Millions of Americans rely on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to help feed their families. They deserve the same freedom to choose the foods and beverages that best fit their needs.

Restricting products – like soda – from SNAP won’t make anyone healthier or save a $1 in taxpayer spending, whether SNAP costs today or healthcare costs tomorrow. Instead, restrictions will only grow government bureaucracy and costs while creating a slippery slope to government deciding “good” and bad” foods.

The fact is beverages are not driving obesity and chronic disease in America. The data shows that while obesity rates remain high, beverage calories per serving are down significantly.

Get the facts on restrictions and how America’s beverage companies are working to deliver the choice and information consumers want.

 

---

 

Setting the Record Straight About Obesity

Beverages are not driving obesity in the United States.

While CDC data shows adult obesity is up 37.4% since 2000, full-calorie soda sales are down 22.9% and beverage calories per serving are down 42%. If the two were connected, obesity rates should have decreased with the decline in soda consumption.

In fact, calories from sugar-sweetened beverages are a small part of the American diet. When consumption of all sugar-sweetened beverages are combined, they account for less than 6% of calories in the American diet, according to USDA analysis of government data. 

 

---

 

SNAP Restrictions Won’t Save Money or Improve Health

The fact is SNAP restrictions won’t save taxpayer dollars or make Americans healthier.

Allowing the government to designate grocery items as “good” and “bad” would create a food code more complicated than the tax code.

• The U.S. Department of Agriculture estimates that costs of similar administrative costs efforts could exceed $600 million per year, adding bureaucracy without delivering real health benefits.
• Beyond the costs, restrictions are a slippery slope to government meddling in grocery carts and dietary decisions based on political interests.

SNAP restrictions won’t solve the real health challenges facing Americans.

• We can all agree that too much of anything, whether salt, sugar or fat, is not good for anyone.
• But no one ingredient or nutrient is solely responsible for obesity.
• Evidence does not support the claim that implementing restrictions on SNAP purchases will improve health.

The bottom line: SNAP restrictions add bureaucracy and hundreds of thousands of dollars in expense without delivering health benefits or making the SNAP program stronger for families.

 

---

 

Supporting SNAP Families Without Restricting Freedom

SNAP participants are our neighbors. They are working families who need a temporary hand up during a hard time. About 41 million Americans—including 1.7 million veterans—depend on SNAP every month to feed their families. On average, participants are on SNAP for about a year and nearly 80% of able-bodied adults work while receiving benefits.

Families on SNAP make the same grocery decisions we all do, spending just one cent more per dollar on beverages than non-SNAP households, according to the USDA. Restricting one segment of the population from one aisle in the grocery store just because they need government assistance goes against American values.

Government restrictions on purchases set a dangerous precedent, where bureaucrats decide what foods and beverages Americans can buy. 

 

---

 

Empowering Consumers with Choice & Information

America’s beverage companies are offering more choices with less sugar than ever before, including:  

We work hard to make sure our consumers are informed consumers. The results are difficult to ignore 

• Today, nearly 60% of beverages Americans buy have zero sugar or calories, up from 46% in 2010. 
• Beverage calories per-serving have declined by 42% since 2000.

 

---

 

What They Are Saying

See what experts are saying about proposed SNAP restrictions and the importance of protecting consumer choice.  

American Action Forum: Making America Healthy Again

“Second, the bill would give the HHS secretary the authority to identify other junk foods in addition to candy, dessert, and soft drinks. Put differently, the secretary would get to draw the line between junk and non-junk food. This is a nightmarish, anti-freedom, anti-DOGE, anti-common-sense notion.”

DC Journal: Congress Wants to Edit Your Grocery Shopping List

"Our elected representatives should support individual freedom and limited government, trusting the American people to make decisions for their families. Proponents of new SNAP restrictions ignore that principle."

American Spectator: Nannies Take on Food Stamps

"Some members of Congress are embracing a symbolic "reform" that amounts to little more than pestering program recipients—and the stores that serve them—with some Nanny State regulations."

Townhall: Targeting Families on SNAP Will Increase Costs and Fail to Address Obesity

"Instead of focusing on productive policies that would actually lower obesity rates, lawmakers find it easier to insert the federal government between American consumers and the products they choose."

The Conversation: Why government can’t make America ‘healthier’ by micromanaging groceries purchased with SNAP benefits

“While improving the American diet is a worthy goal, research that we and other scholars have done makes it clear that adding new restrictions to SNAP will do little to help us become a healthier nation.” 

Food Research & Action Center: SNAP Choice Is the Right Choice 

“Ensuring that individuals can select foods that align with their dietary needs, preferences, and cultural values is crucial for preserving their dignity and autonomy. It is paternalistic to dictate what foods SNAP participants are allowed to eat, as it assumes they are incapable of making their own food choices simply because they have limited income.”