Oklahoma seeks to exclude soda, candy from food stamp purchases
Stitt made the announcement during an event at the Capitol with U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. as part of the 'Make America Healthy Again' initiative.
Oklahoma would join several other states that already have sought federal waivers from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to prohibit the purchase of items such as soda and energy drinks under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.
'If you want to drink a bottled soda, you should be able to have that right,' Kennedy said. 'But the federal government should not be paying for it with taxpayer money.'
SNAP is a roughly $100 billion program that serves about 42 million Americans and is run by the U.S. Agriculture Department and administered through states.
Stitt also signed an executive order on Thursday calling into question the appropriateness of mandatory fluoridation of public drinking water and the use of commonly used artificial food coloring, including Red Dye 40. Under the order, the Oklahoma State Department of Health and Department of Equality are directed to immediately stop any endorsement of fluoridation of the public water supply. Although Stitt said each local municipality will still have the autonomy to make a decision to continue the practice, which has long been encouraged as a means of promoting dental health.
Under the order, the two state agencies are directed to conduct a comprehensive review of water fluoridation and make recommendations for transitioning away from the practice.
Wednesdays
Columnist Jen Zoratti looks at what's next in arts, life and pop culture.
Stitt also said he would direct agencies that provide meals, including prisons and public schools, to discontinue the use of artificial dyes in food.
'Today we're going to get the ball rolling on making Oklahoma healthy again,' Stitt said.
Hashtags
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Canada News.Net
a day ago
- Canada News.Net
Gallup: U.S. drinking rate at all-time low, health concerns rising
WASHINGTON, D.C.: Alcohol consumption in the United States has dropped to its lowest level since Gallup began tracking the trend in 1939, with more Americans now viewing even moderate drinking as harmful to their health. Gallup's annual Consumption Habits survey found that just 54 percent of adults say they drink alcohol, down from 58 percent in 2024 and 62 percent in 2023. The share is lower than the previous record low of 55 percent set in 1958. The decline comes amid a years-long slide in alcohol sales following a pandemic-era spike, as inflation and high interest rates squeeze budgets. At the same time, public health officials are issuing stronger warnings that even small amounts of alcohol can be linked to at least seven types of cancer. For the first time, a majority of Americans, 53 percent, now believe moderate drinking is harmful for health, up from 45 percent last year. Gallup also found fewer Americans drinking regularly. Only 24 percent said they had consumed alcohol in the previous day, a record low, while 40 percent said it had been more than a week since their last drink — the highest share since 2000. Average weekly consumption has also fallen sharply. Over the past seven days, drinkers reported an average of 2.8 drinks, down from 3.8 last year and well below the 2003 peak of 5.1 drinks per week. The current figure is the lowest since 1996. Lydia Saad, Gallup's director of social research, said the trend does not appear to be driven by people switching to other substances, such as recreational marijuana, which is now legal in about half of U.S. states. Gallup has measured Americans' drinking patterns for 85 years and tracked attitudes toward the health effects of moderate drinking since 2001.
Toronto Sun
a day ago
- Toronto Sun
GOLDBERG: Trump's 'Mission Accomplished' tariff hype is just that
U.S. President Donald Trump boards Air Force One on August 15, 2025 at Joint Base Andrews, Maryland. President Trump is traveling to Anchorage, Alaska, for peace talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin on the war in Ukraine. Photo by Andrew Harnik / Getty Images On May 1, 2003, George W. Bush announced, 'Major combat operations in Iraq have ended.' He was standing below a giant banner that read, 'Mission Accomplished.' At the risk of understating the matter, subsequent events didn't cooperate. However, it took some time for this to be widely accepted. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account We're in a similar place when it comes to President Donald Trump's experiment with a new global trading order. 'Tariffs are making our country Strong and Rich!!!' proclaims Trump, making him not only the first Republican president in living memory to brag about raising taxes on Americans, but also the first to insist that raising taxes on Americans makes us richer. MAGA's mission-accomplished groupthink relies primarily on three arguments. The first is that Trump has successfully concluded a slew of beneficial trade deals. The truth is that some of those deals are simply 'frameworks' that will take a long time to be ironed out. But Trump got the headlines he wanted. The second argument is a kind of populism-infused sleight of hand. The 'experts' — their scare quotes, not mine — are wrong once again. Your noon-hour look at what's happening in Toronto and beyond. By signing up you consent to receive the above newsletter from Postmedia Network Inc. Please try again This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The White House social media account crows, 'In April, 'experts' called tariffs 'the biggest policy mistake in 95 years.' By July, they generated OVER $100 BILLION in revenue. Facts expose the haters: tariffs WORK. Trust in Trump.' But the high-fivers are leaving things out. The most dire predictions of economic catastrophe were based on the scheme Trump announced on April 2, a.k.a. 'Liberation Day.' Trump quickly backed off that plan ('chickened out' in Wall Street parlance ) in response to a bond and stock market implosion. Saying the experts were wrong under those circumstances is like saying experts opposed to defenestration were wrong when they successfully convinced a man not to jump out a window. The third argument, made by the White House and many others — that tariffs are working because they're raising money — is a response to a claim no one made. To my knowledge, no expert claimed tariffs wouldn't raise money. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. The estimates of these revenues from Trump World are stratospheric. Commerce Secretary Howard Lutnick expects somewhere between $700 billion and $1 trillion per year. Last month, the government collected $29 billion. Likely, this number will significantly increase as more tariffs come online and businesses run down the inventory they stockpiled earlier this year in anticipation of more tariffs to come. Normally, Republicans don't exult over massive revenues from tax hikes. But Trump's defenders get around this problem by insisting that money is 'pouring' and 'flowing' into America from someplace else. Tariff revenue is indeed pouring into the Treasury, but that money is coming out of American bank accounts, because American importers pay the tariff. Even Treasury Secretary Scott Bessent cannot deny this when pressed. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. So yes, tariffs are 'working' the way they're supposed to; the problem is Trump thinks tariffs work differently than they do. It's possible some foreign exporters might lower prices to maintain market share and some American businesses might absorb the costs for now to avoid sticker shock for inflation-beleaguered consumers, but what revenue is generated still comes from Americans. Ultimately, it means higher prices paid here, reduced profits for businesses here or reduced U.S. trade overall. Sometimes, when pressed, defenders of the administration will concede the true source of the revenues, but then they say the pain is necessary to force manufacturers and other businesses to build and produce in the United States. It's a backdoor industrial policy masquerading as trade policy. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. That, too, might 'work.' But all of this will take time, no matter what. And, if it works, that will have costs, too. Manufacturing in America is more expensive and that's why we manufacture so much stuff abroad in the first place. If this 'reshoring' happens, our goods will be more expensive, and less money will 'pour in' from tariffs. It's difficult to exaggerate how well-understood all of this was on the American right until very recently. But the need to grab any argument available to declare Trump's experiment a success has a lot of people not only abandoning their previous dogma but leaping to the conclusion that the dogma was wrong all along. Maybe it was, though I don't think so. The evidence so far suggests that problems are looming. The dollar is weakening. Prices continue to rise. The job market is reeling. The stock market (an unreliable metric, according to MAGA, when it plummeted after Liberation Day) is holding on, thanks to tech stocks. The truth is, we won't have real evidence for a while. It's worth remembering that Americans don't live by headlines and press releases and they don't live in the macro economy either. Declaring 'Mission Accomplished' for the macro economy won't convince people they're better off in their own micro-economies when they're not. Crime Toronto & GTA Toronto Blue Jays Sunshine Girls Toronto Blue Jays
Toronto Star
2 days ago
- Toronto Star
Trump tax law could cause Medicare cuts if Congress doesn't act, CBO says
WASHINGTON (AP) — The federal budget deficits caused by President Donald Trump's tax and spending law could trigger automatic cuts to Medicare if Congress does not act, the nonpartisan Congressional Budget Office reported Friday. The CBO estimates that Medicare, the federal health insurance program for Americans over age 65, could potentially see as much as $491 billion from 2027 to 2034 if Congress does not act to mitigate a 2010 law that forces across-the-board cuts to many federal programs once legislation increases the federal deficit. The latest report from CBO showed how Trump's signature tax and spending law could put new pressure on federal programs that are bedrocks of the American social safety net.
