It’s common knowledge that soda and sugary drinks aren’t good for you.
Now a debate is playing out in Colorado, with policymakers set to weigh in Friday, April 3, over soft drinks and sugary drinks, government benefits and health.
The looming question is over whether people who get federal nutrition benefits, also called SNAP, should be allowed to use them to buy sugary drinks, like cola, soft drinks, sports drinks and energy drinks, which can contribute to a variety of health issues.
The debate was sparked in August, when Colorado received a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to restrict the use of SNAP benefits to buy those sweetened beverages. But it needed the blessing of the state human services board, which is appointed by the governor.
In March, after seven hours of passionate debate, the panel delayed a vote on the decision, which could affect about 600,000 Coloradans who receive SNAP benefits. That's about one in 10 people in the state. Dozens of people testified in person or online.
Personal testimony
Many spoke out against the restriction; some were SNAP recipients, detailing their own personal experience.
"People are saying, ‘get juice,’ (instead of a soda). Juice is an incredible luxury I could rarely afford, you know. It's once a month or once every other month. But it's hard when you're eating so cheaply,” said Ty Smith is a disability advocate based in La Junta, who specializes in mental health.
He told CPR in an interview that people who get SNAP benefits often consume sugary drinks as a coping tool, to deal with the many challenges of extreme poverty.
“If they strip us of our sugar as a coping skill, what are they gonna give us?” he said.
Some folks at the meeting who spoke against the change described it as a matter of human dignity, to be able to choose what you consume.
Advocacy groups like Hunger Free Colorado said the soda ban would be confusing for people who aren't fluent in English, and could backfire, as they might face embarrassment at the checkout if some of their purchases are denied. They say it could drive up food insecurity.
“Banning what people can get doesn't actually change the health outcomes,” said Raquel Lane Arellano of Hunger Free Colorado. “It has the real serious risk of making them use their benefits less.”
Rare treats
Several opponents also made the case that soda or juice are often treated as a rare treat by many low-income folks who rely on SNAP benefits. That includes children and families, as well as older adults.
“A lot of them, one soda a day is really all that they want. It's their one vice, their one pleasure,” said Jeanette Hensley with the Colorado Center for Aging. “We have a lot of 85-year-olds that really could use a Coca-Cola or, or a soda every once in a while.”
Some board members also questioned whether this would actually get people to change what they buy.
“We're saying ‘Hey, poor people, you be the be Guinea pigs to figure this out.’ Because we don't have any studies to support really what we're saying,” said the board's vice chair, attorney Mychael Dave, noting he didn’t think there was enough concrete research.
The waiver and health
Normally, decisions over benefits are handled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, but it has started letting states ban certain things if they ask permission to do so. And that’s what Colorado has done.
Gov. Jared Polis and his administration championed the request, saying it would improve the health of Coloradans and reduce obesity rates, diabetes and tooth decay.
“Sugary drinks are uniquely harmful to the health of the public,” said Dr. Ned Calonge, the state’s chief medical officer. “They are the No.1 source of added sugar to the American diet and at the same time bring almost no nutritional value.”
“I am in passionate support of this rule because it serves to improve the health of the populations that we serve,” said Kim Bimestefer, who leads the state agency that oversees Medicaid, which serves low-income Coloradans, many in diverse communities.
The board itself seemed to be listening to the public opposition and carefully weighing the pros and cons.
“I just don’t think there’s any complication with soda. It is addictive. It is harmful. There is zero nutritive benefit. And that's not what SNAP is for,” said board member Elizabeth Lowdermilk, who is a psychiatrist.
Another board member, former state senator John Kefalas, a Larimer County commissioner, warned about unintended consequences and cautioned against the state government “telling people what they can and cannot buy.”
Impact of sweetened drinks
A staff presentation at the start of the meeting highlighted the impact of sweetened beverages.
The drinks are the second-highest category of purchases with SNAP dollars, compared with the fifth-highest category of purchases for non-SNAP households, a staffer told committee members, citing a USDA report.
About 9.25% of SNAP dollars are spent on sweetened beverages, and those enrolled in the program spend more on them than on fruits or vegetables, a staffer told committee members.
Proponents also argue a ban could save the state money if it means Medicaid doesn’t have to spend as much treating the heart disease, diabetes and dental problems linked to sugary drinks.
The board ultimately voted 8-1 to delay the decision until its next meeting.
The state is looking at other potential changes to the program as well -- to allow people to use SNAP cards to buy hot food in grocery stores, like rotisserie chickens, and to more easily use them at restaurants and farmers' markets.
What is allowed and what would be banned
Beverages that would still be allowed for purchase using SNAP:
- Any unsweetened beverage, such as bottled water and seltzer.
- Any beverage that contains milk or milk products, i.e, soy milk, coconut milk, rice milk, almond milk, chocolate milk, strawberry milk, etc.
- Products commonly referred to as “infant formula” or “baby formula.”
- Beverages consisting of at least 50 percent natural fruit or vegetable juice by volume.
- Electrolyte or other drink packets that you mix yourself.
