

Seeing as how unhealthy food tends to be cheaper then healthy food this is only going to make things worse for poor people.

The Parkus Empire wrote:Makes good sense, provided they are willing to issue more stamps and higher limit food cards to cover the increased cost.

...Except you know they're not.