DOVER — A Republican-sponsored bill that would ban junk food purchases with food stamps died in a legislative committee Wednesday amid concerns of discrimination and unfair limitations.
Senate Bill 293 sought to reform the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP food stamps) by encouraging healthier eating habits among recipients by limiting the types of food they could buy.
According to statistics from the Department of Health and Social Services, about 152,000 residents receive the assistance.
Prime sponsor House Minority Leader, Rep. Danny Short, R-Seaford, said the bill is on par with many healthy initiatives in the state, including the governor’s $2.7 million trail and pathway program to encourage healthy lifestyles.
“With regard to this bill, what we are trying to do is educate the public,” Rep. Short said during the bill’s hearing in the House and Human Development hearing Wednesday.
Kids are able to receive healthy breakfasts and lunch provided by the state, but at home their healthy eating habits can fall by the wayside if parents are not buying healthy groceries, he added.
Limiting the type of junk food individuals can purchase with food stamps helps to foster those healthy decisions, he said.
“We can educate them and not confuse their children when they get home,” Rep. Short said. “They can still get the ice cream they can still get the cake, but with their money.”
But SNAP, which is funded by the federal government but supported, in part, by the state, already has some restrictions. According to the U.S. Department of Agriculture, recipients cannot use the assistance to buy beer, wine, liquor, cigarettes or tobacco as well as any nonfood items like vitamins and medicines. Hot food, like pre-cooked rotisserie chickens and any food that will be eaten in the store, can also not be purchased.
But food stamps can be used to purchase soft drinks, so-called energy drinks, candy, cookies, cakes, snack crackers and ice cream.
“This just tells me we are on a trend that’s not necessarily good,” said co-sponsor Rep. Tim Dukes, R-Laurel. He added that food stamp recipients have grown 196 percent, while Delaware rates third in teenage obesity in the country.
The bill would also need the Delaware Department of Health and Social Services to seek a waiver from the USDA to implement new SNAP regulations.
But, at this time, the USDA has not granted a SNAP waiver for a measure mandating the benefits are used for healthy choices.
“I’m just asking you to consider this,” Rep. Short said.
While everyone is in agreement that educating people on nutrition is worthwhile, Rep. Edward Osienski, D-Newark, said mandates on nutrition are not beneficial.
He said his district had one of the largest increases in food stamp participation, but he doesn’t question their choices.
“I have complete confidence that they are making those (healthy) choices,” Rep. Osienski said.
Not only that, but he said it would be difficult for the health department to decide what is healthy and what is not.
“How do you make that decision? It’s hard enough shopping on the small allotment on SNAP that you have,” he said. “I don’t see the department the being capable to make those decisions.”
Added Ezra Temko, president of Delaware’s chapter of Americans for Democratic Action, said that if lawmakers really want to help SNAP recipients to be healthier, they should petition to reevaluate food stamp allocations to allow recipients to afford more expensive organic products.
“I think the intentions are good, but I think they can be directed elsewhere,” Mr. Temko said.
According to the National Conference of State Legislatures, since the start of 2012, at least 13 states — including California, New Jersey and Illinois — have considered bills to restrict the purchase of certain foods under SNAP.
In the hearing Wednesday, Debbie Gottschalk, policy advisory for DHSS, said the department has inquired about the waiver, but the federal government will not grant it, which ended the discussion on SB 243.
Lawmakers overwhelmingly voted to table the bill so it will not get a full vote on the House floor.
Rep. Short said it seemed as if the committee members had already made up their minds about the measure, so he was not surprised with the result. He doesn’t see the bill being lifted from the table.