|
Getting your Trinity Audio player ready...
|
Iowa secured federal waiver from the feds. No legislation needed.
by Guy Page
Starting January 1, Iowans will no longer be able to use food stamps to buy soda, candy, and certain other items, following federal approval of a waiver sought by Governor Kim Reynolds.
Could Vermont Gov. Phil Scott do likewise – bypassing the Vermont Legislature by obtaining a waiver directly from the federal government? VDC sent a version of the story below to Phil Scott’s press secretary and inquired. VDC will publish a response as soon as it is received.
Meanwhile, Make America Healthy Again supporter John Klar will be a guest today on Hot Off The Press. VDC’s call-in news and commentary daily news program runs 11:05 AM – noon on WDEV AM 550, FM 96.1, and wdevradio.com. Call in to 802-244-1777.
What Iowa did and how they did it
The U.S. Department of Agriculture granted Iowa’s request earlier this year, allowing the state to impose new restrictions on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The program, which serves more than 250,000 low-income Iowans, provides funds to purchase groceries.
Under the waiver, SNAP benefits cannot be used to buy candy, chewing gum, juice with less than 50% fruit or vegetable content, vitamins and minerals, or some prepared foods sold in stores. The Iowa Department of Health and Human Services said the move is part of a broader effort to address obesity and chronic illness by encouraging healthier food choices.
Governor Reynolds celebrated the USDA’s approval in August, calling it a step toward “empowering Iowans to make better nutritional decisions and improve long-term health outcomes.”
Supporters of the change say it aligns SNAP spending with federal dietary guidelines and reduces taxpayer spending on junk food. Critics argue it unfairly limits food choices for low-income families and could increase administrative burdens for retailers.
The new rules make Iowa the first state to implement such broad restrictions on SNAP purchases, a move other states are expected to watch closely.
Discover more from Vermont Daily Chronicle
Subscribe to get the latest posts sent to your email.
Categories: Media
How about first doing away with cash ebt benefits? And spacing the benefits out through the month, rather than having them all at the start of the month?
It makes good sense for a host of reasons to limit the product eligibility for the SNAP/3SquaresVT program to include ONLY staple and whole foods. The American taxpayer is forking over $100 billion annually for the program and the current list of eligible items is definitely subsidizing poor eating habits and consequently poor health. The poor health is further burdening taxpayers since a very disproportionate percentage of SNAP-eligible households are also on the Medicaid program. The average family with children receives over $500 monthly in SNAP benefits. It’s not mean and heartless to demand that they peel some carrots and potatoes instead of just ripping open a bag or zapping a package in a microwave. MAHA is long overdue for the health of the US budget and for our bodies. The biggest impediment is the junk food lobby. The grocery stores already have the ability for their point of sale computers to categorize items by tax or no tax eligibility, so the biggest debate will be what do we consider to be “junk food” and some states already have established that as a guide. What is the Governor waiting for? The Vermont Legislature should be bypassed as they will never enact this change.
I like this. How often have we seen someone on food stamps with a cart full of “junk.” If this law is implemented here and it should be then a list of what is and what isn’t allowed needs to be published.
I also agree with Will Hunter, do away with the cash benefit so that EBT’s can no longer buy cigarettes, vapes, alcohol, tattoos and marijuana to mention a few.
I disagree with doing away with the cash benefits. I’m elderly and I receive benefits in a cash deposit to my savings account. Having an EBT card could become part of the digital ID crap, and they could withhold benefits if you say something the government dislikes. I’m so grateful for the help in being able to eat well and if others feel they want to buy cigarettes, that’s their choice, albeit a stupid choice, but it’s their choice. Maybe use a certain age to determine when cash benefits should be allowed…
How about reverting back to the way it was in the mid 70’s when I briefly was on food stamps. You went to a bank on the first and the 15th and stood in line to get food coupons. BTW you had to buy them. Something like 20 bucks got you 50 in coupons. I did that about twice and went and got another job. I personally like the older way of handing out “surplus food” from the USDA.
There should more discussion about this digital ID crap. The other problem is how many people are using the cash to buy drugs???? Comment from Richard Dy.
It is a well-known phenomenon that people use loaded EBT cards as currency or collateral when buying street drugs. Many busts in the Boston area have turned up stacks of cards in the possession of dealers. Proposals in Mass to affix photos of the lawful beneficiary of those cards have been met with crickets. Democrats say it is too expensive to re-do the cards with picture, but nothing is more expensive than an unaccountable government program.
First, it’s a Federal program. The states may allocate who’s eligible and what may be purchased, but it’s paid for by the Federal government. I think if states want to limit their SNAP-recipients from using their benefits to buy certain “junk foods,” then why not just ban those “junk foods” altogether? Why is it rich kids can eat candy and popcorn, yet impoverished kids are forced to eat apples? They’re ALL overweight anyways. Next we’ll have people crossing state lines to go to Walmart to purchase their Oreos, Ring Dings and Dipsy Doodles. Personally, I don’t care what they buy with their benefits. We don’t need a nanny state.
Ring Dings and Dipsy Doodles 😂🤣😂
In the Land of the Free, we should all be able to buy and eat crap if we so choose, but when we have a system of subsidizing food (which is regarded by many as a “human right”), that should only cover basics…no luxury food, no junk food and no convenience/prepared food. Many consider shelter to also be a human right. That does not mean that every person who claims to be homeless gets a taxpayer-financed house on the lake in Charlotte VT.
When I lived in VT I received foodstamps as cash benefits. I mail ordered herds and supplements. Mostly these were items that food stamps would ordinarlity cover, the rest were minerals and vitamins which I needed in order to keep healthy and alive. I felt justified.