logo
Red states lead push for MAHA soda bans

Red states lead push for MAHA soda bans

Yahooa day ago
Republican-led states are leading the charge to ban soda and candy from their food assistance programs, as Robert F. Kennedy Jr.'s 'Make America Healthy Again' (MAHA) movement flips traditional partisanship on its head.
Colorado is the only blue state to seek and have a soda ban waiver approved, and the only waiver state to propose expanding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits in conjunction with limiting its scope.
Both parties at times have expressed interest in eliminating soda from SNAP, but the Trump administration is the first to encourage states to do so.
Recent attempts at soda regulation have mostly been concentrated in blue cities. Former New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg (D) infamously tried to ban the sale of supersized sugary drinks in 2013, prompting Republicans to decry his 'nanny state' tactics.
With the healthy-eating push now under the MAHA branding, GOP states are jumping aboard.
Kennedy doesn't run SNAP — that falls under the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). But as the face of MAHA, Kennedy has been alongside Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins to promote soda and candy bans.
In just the first six months of the new administration, 12 state waivers have been approved by the USDA that restrict SNAP recipients from purchasing some combination of soft drinks, sugary beverages, energy drinks and candy
'We all believe in free choice, we live in a democracy. … If you want to buy sugary soda, you ought to be able to do that. The U.S. taxpayer should not pay for it,' Kennedy said during a recent press conference.
The states that have claimed waivers are Arkansas, Colorado, Florida, Idaho, Indiana, Iowa, Louisiana, Nebraska, Oklahoma, Texas, Utah and West Virginia.
SNAP dollars can be used to buy any food or beverage from a grocery store except alcohol, nutritional supplements or hot food. The idea of policing the shopping carts of low-income Americans has never sat well with anti-hunger advocates, who argue it's paternalistic and stigmatizing for low-income Americans.
Additionally, while federal data show sugary drinks are the leading source of added sugars in the American diet, nutrition experts said there is limited evidence that shows SNAP soda bans lead to better health outcomes.
There's even less evidence that banning candy and dessert foods from SNAP can positively impact a person's diet.
'Claiming that implementing these restrictions will absolutely lead to a curb in diet-related diseases, you cannot confidently say that. There is no evidence to support that statement,' said Joelle Johnson, the deputy director for Healthy Food Access at the Center for Science in the Public Interest, a group that advocates for stronger nutrition regulation.
The SNAP waivers are for pilot programs only, so they won't immediately lead to long-term policy changes. They are a chance for states to conduct the research that's been missing — if they want to find out.
Barry Popkin, a professor of nutrition at the University of North Carolina School of Global Public Health, said he thinks waivers are toothless ways for states to show their MAHA bona fides.
'None of these states are doing more than pleasing MAHA, doing what's easy. They can do this internally. They don't have to go to the politicians [and pass laws],' Popkin said, 'Waivers do nothing except allow a state to say you can't buy junk food.'
Experts said historically, Republicans who have wanted to ban soda from SNAP also viewed it as a way to trim spending on the program. Some advocates continue to view the latest push with skepticism.
One of the groups pushing hard for state SNAP waivers is the Foundation for Government Accountability, a conservative think tank based in Florida that's been working for more than a decade to reshape the nation's public assistance programs and significantly cut spending.
Johnson said she is worried about a slippery slope. If fewer items are eligible for SNAP, she's concerned GOP leaders will use that as an excuse to cut back on people's monthly benefits.
Priya Fielding-Singh, director of policy and programs at the George Washington University's Global Food Institute, said there could be benefits in trying to focus SNAP purchases on healthy food.
But it's hard to look at a soda-and-candy ban in isolation, she said.
The USDA slashed about $1 billion in funding that let schools and food banks buy food directly from local farms and ranchers. The White House is proposing deep cuts to fruit and vegetable benefits under WIC, the nutritional assistance program for women, infants, and children.
The GOP's new tax cut law is projected to cut $186 billion from SNAP in the next decade and disqualify millions from eligibility.
'It's hard to separate the soda ban from the larger political efforts to shrink SNAP overall. So are these bans about promoting health or are they about shrinking SNAP? And I think the distinction really matters,' Fielding-Singh said.
She added that any moves to restrict what people can buy with SNAP should be paired with efforts to give people the 'means and access and resources to eat more healthfully.'
But so far, none of the red-state waivers do that.
Colorado Gov. Jared Polis (D), in a statement on his waiver, called it 'a big step towards improving the health of Coloradans, and reducing obesity rates, diabetes, and tooth decay' that 'will help to ensure that more Coloradans participating in SNAP have access to healthy foods.'
The Trump administration has not yet given Colorado the green light on a separate waiver to cover hot foods from grocery stores such as rotisserie chicken or soup.
Two other Democratic governors — Kansas's Laura Kelly and Arizona's Katie Hobbs — each vetoed bills that called for their states to submit waivers to ban candy and soda.
'I support the idea that Kansans should eat healthier. However, changes to the SNAP food assistance program should be made at the federal level, not on a patchwork, state-by-state basis,' Kelly wrote in her veto message.
She also noted the language in the bill would have mandated businesses stop accepting food assistance benefits for 'healthy' items such as protein bars and trail mix while continuing to allow Twix, Kit Kat, and Twizzlers.
Kennedy this week said he expects more blue states to be filing waivers.
'I was at the governors' conference in Colorado last week, and I met with a whole string of Democratic governors and they all committed to filing SNAP waivers,' he said.
Kennedy also said those governors also committed to put forward other 'MAHA legislation' but acknowledged they may not want to be associated with the term because it's become 'kind of a partisan brand.'
As she signed Colorado's waiver, Rollins said healthy eating should be bipartisan.
'This is not red or blue, Republican or Democrat,' Rollins said. 'We are discussing and working with every state, so really excited to continue to work with Gov. Polis.'
Copyright 2025 Nexstar Media, Inc. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Former Republican Cincinnati City Council member picks up petition for November election
Former Republican Cincinnati City Council member picks up petition for November election

Yahoo

time27 minutes ago

  • Yahoo

Former Republican Cincinnati City Council member picks up petition for November election

Cincinnati City Council's last Republican is hoping to return. Hyde Park resident Liz Keating was the lone Republican on Cincinnati's nine-member council before she was voted out in 2023. Keating has pulled petitions to run for City Council, a Hamilton County Board of Elections staffer confirmed Aug. 14. The deadline to file for city council hopefuls is Aug. 21. Twenty-four candidates have submitted petitions to run for Cincinnati City Council, which is nonpartisan. Former Cincinnati Vice Mayor Chris Smitherman, who has previously campaigned as an independent, has also pulled petitions. The Enquirer reached out to Keating for comment but did not receive a response prior to publication. This story may be updated. Enquirer reporter Scott Wartman contributed reporting. Regional politics reporter Erin Glynn can be reached at eglynn@ @ee_glynn on X or @eringlynn on Bluesky. This article originally appeared on Cincinnati Enquirer: Cincinnati City Council's last Republican considers a return Solve the daily Crossword

From the Sidelines, Ukraine Prepares to Watch as U.S., Russia Discuss Its Fate
From the Sidelines, Ukraine Prepares to Watch as U.S., Russia Discuss Its Fate

Time​ Magazine

time28 minutes ago

  • Time​ Magazine

From the Sidelines, Ukraine Prepares to Watch as U.S., Russia Discuss Its Fate

This article is part of The D.C. Brief, TIME's politics newsletter. Sign up here to get stories like this sent to your inbox. Given the optimistic tone coming from so many world leaders ahead of Donald Trump's Friday meeting with Vladimir Putin, one might be forgiven for believing a peaceful end to Russia's war in Ukraine was merely hours away. [time-brightcove not-tgx='true'] German Chancellor Friedrich Merz called Wednesday's video call with the U.S. President to discuss the Americans' upcoming meeting with Russian President Vladimir Putin 'a truly exceptionally constructive and good conversation.' From his point of view, Trump 'would rate it a 10, very friendly.' Putin told reporters on Thursday that he saw Trump making 'quite energetic efforts to stop the fighting, end the crisis, and reach agreements of interest to all parties involved in this conflict.' All the while Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky, whose country remains under constant attack from Putin's Russia, seemed to say what everyone else didn't want to acknowledge: 'Putin does not want peace. He wants to occupy us completely.' Ahead of a bilateral summit between U.S. and Russian leaders slated to take place on Friday in Alaska, no one was offering hard predictions. It's impossible to forget just how effectively Putin has succeeded in bending Trump with his charm, brutality, and mind games. The session in Anchorage is likely far from resolving the three-year-old war but could, if Trump's comments this week hold true, a first step toward winding down a conflict that has left Trump beyond frustrated that he cannot simply will peace into being. But everyone has seen Trump set out with one plan only to see him return with a completely revised notion. It's why Putin is already trying to distract Trump with other agenda items before they even meet. To be blunt, it's a coin-toss what happens next. But one thing is certain: none of it will match the tranquility and conformity that leaders were trying to project heading into this session. Trump is famous for going into these sessions under-prepared and over-confident. And recent reports suggest Trump may be preparing a deal with Russia that would trade rare minerals—perhaps those mined in Alaska—with Russia in exchange for peace in Ukraine, a suggestion Trump did not shoot down during a Thursday meeting with reporters. Separately, there are reports that Trump is bandying around an idea that would give Russia military and economic control of an occupied Ukraine, much like Israel has the run of the Palestinians' West Bank. Indeed, the expectations-lowering machine was going so fast this week you could see the smoke coming off the gears, with Trump on Thursday doubling-down on the idea that Friday's session was merely an opening act for the real games that would come quickly and with Zelensky on hand. 'We have a meeting with President Putin tomorrow,' Trump told reporters in the Oval Office on Thursday. 'I think it's going to be a good meeting, but the more important meeting will be the second meeting that we're having. We're going to have a meeting with President Putin, President Zelensky, myself, and maybe we'll bring some of the European leaders along. Maybe not.' It's the maybe not that has a lot of Ukraine's allies on edge. Europe's bloodiest war since 1945 has left the continent unsettled, the West dusting off its Cold War instincts, and Russia increasingly isolated. This will be the first time Putin has had an in-person audience with a U.S. President since 2021, or since he invaded Ukraine the following year. That Trump would welcome Putin on U.S. soil was being spun both as Trump securing home-turf advantage and a moment of capitulation to a cold-blooded dictator whose values are anathema to American values. For his part, Trump has been aggressively cagey about the summit's goals as he tries to improvise his way toward the Nobel Peace Prize he openly covets. 'We're going to see what happens. And I think President Putin will make peace. I think President Zelensky will make peace. We'll see if they can get along, and if they can, it'll be great,' Trump said of the two leaders who have killed thousands of foes in a battle that seems fated. White House officials and their proxies on the outside have been shameless in repositioning the goalposts so that Trump could declare a win no matter the outcome. The talking point calling the summit a 'listening experience' drew so much derision, it teeters on becoming the new Infrastructure Week, a branding campaign infamous for its lack of tangible results. On Thursday, Trump leaned into that posture in his freewheeling session with reporters. 'We're going to find out where everybody stands,' Trump said, seemingly oblivious to the fact Russia invaded Ukraine and has been far from an honest negotiating partner. 'And I'll know within the first two minutes, three minutes, four minutes, or five minutes left, we tend to find out whether or not we're going to have a good meeting or a bad meeting. And if it's a bad meeting, it'll end very quickly, and if it's a good meeting, we're going to end up getting peace in the pretty near future.' In an earlier radio interview, Trump said he put the odds of a failed summit at one-in-four and said he would leave Alaska immediately if things go sideways. The pieces were certainly in the wings for that outcome. Putin is bringing with him a business delegation that could distract Trump from the task at hand with the prospect of big-ticket investment vehicles. Trump, above all else, sees himself as a deal maker, and an economic package at home could prove more tempting than peace in a far-away corner of the globe. At the same time, Kremlin officials have dangled a nuclear treaty as another potential subject of conversation. Trump's advisers see the risk. Putin knows its potential. And Trump himself seems indifferent to the distractions hiding in plain sight. So as Friday's summit barrels toward a starting pistol, it is the diplomatic equivalent of a jump ball, with two nuclear powers making a play as Ukraine is left to watch from afar a discussion about its sheer survival. Make sense of what matters in Washington. Sign up for the D.C. Brief newsletter.

US employers slash hiring as Trump advances a punishing trade agenda
US employers slash hiring as Trump advances a punishing trade agenda

Chicago Tribune

time28 minutes ago

  • Chicago Tribune

US employers slash hiring as Trump advances a punishing trade agenda

WASHINGTON — U.S. hiring is slowing sharply as President Donald Trump's erratic and radical trade policies paralyze businesses and raise doubts about the outlook for the world's largest economy. U.S. employers added just 73,000 jobs last month, the Labor Department reported Friday, well short of the 115,000 expected. Worse, revisions shaved a stunning 258,000 jobs off May and June payrolls. And the unemployment rate ticked higher to 4.2% as Americans dropped out of the labor force and the ranks of the unemployed rose by 221,000. 'A notable deterioration in U.S. labor market conditions appears to be underway,' said Scott Anderson, chief U.S. economist at BMO Capital Markets. 'We have been forecasting this since the tariff and trade war erupted this spring and more restrictive immigration restrictions were put in place. Overall, this report highlights the risk of a harder landing for the labor market.' Economists have been warning that the rift with every U.S. trading partner will begin to appear this summer and the Friday jobs report appeared to sound the bell. 'We're finally in the eye of the hurricane,' said Daniel Zhao, chief economist at Glassdoor. 'After months of warning signs, the July jobs report confirms that the slowdown isn't just approaching—it's here.' U.S. markets recoiled at the jobs report and the Dow tumbled more than 600 points Friday. But President Donald Trump responded to the weak report by calling for the firing of Erika McEntarfer, the director of the Labor Department's Bureau of Labor Statistics, which compiles the jobs numbers. 'I have directed my Team to fire this Biden Political Appointee, IMMEDIATELY,' Trump said on Truth Social. 'She will be replaced with someone much more competent and qualified.' Trump questioned the big revisions, but they are a standard part of the monthly jobs report. The Labor Department revises its numbers as more data comes in. Particularly since COVID-19, businesses have taken longer to respond to the government's survey on hiring. As more data has come in later than in the past, the potential for large revisions has increased. Revelations in the new data raise questions about the health of the job market and the economy as Trump pushes forward an unorthodox overhaul of American trade policy. Trump has discarded decades of U.S. efforts to lower trade barriers globally, instead, imposing hefty import taxes — tariffs — on products from almost every country on earth. Trump believes the levies will bring manufacturing back to America and raise money to pay for the massive tax cuts he signed into law July 4. Mainstream economists warned that the cost of the tariffs will be passed along to Americans, both businesses and households. That has begun. Walmart, Procter & Gamble, Ford, Best Buy, Adidas, Nike, Mattel, Shein, Temu, Stanley Black & Decker, have all hiked prices due to U.S. tariffs. Economists at Goldman Sachs estimate that overseas exporters have absorbed just one-fifth of the rising costs from tariffs, while Americans and U.S. businesses have picked up the lion's share of the tab. Trump has sowed uncertainty in the erratic way he's rolled the tariffs out — announcing, then suspending them, then coming up with new ones. Overnight, Trump signed an executive order that set new tariffs on a wide swath of U.S. trading partners to that go into effect on Aug. 7, and that comes after a flurry of unexpected tariff-related actions this week. 'There was a clear, significant, immediate, tariff effect on the labor market and employment growth essentially stalled, as we were dealing with so much uncertainty about the outlook for the economy and for tariffs,' said Blerina Uruci, chief U.S. economist for the brokerage T. Rowe Price. Still, Uruci said the data suggests we could be past the worst, as hiring actually did pick up a bit in July from May and June's depressed levels. 'I'm not overly pessimistic on the U.S. economy based on this morning's data,' she said, though she does think that hiring will remain muted in the coming months as the number of available workers remains limited due to reduced immigration and an aging population. 'Because of immigration policy, labor supply growth has nearly ground to a halt,' said Guy Berger, senior fellow at the Burning Glass Institute, which studies employment trends. 'So we're going to have very weak employment growth. And we look like southern Europe or Japan.' Still, with fewer workers available, the economy doesn't need to generate many jobs to soak up the unemployed. That could keep the unemployment rate from climbing much, Berger added. Trump has sold the tariffs hikes as a way to boost American manufacturing, but factories cut 11,000 jobs last month after shedding 15,000 in June and 11,000 in May. The federal government, where employment has been targeted by the Trump administration, lost 12,000 jobs. Jobs in administration and support fell by nearly 20,000. Healthcare companies added 55,400 jobs last month – accounting for 76% of the jobs added in July and offering another sign that recent job gains have been narrowly concentrated. The department originally reported that state and local governments had added 64,000 education jobs in June. The revisions Friday slashed those jobs to less than 10,000. Those revisions also revealed that the U.S. economy has generated an average of just 85,000 jobs a month this year, barely half last year's average of 168,000 and well below an average 400,000 from 2021-2023 as the economy rebounded from COVID-19 lockups. The weak jobs data makes it more likely that Trump will get one thing that he most fervently desires: A cut in short-term interest rates by the Federal Reserve, which often — though not always — can lead to lower rates for mortgages, car loans, and credit cards. Fed Chair Jerome Powell and other Fed officials have repeatedly pointed to a healthy job market as a reason that they could take time to evaluate how Trump's tariffs were affecting inflation and the broader economy. Now that assessment has been undercut and will put more pressure on the Fed to reduce borrowing costs. Wall Street investors sharply raised their expectations for a rate cut at the Fed's next meeting in September after the report was released. On Wednesday, the Fed left its key rate unchanged for fifth consecutive meeting and Powell signaled little urgency to reduce rates anytime soon. He said the 'labor market is solid' with 'historically low unemployment.' But he also acknowledged there is a 'downside risk' to employment stemming from the slow pace of hiring that was evident even before Friday's weaker numbers. The current situation is a sharp reversal from the hiring boom of just three years ago when desperate employers were handing out signing bonuses and introducing perks such as Fridays off, fertility benefits and even pet insurance to recruit and keep workers. The rate of people quitting their jobs — a sign they're confident they can land something better — has fallen from the record heights of 2021 and 2022 and is now weaker than before the pandemic. Drees Homes, a homebuilder based outside Cincinnati in Fort Mitchell, Kentucky, has hired about 50 people over the past year, bringing its workforce to around 950. Pamela Rader, Drees' vice president for human resources, it's 'gotten a little bit easier'' to find workers. A couple of years ago, Rader said jobseekers were focused on getting more pay. Now, she said, they emphasize stable employment, a better work-life balance, and prospects for advancement.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store