Maine State Senator Submits Bill To Ban Junk Food From Food Stamps!

[Christians4LessGvt]

Maine State Senator Submits Bill To Ban Junk Food From Food Stamps



From CBS-13 WGME:

CBS 13 discovered a new proposal to stop people on food stamps in Maine from using their benefits to buy junk food. The proposal would impact the 215,000 people on food stamps in Maine. It says if you?re collecting food stamp benefits, you can?t use that taxpayer money to buy things like candy and soda. The proposal comes after a CBS 13 investigation last spring found you can use food stamps to buy a gift basket with M&Ms, fun dip, and even dress up toys.

Republican State Senator Roger Katz submitted a bill to cut "taxable food items" from the program. The state says those items include things like candy, confections, fudge, and soft drinks. "Here's the deal, the food stamp program is the supplemental nutritional assistance program, I'll emphasize the word nutritional," Sen. Katz, said.

Non-taxable items are still covered. Those are considered grocery staples, like bread, milk, and vegetables. "This bill just says, look, if we're going to be giving taxpayer dollars to people appropriately they should use it to buy nutritional foods," Sen. Katz said, "We're trying to get nutritional food to people who can't afford to buy it necessarily themselves."

The bill requires the Department of Health and Human Services to ask the federal government for permission to eliminate junk food items from the food stamp program. The federal government are the ones who actually make the rules for the program, while the state runs it.

As of now, the Department of Agriculture says the reason all foods are eligible for the food stamp program is due to the fact "no clear standards exist for defining foods as good or bad, or health or not healthy."

While this bill is certainly going to ruffle the feathers of leftists and career welfare recipients, it's definitely good news for the tax payer.

It doesn't really seem fair to provide those who can't afford to buy their own groceries with better meals and food items than the individuals who are working hard and having taxes basically wreck their income to support a large group of people who refuse to work for a living.

If someone is down and out and needs a hand up, not a handout, they should be fine with receiving aid to buy healthy meals, being willing to sacrifice sugary treats on a temporary basis while they get back on their feet.

Only those who have no desire to get off the system will have a problem with this legislation.

Let's hope it passes and reduces the economic strain on the people living in Maine.

http://www.wgme.com/news/features/top-stories/stories/new-proposal-cut-junk-food-food-stamp-program-25778.shtml#.VNjvCVXF9pm

[Xavier_Onassis]

I frequently shop where people buy food with food stamps. I have not noticed that they spend much on junk food: perhaps some corn chips and potato chips.
I fail to see how this would save taxpayers any money. The food stamp recipients would simply spend the same credit on accepted food products.  And what, precisely is junk food?  How about lard? A lot of people make their own cakes and use lard to fry chicken in. Lard is not as healthy as vegetable shortening. Shall we let the poor have bacon? I suppose that they could buy cheese and crackers, but those cheesy crackers, aren't they junk food? I recall that the Reagan Administration wanted to classify ketchup as a vegetable for school lunches. I suspect they got some campaign donations from Hunts or Heinz or some tomato lobbying group.

The main purpose of food stamps has been to subsidize the supermarkets and the agricultural and food processing industries. When the government had separate surplus commodities distribution centers, Cargill, Safeway, Kroger and Wal*Mart didn't get a penny. As I recall, poor people got all the Bulgar wheat they wanted. I roomed with some students one summer, and we tried all the free recipes Surplus Commodities provided. Most were fairly simple and quite good.

For this to happen, the Federal government Dept of HHS need to define what foods shall be considered junk foods and which will not. That would involve a LOT of lobbying.
This sounds like another Republican't "Punish the Poor" plan. The goal is not to give better nourishment to the poor, and certainly not to save the taxpayers money, but to curry favor with the Tea Party Loons.

In Florida, the rules must be vague. I went to the Dollar Tree the other day and bought some food, since they have good deals. Wal*Mart charges $2.39 for eight hot dog buns. The same thing Dollar Tree sells for, well, a dollar. And no, the Dollar Tree buns are not past expiration date. Anyway, I bought cheese puffs, potato chips and some cookies. The cookies were taxed, the other snacks were not. At Family Dollar, they tax the chips and not the cookies. I don't argue about this, because seven cents is not worth the effort. I would end up talking to the manager, who would tell me that they had to charge tax because thee cash registers were hooked up to the central office. I have never been unemployed and have never spent any food stamps.

It seems reasonable to exclude from food stamp payment non-food items, or those defined in a state that does not tax food as taxable. Gift baskets and toys with candy inside would surely come under this category.

My guess is that this is more of a publicity stunt and will get nowhere.

[Plane]

    So the poor will outlive the wealthy?

[Xavier_Onassis]

Surely some poor people will outlive some wealthy people. And vice versa. As a group, the wealthy statistically live longer.

I do not understand your point here, though.

If a welfare Mother has $200 in food stamps (really, she has a debit card for that amount) and she cannot buy M&Ms for the kids, there is no way she is going to leave that $3.99 unspent. Perhaps she will buy flour, eggs, milk and sugar and make them cookies. But the one thing that she will NOT do is leave it unspent. And even if she did, the state is not going to take that returned $3.99 and return it to the taxpayer. So is all this silly state Senators wishes were fulfilled, this would NOT be "good news for the taxpayer".