New York – NY Seeks To Ban Sugary Drinks From Food Stamp Buys

    9

    New York – New Yorkers on food stamps would not be allowed to spend them on sugar-sweetened drinks under an obesity-fighting proposal being floated by Mayor Michael Bloomberg and Gov. David Paterson.

    Join our WhatsApp group

    Subscribe to our Daily Roundup Email


    Bloomberg and Paterson planned to announce Thursday that they are seeking permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which administers the nation’s food stamp program, to add sugary drinks to the list of prohibited goods for city residents receiving assistance.

    If approved, it would be the first time an item would be banned from the federal program based solely on nutritional value.

    The idea has been suggested previously, including in 2008 in Maine, where it drew criticism from advocates for the poor who argued it unfairly singled out low-income people and risked scaring off potential needy recipients.

    And in 2004 the USDA rejected Minnesota’s plan to ban junk food, including soda and candy, from food stamp purchases, saying it would violate the Food Stamp Act’s definition of what is food and could create “confusion and embarrassment” at the register.

    The food stamp system, which was launched in the 1960s, serves some 40 million Americans a month and does not currently restrict any other foods based on nutrition. Recipients can essentially buy any food for the household, although there are some limits on hot or prepared foods.

    Food stamps also cannot be used to buy alcohol, cigarettes or items such as pet food, vitamins or household goods.

    The city and state proposal would be temporary, so officials could study its effects over two years. It would apply only to food stamp recipients in New York City — 1.7 million of the city’s more than 8 million residents — and would not affect the amount of assistance they receive.

    “This initiative will give New York families more money to spend on foods and drinks that provide real nourishment,” said a statement from Bloomberg, who also has outlawed trans-fats in restaurant food and has forced chain restaurants to post calorie counts on menus.

    In fiscal year 2009, New Yorkers received $2.7 billion in food stamp benefits and spent $75 million to $135 million of that on sugary drinks, the city said.

    The ban would apply to any beverage that contains more than 10 calories per 8 ounces, except for milk products, milk substitutes like soy milk and rice milk, and fruit juices without added sugar.

    A 20-ounce sugar-sweetened drink can contain as many as 16 packets of sugar.

    There still are many unhealthful products New Yorkers could purchase with food stamps, including potato chips, ice cream and candy. But officials said the proposal targets sugary drinks because they are the largest contributor to obesity.

    “We continue to see a dramatic rise in obesity among children, especially in low-income communities,” state Department of Health Commissioner Richard Daines said. “This initiative targets a major public health threat — the high consumption of sugary beverages — which have little to no nutritional value.”

    More than half of adult New York City residents are overweight or obese, along with nearly 40 percent of public school students in kindergarten through eighth grade.

    City officials said lower-income residents are most likely to drink one or more sugar-sweetened drink a day; type 2 diabetes is also twice as common among poor New Yorkers compared to the wealthiest.

    The USDA had no immediate comment Thursday on the proposal.

    The department recently launched a pilot program to encourage food stamp recipients to make more healthful choices in their food shopping. Under the program, involving 7,500 randomly selected households in Massachusetts, participants get 30 cents added to their benefit balances for every dollar they spend on fruits and vegetables — which reduces the cost of fresh produce by almost one-third.


    Listen to the VINnews podcast on:

    iTunes | Spotify | Google Podcasts | Stitcher | Podbean | Amazon

    Follow VINnews for Breaking News Updates


    Connect with VINnews

    Join our WhatsApp group


    9 Comments
    Most Voted
    Newest Oldest
    Inline Feedbacks
    View all comments
    ModernLakewoodGuy
    ModernLakewoodGuy
    13 years ago

    I dont understand why it has been allowed up until now. I thought it was for basic nutrition like bread, milk cheese…thats like saying people could use their section 8 vouchers for stays at the sheraton

    ProminantLawyer
    ProminantLawyer
    13 years ago

    ” It would apply only to food stamp recipients in New York City — 1.7 million of the city’s more than 8 million residents”.

    That’s allota piples.

    2tellthetruth
    2tellthetruth
    13 years ago

    Great idea!Will it work? probably not, stores core shoppers for junk food are in that bracket. I am sure stores will just punch in the number for the sodas and charge away.

    Aryeh
    Aryeh
    13 years ago

    Better yet, we can mandate that Medicare and Medicaid recipients be tobacco free, and administer drug and alcohol tests to anyone in these programs as a prerequisite! Social engineering is a wonderful thing.

    Joe-Shmoe
    Joe-Shmoe
    13 years ago

    Disgusting! Now the city will come out that sugar (domino etc) is banned for medicade recipients. Next comes no nosh, no food which has any sugar etc. Please let the poor man live! I know bloomberg hates the poor, hates the smokers, hates the people that live in ny, hates the people that drive cars, hates the people that work (taxes them) hates the people that purchase new clothes, (under 100 dollars is now taxable) etc etc etc. there are soooo many things he did to kick everybody as hard as he could. He must be a really unhappy bum trying to get some self esteem by lowering everyone as much as possible (like yesh lo moneh rotse mosayim)

    13 years ago

    It is interesting that Bloomberg is so concerned about poor fat people (it appears that being fat is okay so long as you are not also poor).

    Can anyone explain to me why Bloomberg makes sure that cigarettes are being taxed instead of being banned altogether if he is so concerned with health, and not just revenue to suck out of NYC residents?

    Oh, I guess that is a rhetorical question.

    memyself
    memyself
    13 years ago

    #6
    “(it appears that being fat is okay
    so long as you are not also poor)”

    yes, if your obesity will cost medicaid more money, it’s not ok.

    The_Truth
    Noble Member
    The_Truth
    13 years ago

    I completely agree with this and don’t know why my tax dollars are being given to people to eat and drink junk, only to then claim from Medicaid/Medicare for obesity related issues later on.

    If people want to smoke, let them, but they should be taxed for it to pay for all the lung cancer patients claiming from Medicare/Medicaid.

    13 years ago

    your tax dollars are paying for this – for medicare, for health care, for hospitals, etc., and your non-tax dollars as well (e.g., your health insurance costs, higher product prices). your logic is fatally flawed.