Quantcast

Texas legislators consider banning use of food stamps to purchase junk food, energy drinks

WF - Rumpelstiltskin -PWCM~JLA 2013/02/12 14:47:28

Texas legislators are considering banning people from using food stamps to purchase junk food and energy drinks.

According to Democraticpeople food stamps purchase junk food energy drinks nbsp democratic state Rep. Richard Peña Raymond, who is sponsoring the bill to ban junk food purchases with public-assistance dollars, taxpayers should not be paying for food that could hurt people’s health and ultimately run up government costs down the line.

“You buy whatever you want. You want to buy two pounds of butter and go have that for supper? That’s your moneygovernment costs line buy buy pounds butter supper nbsp money. You do whatever you want,” Raymond told KGBT-TV. “We should not be on the one hand use money taxnbsp money raymondnbsp told nbsp kgbt-tv hand money nbsp tax dollars to buy junk food, and then on the other hand use tax dollars to pay for health related diseases that come about because of junk food.”

Raymond’s bill would prohibit the use of food stamps, or Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits, to purchase sweetened beverages, candy, potato or corn chips, and cookies.

The ban would have some exceptions. Baby formula and certain weight loss products, for example, would be exempt.

Another bill, which is also under consideration, would eliminate the use of SNAP benefits to purchase energy drinks.

“There’s nothing nutritious or healthy about these products, and in fact they’re potentially dangerous to children,” that bill’s sponsor, Democratic state Rep. Terry Canales, told KGBT-TV. ”We don’t believe you should be able to use government fundsdemocratic rep terry canalesnbsp told nbspkgbt-tv nbspwe government nbsp funds to buy them.”

His bill would prohibit SNAP benefits from being used to buy “beverage[s] containing at least 65 milligrams of caffeine per 8 fluid ounces that is advertised as being specifically designed to provide metabolic stimulation or an increase to the consumer’s mental or physical energy,” according to the legislation, which would not ban coffee or coffee-based beverages.


The legislation would also include an education outreach provision, to promote awareness about the prohibition.

Both pieces of legislation would take effect on Sept. 1, 2013.



Read more: http://dailycaller.com/2013/02/09/texas-legislators-consider-...
You!
Add Photos & Videos

Top Opinion

Sort By
  • Most Raves
  • Least Raves
  • Oldest
  • Newest
Opinions

  • ruru 2013/02/13 03:48:02
    ruru
    +1
    Great idea.
  • JohnT 2013/02/13 03:13:24
    JohnT
    +1
    It makes good sense on the surface but isn't that being a nanny government something all those Texans dislike? Perhaps they could do something about the corporate welfare that is twice the amount of personal welfare, and than cut off the foreign aid.
  • Mark 2013/02/13 03:12:19
  • evangelism_vision 2013/02/13 01:37:16
    evangelism_vision
    +1
    GOOD FOR THEM. If they want the Junk food, Let them go look for a Job, then they won't need the Food Stamps
  • Gordon 2013/02/13 00:07:11
    Gordon
    +2
    Only wholesome food that the food stamp user prepares from scratch should be available to them. No more junk food, soda, alcohol, candy, prepared food, luxury items such as steak or shrimp, etc.
  • Kurt 2013/02/12 22:48:48
    Kurt
    +3
    That is a great idea and surprised this isn't in effect yet in all the states.
  • ««Gingey, the Master Debate... 2013/02/12 22:34:22 (edited)
    ««Gingey, the Master Debater of Þ|-|Дэ†»»
    +2
    Here's what food stamps SHOULD cover:

    whole grain bread
    brown rice
    dried beans
    fresh/canned/frozen vegetables/fruits
    fresh/canned meat
    flour
    corn meal
    eggs
    fat free milk or soy milk

    No pre-made garbage. However, since many junk food companies rely on government subsidies, I doubt this will happen, because this law would mean less money for the big corporations.
  • Gordon ««Ginge... 2013/02/13 00:13:18 (edited)
    Gordon
    +1
    But, that would mean less graft money for the President and Congress. They love those "donations."
  • ««Ginge... Gordon 2013/02/13 02:24:28
    ««Gingey, the Master Debater of Þ|-|Дэ†»»
    +2
    Absolutely. It is a two way street.
  • ZB 2013/02/12 21:45:35 (edited)
    ZB
    +3
    I don't think you can buy energy drinks with SNAP in Oklahoma already. I don't know for sure cause I don't buy the stupid thinks. Regular soda or coffee is just fine for me. Although watching other people buy 50 to 100 dollars in actual junk with SNAP, instead of actual food first makes me sick. My family is on SNAP. We'll spend most of it on actual food for the month, THEN we MIGHT get some chips or candy or something as treats for the kids. But junk comes AFTER real groceries. Although, actual healthy foods are more expensive, which means the SNAP benefits don't go as far.
  • kcandi 2013/02/12 21:27:30
    kcandi
    That's right, more government control - just what we need.
  • Jessie M 2013/02/12 21:26:05
    Jessie M
    +2
    No Junk Food for you
  • Charles White 2013/02/12 21:16:40
    Charles White
    +2
    What is in the water or air in the land of Texas? ? ? Raymond is so concern about banning people on welfare but people with assault weapons are free to run around wild and free, , ,People like Raymond should not be elected to office, , ,
  • THE One... Charles... 2013/02/12 23:56:51
  • Boxcar Racer 2013/02/12 20:20:41
    Boxcar Racer
    +1
    It seams logical. Only problem I see is trying to classify junk food. Even things you make at home could be seen as junk food.
  • ZB Boxcar ... 2013/02/12 21:49:33
    ZB
    +1
    Things like chips, cookies, candy, etc. Thats what they're talking about. trying to control what they make at home with baking goods is impossible. And restricting those would be stupid because a lot of people make things like homemade bread, pot pies, and the like. Which can be healthy if made right.
  • ««Ginge... Boxcar ... 2013/02/12 22:38:02
    ««Gingey, the Master Debater of Þ|-|Дэ†»»
    +1
    That's true, but baking home made chocolate chip cookies is still healthier than buying a pack of chips ahoy.
  • elisabeth.grace2 2013/02/12 20:14:14
    elisabeth.grace2
    +1
    I'm all for energy drinks being banned. But often junk food is cheaper then healthy stuff I think it could negitively effect some ppl.
  • lucky 2013/02/12 19:49:41
    lucky
    +1
    I think my state already banned the energy drinks from being bought with an EBT card as for the rest.

    You buy your own food then eat junk food to your little heats content, tax payers money buys your food then eat healthy because more than likely taxpayers are also going to be paying for your health care and your eating habits could cost taxpayers more down the line.

    On the flip side I wish they were as motivated to find ways to get able bodied people off of welfare benefits period.
  • Jim lucky 2013/02/13 03:01:22
    Jim
    The only way to get able bodied people off of welfare is to return to a full-set industrial economy like we had in the 1950's. All those cheap imports ended up costing a lot more in the final equation.

    Yeah, the price on the shelf is cheaper but, the full cost shows up in the unemployment rolls and social safety net. What you don't pay in the purchase price shows up in higher taxes, ruined cities, mass anxiety, and immorally high CEO bonuses.
  • Jim 2013/02/12 18:04:54
    Jim
    +2
    I'm fine with such restrictions. It is not hard to determine what is junk food. Snacks are junk food. Anything where sugar or high fructose corn syrup is the main ingedient is junk. Cheap cold cut meats are junk. Soft drinks are junk. Just about everything at GNC stores is junk. The art of homemaking is long lost and is the main reason why diet-related disease is so widespread.

    What might be an interesting trial program would be to go to community kitchens or inner city churches and show poor people how to take real vegetables, fruit, cheap cuts of meat, and prepare tasty meals that are nutritious and easy to prepare.
  • Gordon Jim 2013/02/13 00:18:18
    Gordon
    Good idea, but are they actually so stupid that they cannot figure out how to prepare, bake or cook healthy food? With so many cooking shows, free library cookbooks, etc. there is no excuse for not knowing how to cook well.
  • Redneck 2013/02/12 18:03:43
    Redneck
    +2
    Great idea!
  • Mark In Irvine 2013/02/12 17:06:32
    Mark In Irvine
    +1
    are foodstamps a state-issued thing or a federal-government-issues thing? if texas issues the stamps, then texas can place limits on how they can be used. if uncle sam issues them, it would be unconstitutional for texas to try to limit how they may be used.
  • ZB Mark In... 2013/02/12 21:50:59
    ZB
    +3
    Federally regulated guidelines but controlled and administered at the state level.
  • Mark In... ZB 2013/02/12 22:53:19
    Mark In Irvine
    hmmmmmmmm ... I'm thinkin' federal jurisdiction.
  • holly g... Mark In... 2013/02/12 22:33:46
    holly go lightly
    +1
    I think it is the state.
  • Seonag 2013/02/12 17:04:50
  • belle 2013/02/12 17:02:41
    belle
    +2
    Can't be;ieve I actually agree with a democrat, but this is a good plan, pass it now.
  • macbeth 2013/02/12 16:23:26
    macbeth
    +2
    Since most of the stuff sold in supermarkets is junk, I don't see how it can possibly work.
  • Sodahead Founders are Fascists 2013/02/12 16:15:28
    Sodahead Founders are Fascists
    +2
    And who decides what is junk food?
    And where is the protection against junk food industry lobbyists bribing politicians to declare their junk food as not junk food?
  • none 2013/02/12 15:59:05
    none
    +1
    Good idea that should have happened long ago.
  • superangrymonkey 2013/02/12 15:48:01
    superangrymonkey
    +1
    OH look, more government abuse of authority.
  • ««Ginge... superan... 2013/02/12 22:35:41
    ««Gingey, the Master Debater of Þ|-|Дэ†»»
    Are you serious? People relying on the government should be subject to regulations.
  • THE One... ««Ginge... 2013/02/12 23:59:08
  • THE One... superan... 2013/02/12 23:58:38
  • BK 2013/02/12 15:41:28
    BK
    +2
    I cannot understand why anyone would think that public assistance should be able to be used to buy junk food and energy drinks. Public assistance should be about survival right now and a path back to self sufficiency in the future.
    It's too bad that even banning these items from purchase under public assistance programs won't actually stop people from using public dollars to get banned items. I've talked to people who simply sell their bridge cards for half value and buy booze and smokes with the money. Banning items is a no-brainer, but it's not the end of the problem. The entire system needs to be tightened up. Providing assistance to the less fortunate is a worthy cause, handing over a pile of cash is irresponsible.
  • rand 2013/02/12 15:40:12
    rand
    +1
    About time. This should be nation-wide.
  • _-T3x4S_M4D3-_ 2013/02/12 15:26:29
  • Clay Slayer 2013/02/12 15:10:14
    Clay Slayer
    +2
    They need to go back to the old program of dispensing the bare Essentials, instead of Cart Blanc voucher cards,..I get pissed when I go to the store and there is some broad with her five kids by different daddies,all decked out in gold, and driving a new car,, with 3 karts of the best food in the store, pays for them with WIC card, and then the last cart has a couple cases of beer and a couple bottle of wine and a carton of cigarettes, that she pulls out 100 bucks to pay for it... I let them know, that I hope they apprecieate eating on my dime,, and if they can buy booze and cigarettes, get off the freaking welfare program..

See Votes by State

The map above displays the winning answer by region.

Living

2014/11/28 09:50:19

Hot Questions on SodaHead
More Hot Questions

More Community More Originals