An Alabama House committee advanced a bill that would prohibit the use of Supplemental Nutrition Program benefits on soda and candy on Wednesday.
Senate Bill 57, sponsored by Senator Arthur Orr, R-Decatur, and passed by the Senate on March 4, would require the Alabama Department of Human Resources to request a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition Service to exclude candy and soda from eligible food for SNAP benefits.
The substitute version of the bill advanced by the House Ways and Means General Fund Committee on Wednesday removes a previous version’s requirement that the Department of Revenue shall coordinate with SNAP-authorized retailers to implement the waiver by identifying excluded products and providing guidance on SNAP-ineligible purchases.
Under the Ways and Means Committee-approved version of the legislation, the Department of Human Resources would be mandated to publish a list of the items included and excluded from SNAP online, and provide guidance on SNAP-eligible and -ineligible items.
The committee also adopted an amendment to set the waiver’s implementation date as no sooner than April 1, 2027.
Representative Reed Ingram, R-Pike Road, spoke before the committee in favor of the legislation, arguing the bill will help improve Alabamians’ health and lower obesity rates.
Ingram told the committee that he would not support a vote on the bill from the full House until he has worked with the House Committee on Rules to ensure the bill would not add to Alabama’s general fund budget.
“That’s my commitment, until we get it, like, to where it’s not gonna cost the taxpayers any money, or out of our budget,” Ingram said. “We’re gonna work that out. And that’s my commitment to DHR and to Revenue. Of course, Revenue’s been taken out.”
According to the fiscal note released on a previous version of SB57, the Department of Revenue provisions, now stricken from the bill, would increase the department’s financial obligations by an estimated $10.6 million annually.
The Legislative Services Agency, additionally, estimated that the bill will increase administrative costs for DHR by requiring the department to request approval of the USDA waiver.
“I’m going to, you know, work on the bill continuously before we get on the House floor with it, and that’s my commitment to the chairman, but it’s about saving lives, and it’s about making our state healthier,” Reed said.
Committee Democrats voiced concerns that the legislation would restrict SNAP recipients’ purchasing power, expressing skepticism that Orr’s legislation would genuinely promote healthy living.
Representative Laura Hall, D-Huntsville, expressed disappointment that the bill will restrict items SNAP recipients are eligible to purchase using their benefits, while not providing statutes that establish programs to promote healthy eating.
“If we’re trying to be healthy, if we’re having a large amount of money to spend, wouldn’t it make sense that we would be providing an opportunity for eating healthier?” Hall asked Ingram.
Representative Pebblin Warren, D-Tuskegee, described the legislation as “discrimination against SNAP recipients,” expressing doubt that the bill will be effective in improving health outcomes across the state.
“I don’t think you’re gonna get the results that you expect to come out of this by restricting it for one group of people,” she said.
“I don’t know if anybody else in here has ever been poor before. But sometimes, poor people just want to reward their kids with something,” Representative Napoleon Bracy, D-Prichard, added.
“It’s almost like we’re policing their basket. You know, this little poor kid worked hard, and they made straight A’s, and mom wants to get them a Snickers, and it’s the only way that she can get it,” he continued.
The USDA waiver program that SB57 seeks to utilize was established by the Trump administration to allow states “greater flexibility to manage their programs.”
Waivers have been approved restricting the purchase of soft drinks and certain food items through SNAP in 22 U.S. states.
Committee Chair Representative Rex Reynolds, R-Huntsville, highlighted a lawsuit challenging SNAP restrictions enacted in Colorado, Iowa, Nebraska, Tennessee and West Virginia, claiming the waivers are part of a USDA effort to undermine the SNAP program.
Despite motioning to advance the SB57, Reynolds cautioned against seeking a House vote on the legislation until questions about its financial impacts and administration are resolved.
“While I agree with the nutritional aspects of this bill, we as a state—we are absolutely not ready to move forward on this,” Reynolds said. “There’s just too many issues. We’re seeing lawsuits in other states. A lot of that’s got to do with the administrative ability to move this bill forward, and let’s focus on this bill a little bit forward, and try not to make those mistakes.”
