Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Snap Policy topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Debate over SNAP restrictions pits public-health goals against retailer implementation concerns
Summary
Senate Bill 354, which would direct Montana to seek a federal waiver to bar SNAP purchases of candy and sugar-sweetened beverages, drew support from health groups and some SNAP families and strong opposition from retailers, food banks and convenience-store associations citing implementation costs and equity concerns.
Senator Daniel Zolnicov opened the House Health and Human Services hearing on Senate Bill 354, saying the bill would request a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to make categories such as soda and candy ineligible for SNAP purchases. "This bill is meant to try to curtail that," Zolnicov said, arguing the measure aims to improve nutrition paid for with taxpayer-funded benefits.
Proponents included physicians, the Montana Medical Association and nutrition advocates who said restricting SNAP purchases of low-nutrition items could reduce obesity and healthcare costs. Jean Branscum, CEO of the Montana Medical Association, told the committee childhood obesity rates and associated diseases provide a rationale for experimenting with policy levers to change purchasing patterns.
Multiple opposition witnesses from the convenience-store and retail sectors warned the committee that the bill would impose complex UPC-by-UPC implementation burdens on stores, especially small and rural retailers, and could prompt some stores to stop accepting SNAP. "You would literally have to... go through line by line and figure out which items are acceptable and which ones aren't," said Earl Allen, a 30-year convenience-store veteran. Industry witnesses and the Montana Food Bank Network also warned that imposing SNAP restrictions risks stigmatizing recipients and could worsen access in rural food deserts.
DPHHS informational witnesses (Chappelle Smith and Jennifer Fox) told legislators the federal Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) administers SNAP merchant authorization and point-of-sale enforcement, and that item-level eligibility would largely be implemented through federal systems if a waiver were granted. Smith said DPHHS would rely on FNS for item definitions and would not proactively track every retailer without federal direction.
Committee members asked about waiver precedent and enforcement; witnesses cited Maine's experience, where a prior state waiver was denied. Retail and food-security witnesses raised state fiscal and administrative cost estimates from other states and urged caution. The sponsor said he favors amendments and is open to further work to make implementation feasible.
The hearing closed with the sponsor requesting that the committee consider the bill as a step toward aligning SNAP with nutrition goals; no committee vote was taken during the hearing.
