This docum ent does not reflect the intent or official position of the bill sponsor or House of Representatives.
STORAGE NAME: h0581c.HHS
DATE: 3/17/2023
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES STAFF ANALYSIS
BILL #: HM 581 Prohibit Use of SNAP Benefits to Purchase Soft Drinks
SPONSOR(S): Massullo
TIED BILLS: IDEN./SIM. BILLS: SM 814
REFERENCE ACTION ANALYST STAFF DIRECTOR or
BUDGET/POLICY CHIEF
1) Children, Families & Seniors Subcommittee 12 Y, 6 N Osborne Brazzell
2) Health & Human Services Committee 20 Y, 1 N Osborne Calamas
SUMMARY ANALYSIS
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) offers nutrition assistance to eligible, low-income
individuals and families in the form of funds to purchase eligible food. The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS),
under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), administers SNAP, and the Florida Department of Children
and Families (DCF) distributes the benefits.
Eligible foods for SNAP are any food or food product intended for human consumption except alcoholic
beverages, tobacco, hot foods, and hot food products prepared for immediate consumption, with some
exceptions. Eligible foods also include junk foods such as soft drinks and candy.
Soft drinks are flavored, non-alcoholic beverages that are sweetened with sugar or artificial sweeteners. Soft
drinks are typically nutrient-poor and high in calories. Soft drink consumption may be associated with a variety
of adverse health outcomes and nutritional deficiencies due to excess calories and large amounts of rapidly
absorbable sugars. Research has tied soft drink consumption to an increased likelihood of stroke, heart
disease, high blood pressure, and diabetes.
HM 581 urges Congress to prohibit the use of SNAP benefits to purchase soft drinks.
Legislative memorials are not subject to the Governor’s veto power and are not presented to the Governor for
review. Memorials have no force of law, as they are mechanisms for formally petitioning the federal
government to act on a particular subject.
This memorial has no fiscal impact on state or local governments. STORAGE NAME: h0581c.HHS PAGE: 2
DATE: 3/17/2023
FULL ANALYSIS
I. SUBSTANTIVE ANALYSIS
A. EFFECT OF PROPOSED CHANGES:
Background
Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)
The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), administers
the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).
1
SNAP is the nation’s largest domestic food
and nutrition program for low-income Americans, offering nutritional assistance to millions of individuals
and families each year through the provision of funds that can be used to purchase “eligible foods.”
2
In
fiscal year 2020, SNAP provided assistance to approximately 39.9 million people living in 20.5 million
households across the US.
3
SNAP benefits support individual households by reducing the effects of
poverty and increasing food security while supporting economic activity across communities as SNAP
benefits directly benefit farmers, retailers, food processors and distributors, and their employees.
4
SNAP is a federal program administered at the state level in Florida by the Department of Children and
Families (DCF). DCF determines and monitors eligibility and disperses benefits to SNAP participants.
The state and federal governments share the administrative costs of the program, while the federal
government funds 100% of the benefit amount received by participants.
5
Federal laws, regulations, and
waivers provide states with various policy options to better target benefits to those most in need,
streamline program administration and field operations, and coordinate SNAP activities with those of
other programs.
6
SNAP Eligibility and Benefits
To be eligible for SNAP, households must meet the following criteria: (1) gross monthly income must be
at or below 130 percent of the poverty level; (2) net income must be equal to or less than the poverty
level; and (3) assets must be below the limits set based on household composition.
7
As of January
2023, 3,220,757 individuals, including 1,262,174 children and 1,017,860 elderly or disabled individuals,
were receiving SNAP benefits in Florida.
8
1
The Food Stamp Program (FSP) originated in 1939 as a pilot program for certain individuals to buy stamps equal to their normal food
expenditures: for every $1 of orange stamps purchased, people received 50 cents worth of blue stamps, which could be used to buy
surplus food. The FSP expanded nationwide in 1974. Under the federal welfare reform legislation of 1996, Congress enacted major
changes to the FSP, including limiting eligibility for certain adults who did not meet work requirements. The Food and Nutrition Act of
2008 renamed the FSP the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and implemented priorities to strengthen program
integrity; simplify program administration; maintain states’ flexibility in how they administer their programs; and improve access to
SNAP. See a Short History of SNAP, US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, available at
https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/short-history-snap (last visited February 24, 2023).
2
US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Overview. Available
at https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap/ (last visited February 24,
2023).
3
US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Characteristics of SNAP Households: FY 2020 and Early Months of the
COVID-19 Pandemic: Characteristics of SNAP Households, available at https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/characteristics-snap-
households-fy-2020-and-early-months-covid-19-pandemic-characteristics (last visited February 24, 2023).
4
US Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Economic Linkages.
Available at https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-snap/economic-
linkages/ (last visited February 24, 2023).
5
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, Policy Basics: The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). Available at
https://www.cbpp.org/research/food-assistance/the-supplemental-nutrition-assistance-program-
snap#:~:text=The%20federal%20government%20pays%20the,the%20states%2C%20which%20operate%20it . (last visited February
24, 2023).
6
US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, State Options Report. Available at
https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/waivers/state-options-report (last visited February 24, 2023).
7
US Department of Agriculture, Indicators of Diet Quality, Nutrition, and Health for Americans by Program Participation Status, 2011-
2016: SNAP Report. Final Report (2021). Available at https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/Indicators-Diet-
QualitySNAP.pdf (last visited March 1, 2023).
8
Email from Chad Corcoran, Deputy Director of Legislative Affairs, Department of Children and Families, Re: SNAP Participants
(March 2, 2023). On file with the Children, Families, and Seniors Subcommittee. STORAGE NAME: h0581c.HHS PAGE: 3
DATE: 3/17/2023
The Thrifty Food Plan, a minimal cost food plan reflecting current nutrition standards and guidance, the
nutrient content and cost of food, and consumption patterns of low-income households, was developed
by the USDA to serve as the basis for the determination of SNAP benefits. SNAP benefits are intended
to supplement food purchases made with a household’s own income; as such, the formula used to
determine SNAP benefits assumes that a household will spend 30 percent of their net income on food
purchases. The benefit allotted to SNAP households is equal to the difference between the maximum
allotment for their household size and 30 percent of their net income. The structure of this formula
ensures that the lowest income households receive the most benefits.
9
Eligible Foods
The Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 defines eligible food under SNAP as any food or food product
intended for human consumption except alcoholic beverages, tobacco, hot foods, and hot food
products prepared for immediate consumption, with some exceptions.
10
Nonfood items such as pet foods, soaps, paper products, medicines and vitamins, household
supplies, grooming items, and cosmetics are ineligible for purchase with SNAP benefits.
11
When considering the eligibility of vitamins and supplements, power bars, energy drinks and other
branded products, the primary determinant is the type of product label chosen by the manufacturer
to conform to Food and Drug Administration (FDA) guidelines:
Items that carry a nutrition facts label are eligible foods.
Items that carry a supplement facts label are classified by the FDA as supplements and
are therefore not eligible.
12
Foods Purchased by SNAP Households
In 2016, the USDA published a report assessing the types of foods SNAP households purchased as
compared to non-SNAP households. The report analyzed purchases made in 2011, a year in which
SNAP recipients redeemed over $71 billion in SNAP benefits across 230,000 SNAP-authorized stores.
An analysis of similar scale has not been conducted on more recent purchasing data.
13
With respect to SNAP households, the data represents all food purchases made rather than only the
foods purchased specifically with SNAP benefits. The data could not differentiate between items
purchased with SNAP benefits and those purchased with other funds; most SNAP households use a
combination of SNAP benefits and their own funds when making their food purchases.
The study found that the expenditure patterns of SNAP and non-SNAP households were similar:
Approximately 40 cents of every dollar of food expenditures were spent on basic items such as
meat, fruits, vegetables, milk, eggs, and bread.
o 41 cents of every dollar for SNAP households.
o 44 cents of every dollar for non-SNAP households.
Approximately 20 cents out of every dollar were spent on sweetened beverages, desserts, salty
snacks, candy and sugar.
o 23 cents of every dollar for SNAP households.
9
US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Nutrition Assistance Program Report: Barriers That Constrain the
Adequacy of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program Allotments: Survey Findings, p. 9. Available at https://fns-
prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/SNAP-Barriers-SurveyFindings.pdf (last visited March 1, 2023).
10
7 USC § 2012(k); see also 7 CFR § 271.2.
11
Id.
12
US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Food Determinations – Eligible Food (Excluding Meal Services). Available
at https://www.fns.usda.gov/snap/food-determinations-eligible-foods (last visited February 27, 2023).
13
US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Foods Typically Purchased by Supplemental Nutrition Program (SNAP)
Households (2016). Available at https://www.fns.usda.gov/sites/default/files/ops/SNAPFoodsTypicallyPurchased.pdf (last visited
February 27, 2023). STORAGE NAME: h0581c.HHS PAGE: 4
DATE: 3/17/2023
o 20 cents of every dollar for non-SNAP households.
Approximately 40 cents of every dollar were spent on a variety of items such as cereal,
prepared foods, dairy products, rice, and beans.
14
SNAP households spent almost ten percent of their food expenditures on sweetened beverages, which
was almost double what those households spent on fruit.
15
Health Effects of Soft Drinks
Soft drinks are flavored, non-alcoholic beverages that are sweetened with sugar or artificial sweeteners.
Soft drinks are typically nutrient poor and high in calories. Soft drink consumption has been associated
with a variety of adverse health outcomes and nutritional deficiencies due to excess calories and large
amounts of rapidly absorbable sugars. Increased soft drink intake is directly associated with increased
caloric intake. Some nutritional deficiencies may be tied to increased soft drink consumption; calcium
intake, in particular, has been shown to decrease with increased soft drink consumption.
16
Soft drink consumption has been associated with increased body weight and risk for developing
diabetes in some studies. The relationship between body weight and soft drink consumption is tenuous,
with study outcomes varying significantly based on methodology. Overall, soft drink intake may be
linked with an increase in body weight over time.
17
At a national level, a high rate of soft drink
consumption is significantly linked to obesity and diabetes.
18
Soft drink consumption has also been
directly tied to an increased risk of developing type 2 diabetes in women.
19
High intake of soft drinks, sweetened artificially or with sugar, is associated with metabolic syndrome, a
cluster of conditions that increase the risk of heart disease, stroke, and diabetes.
20
Research also
suggests that soft drink intake directly contributes to a greater risk of stroke. It is unclear, however,
whether the relationship between the consumption of soft drinks and adverse health outcomes is direct
and independent, or if soft drink consumption acts as a surrogate for other adverse health behaviors.
21
Among adolescents, consumption of sugar- or artificially-sweetened soft drinks is associated with
increased blood pressure.
22
The increase in blood pressure associated with soft drink consumption
among adolescents is tied to the high amount of sodium, sweeteners, and caffeine that is found in soft
drinks.
23
Some studies have shown that consumption of diet soda in particular can be associated with
increased blood pressure among adolescents.
24
Restricting SNAP Eligible Foods
14
Id.
15
Id.
16
Vartanian, L., Schwartz, M., Brownell, K. Effects of Soft Drink Consumption on Nutrition and Health: A Systematic Review and Meta-
Analysis. American Journal of Public Health. (2011). Available at https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/full/10.2105/AJPH.2005.083782
(last visited February 27, 2023).
17
Id.
18
Basu, S., McKee, M., Galea, G., Stuckler, D. Relationship of Soft Drink Consumption to Global Overweight, Obesity, and Diabetes: A
Cross-National Analysis of 75 Countries. American Journal of Public Health. (2013). Available at
https://ajph.aphapublications.org/doi/abs/10.2105/ajph.2012.300974 (last visited February 27, 2023).
19
Schulze, M., et al. Sugar-sweetened Beverages, Weight Gain, and Incidence of Type 2 Diabetes in Young and Middle-Aged Women.
JAMA. (2004). Available at https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/article-abstract/199317 (last visited February 27, 2023).
20
Narain, A., Kwok, C., Mamas, M. Soft drink intake and the risk of metabolic syndrome: A systematic review and meta-analysis. The
International Journal of Clinical Practice. (2017). Available at https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1111/ijcp.12927 (last visited February
27, 2023).
21
Narain, A., Kwok, C., Mamas, M. Soft drinks and sweetened beverages and the risk of cardiovascular disease and mortality: a
systematic review and meta-analysis. The International Journal of Clinical Practice. (2016). Available at
https://onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/full/10.1111/ijcp.12841 (last visited February 27, 2023).
22
Souza, B., Cunha, D., Pereira, R., Sichieri, R. Soft drink consumption, mainly diet ones, is associated with increased blood pressure
in adolescents. Journal of Hypertension. Available at https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/26682780/ (last visited February 27, 2023).
23
Savoca, M., Evans, C., Wilson, M. The Association of Caffeinated Beverages with Blood Pressure in Adolescents. JAMA Pediatrics.
(2004). Available at https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jamapediatrics/article-abstract/485708 (last visited February 27, 2023).
24
Supra, note 222. STORAGE NAME: h0581c.HHS PAGE: 5
DATE: 3/17/2023
States and local governments have proposed prohibiting SNAP participants from purchasing foods with
limited nutritional values with their benefits as a mechanism to promote healthy choices; however, the
USDA has identified four key problems with the rationale, feasibility, and potential effectiveness of
these proposals:
No clear standards exist for defining foods as good or bad, or healthy or not healthy;
Implementation of food restrictions would increase program complexity and costs;
Restrictions may be ineffective in changing the purchases of food stamp participants; and
No evidence exists that food stamp participation contributes to poor diet quality or obesity.
25
The USDA has denied every request from states and local governments to implement waivers that
would allow them to adopt their own standards for allowable foods under SNAP.
26
In rejecting them,
the USDA has noted that state options are problematic because there is no scientific basis for
allowing nutrition standards to vary from place to place and that variation in state requirements would
complicate industry compliance and increase the cost of doing business.
27
Legislative Memorials
Legislative memorials are not subject to the Governor’s veto power and are not presented to the
Governor for review. Memorials have no force of law, as they are mechanisms for formally
petitioning the federal government to act on a particular subject.
Effect of the Memorial
HM 581 urges Congress to prohibit the use of SNAP benefits to purchase flavored carbonated
beverages sweetened with natural or artificial sweeteners, also known as “soft drinks.”
HM 581 requires the Secretary of State to distribute the memorial to the President of the United States,
the President of the United States Senate, the Speaker of the United States House of Representatives,
and each member of the Florida delegation to the United States Congress.
B. SECTION DIRECTORY:
Not applicable.
II. FISCAL ANALYSIS & ECONOMIC IMPACT STATEMENT
A. FISCAL IMPACT ON STATE GOVERNMENT:
25
US Department of Agriculture, Food and Nutrition Service, Implications of Restricting the Use of Food Stamp Benefits (2007).
Available at https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/FSPFoodRestrictions.pdf (last visited February 27, 2023).
26
In 2004, and several times since, Minnesota sought a waiver to prevent the purchase of junk food with SNAP benefits.
The USDA denied the waiver, which focused on candy and soda, among other foods, stating that it was based on questionable merits.
In 2010, New York City sought a federal waiver to prohibit the purchase of soda and other sweetened beverages with SNAP benefits for
two years. The waiver was ultimately denied by the USDA due to the logistical difficulty associated with implementing the plan.
Anemona Hartocollis, The New York Times (2010). New York Asks to Bar Use of Food Stamps to Buy Sodas. Available at
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/10/07/nyregion/07stamps.html#:~:text=Bloomberg%20sought%20federal%20permission%20on,soda%2
0or%20other%20sugared%20drinks. (last visited February 27, 2023). See also Patrick McGeehan, New York Times (2011). U.S.
Rejects Mayor’s Plan to Ban Use of Food Stamps to Buy Soda. Available at https://www.nytimes.com/2011/08/20/nyregion/ban-on-
using-food-stamps-to-buy-soda-rejected-by-usda.html#:~:text=Federal%20officials%20on%20Friday%20rejected,Mr. (last visited March
1, 2023). Since 2013, the USDA has denied Maine’s repeated requests to ban the purchase of junk foods with SNAP benefits. In 2016,
Maine’s Governor threatened to implement reform unilaterally or cease the state’s administration of the program if the USDA did not
allow it to restrict purchases. Portland Press Herald (2016). Gov. LePage’s threat risks suspension of food stamp assistance. Available
at https://www.pressherald.com/2016/06/21/spokesperson-says-gov-lepage-has-threatened-to-end-food-stamp-program/ (last visited
February 27, 2023). The USDA again denied Maine’s request to ban the use of SNAP benefits to purchase junk food in 2018 under the
Trump Administration. The Washington Post (2018). Why the Trump Administration Won’t let Maine Ban Soda and Candy from Food
Stamps. Available at https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/01/20/why-the-trump-administration-wont-let-maine-ban-
soda-and-candy-from-food-stamps/ (last visited February 27, 2023).
27
Supra, note 25. STORAGE NAME: h0581c.HHS PAGE: 6
DATE: 3/17/2023
1. Revenues:
None.
2. Expenditures:
None.
B. FISCAL IMPACT ON LOCAL GOVERNMENTS:
1. Revenues:
None.
2. Expenditures:
None.
C. DIRECT ECONOMIC IMPACT ON PRIVATE SECTOR:
None.
D. FISCAL COMMENTS:
None.
III. COMMENTS
A. CONSTITUTIONAL ISSUES:
1. Applicability of Municipality/County Mandates Provision:
Not applicable. This memorial does not appear to affect county or municipal governments.
2. Other:
None.
B. RULE-MAKING AUTHORITY:
No rulemaking is necessary to implement the memorial.
C. DRAFTING ISSUES OR OTHER COMMENTS:
None.
IV. AMENDMENTS/COMMITTEE SUBSTITUTE CHANGES