What can you buy with SNAP benefits?

 

A friend on Facebook made this comment:


Does the challenge not include detergent, toilet paper, shampoo, and such? My main expenses are those items at the grocery store.







In answer to the question, according to the United States Department of Agriculture's Food and Nutrition Service, the eligible food items include:

• Foods for the household to eat, such as
• breads and cereals;
• fruits and vegetables;
• meats, fish, and poultry; and 
• dairy products. 

• Seeds and plants which produce food for the household to eat. 

It does not include alcohol, tobacco, nonfood items (like household supplies), vitamins or medicines, food that will be eaten in the store, or hot foods.

Currently, any food even junk food is eligible as long as it is not hot food or sold for on-premise consumption.  They must get questions about why SNAP benefits cover junk food because they purposefully mention that changing the definition of food (i.e. to not include junk food) would require action by a member of Congress.  When Congress has attempted to place limits on what food could be purchased under the SNAP program in the past, they have always concluded that limitations would be too "administratively costly and burdensome".  A longer explanation can be found in the document "Implications of Restricting the Use of Food Stamp Benefits - Summary".  Basically it boils down to four reasons:

1. There is no way to qualify a food as good or bad, healthy or unhealthy. 
2. Restrictions would raise administrative costs of the program.
3. Restrictions would not change the purchasing of food stamp participants.
4. There is no evidence that food stamp participation contributes to poor diet quality or obesity.

I am fairly certain I have a problem with all 4 of those assertions, but I'll address the first one directly now.  There is most certainly a way to qualify a food as good or bad, healthy or unhealthy.  The FDA is doing just that with their move to ban trans fats.  The consumer update talks about trans fats as being unsafe - is that different from unhealthy?  They are unsafe because they have been linked to an increase in coronary heart disease.  In my mind, they do not produce a healthy effect on the body, so that makes them unhealthy.  Furthermore, it seems to me that the government through the USDA labels some foods as healthy with its dietary guidelines.  The idea is that there are certain foods which constitute a healthy diet (and are therefore presumably healthy).  I have to point out the local coalition, the Tweens Nutrition and Fitness Coalition, with which I have worked also sets out fairly precise guidelines for healthy snacks in their healthy snack program, Better Bites.  It does not seem that difficult to qualify a food as healthy or unhealthy.

Maybe the real issue is the good or bad part.  My guess is that goes to the heart of what Marion Nestle has been arguing in her book, Food Politics, for years.  Food is big business, and big food companies will not give up the fight quietly if their products are deemed less healthy than others.  This happened conspicuously with the dairy industry and the beef industry.  Big food companies have big money, and politicians respond to where their money comes from.  The government cannot label a food "bad" without considerable push back.

Now back to the original question, so how does one get help with those household supplies if one cannot afford them?  That I don't know.  Anyone else?