OPINION:
Americans have a problem with obesity and, counterintuitively, food insecurity. Instead of doing something about it, Washington’s premier nutrition program spends billions a year making both predicaments worse.
The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, commonly known as food stamps, is up for renewal as a component of the omnibus farm bill. As Congress races to reauthorize spending ahead of the Oct. 1 fiscal-year deadline, it ought to give a hefty preference toward healthy food choices that feed recipients without fattening them.
America is getting chubbier. Between 1999 and 2021, the proportion of U.S. adults classified as obese climbed from 30.5% to 41.9%, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. Those who struggle to afford groceries, low-income adults, faced an obesity rate of 43.9%.
Paradoxically, despite the epidemic of overeating, as many as 23% suffer from rising rates of food insecurity. The Department of Agriculture defines this as “a lack of consistent access to enough food for every person in a household to live an active, healthy life.”
The “active, healthy life” qualifier means those with plenty of food available to them become food insecure if they opt to feast on such unhealthful fare as greasy burgers and fries.
Even while obesity and food insecurity intensify, federal spending for food steps has ballooned in recent years, from $63 billion in 2019 to a projected $145 billion for fiscal 2023, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The avalanche of grocery money collected by 42 million Americans has contributed to a 15% rise in the cost of food during the Biden administration, and the inflationary spiral is pressuring the feds to further increase subsidies to impoverished Americans.
Tax dollars, though, should not be wasted on food choices that contribute to obesity. Country singer Oliver Anthony made that point recently with his hit song, “Rich Men North of Richmond”: “God, if you’re 5 foot 3 and you’re 300 pounds, taxes ought not to pay for your bags of Fudge Rounds.”
Obviously not.
The double trouble of Americans expanding their waistlines while falling into food insecurity has the look of widespread addiction to poor nutrition. And Uncle Sam is feeding the habit by allowing food stamps to pay for most kinds of food except hot items as well as nonalcoholic drinks like sugary soda. It’s an abuse of tax money.
Fortunately, there are ways of encouraging better food choices. A study published in the American Heart Association’s journal Circulation found people at risk of cardiovascular disease boosted their consumption of fruits and vegetables by participating in “produce prescription programs.”
Nine programs with a total of 3,800 participants — half of whom were food insecure — were given an average of $63 a month to buy fresh produce. After six months, the study found, participants showed “improved body mass index, blood sugar and blood pressure levels.”
Consumption of junk food could be curtailed were Congress to take a page from such programs and direct a portion of the funds loaded onto SNAP’s electronic benefits transfer cards for the purchase of only sensible choices like produce. Those who insist on sticking with unhealthful food, of course, would retain the freedom to do so — on their own dime.
Please read our comment policy before commenting.