Can banning junk food from SNAP fix the US nutrition crisis?

As political pressure mounts to reform public assistance, several US states, including Arkansas, Indiana, Idaho, and West Virginia, are pushing to ban soda and junk food from being purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits.

This month, Arkansas Governor Sarah Huckabee Sanders submitted a waiver request to the US Department of Agriculture (USDA) to prohibit SNAP purchases of soft drinks and candy. 

“President Trump and his administration have put a laser focus on solving the US chronic disease epidemic, and reforming our food stamp program is a great place to start,” says Governor Sanders. 

“Banning soft drinks and candy from food stamps will remove some of the least-healthy, most-processed foods from the program and encourage low-income Arkansans to eat better.”

USDA Secretary Brooke L. Rollins, who oversees SNAP, welcomes the move. “I look forward to moving through the approval process swiftly. I encourage more states across the nation to follow the bold lead of states like Arkansas as we Make America Healthy Again [MAHA].”

The initiative has sparked pushback. The National Confectioners Association argues that SNAP users buy candy at roughly the same rate as non-recipients — just 2% of overall purchases, according to USDA data.

“This policy approach is misguided and not needed when it comes to chocolate and candy. SNAP and non-SNAP participants both understand that chocolate and candy are treats — not meal replacements. People in the US enjoy chocolate and candy two to three times per week, averaging just 40 calories and about one teaspoon of added sugar per day.”

Research has underlined systemic roots of unhealthy eating in food-insecure communities.Additionally, the association highlights potential consumer confusion, as a granola bar or trail mix may be prohibited as a SNAP-eligible purchase in one state but permitted in another state across the border. “Varying definitions lead to consumer and retailer confusion.”

West Virginia targets soda

Recently, the US Health and Human Services (HHS) Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said: “West Virginia is leading the nation in passing a bill to clean up our food supply and submitting a waiver to remove soda from SNAP.”

“I commend the 24 states pushing MAHA bills to clean up our food system, improve school lunches, submit waivers to SNAP, and promote patient choice… I urge every governor to follow West Virginia’s lead and submit a waiver to the USDA to remove soda from SNAP.”

“If there’s one thing we can agree on, it should be eliminating taxpayer-funded soda subsidies for lower-income kids. I look forward to inviting every governor who submits a waiver to celebrate with me at the White House this fall. Thank you, Secretary Rollins, for your leadership on this vital issue for children’s health,” he continues.

In an X post, he states that SNAP should fund nutrition, not junk. 

Junk food ban: Solution to systemic issues?

The American Beverage Association expressed disappointment that Sanders and Rollins are policing food “rather than taking meaningful steps to help people with good-paying jobs to take them off SNAP.” Rollins said the organization’s statement went against the Trump Administration’s health, well-being, and taxpayer protection policies. 

State governors are pushing to ban soda and candy from SNAP, framing it as a step toward tackling chronic disease.The Center for Science in the Public Interest, the Food Research and Action Center, and Vitamin Angels told us about the need to address the root causes of food insecurity, such as poverty, inadequate wages, lack of affordable housing, unaffordable healthcare, and systemic racism.

A study published in The American Journal of Clinical Nutrition cautions that people who are food insecure and taking part in certain programs may consume ultra-processed foods at a disproportionately high rate.

“It has been posited that the high cost of fruits, vegetables, and other healthful and less processed foods and the limited availability of these foods in the surrounding food environment can explain the inverse associations between socioeconomic status and diet quality,” it underscores.

“We hypothesize that psychological, neurological, and behavioral pathways are potentially important mediators of the associations between food insecurity and ultra-processed food consumption (and by association, overall diet quality).”

The study reveals that chronic stress from food insecurity leads to “comfort eating,” which promotes low-income adults to consume ultra-processed foods that worsen long-term health. The addictive properties of such foods, marketing, and limited food options leave people vulnerable. 

The researchers state that SNAP participants consume more ultra-processed foods than non-SNAP participants, most likely as a result of coping mechanisms associated with inadequate benefits and deeper structural barriers rather than the program itself.