Common Sense in a SNAP

Modernizing the supplemental nutrition assistance program (SNAP) to allow hot foods.

Common Sense in a SNAP

January 2022   minute read

By: Anna Ready Blom

Did you know that a person can purchase a cold sandwich with their SNAP benefits, but if that sandwich is heated it can no longer be purchased? You may be thinking that doesn’t make sense, and you would be right. The hot foods restriction is outdated and goes back to the creation of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

The Food Stamp Act was passed in 1964 to establish the anti-hunger program for Americans that would evolve into modern day SNAP. When the program was first created, Congress restricted the purchase of hot, prepared foods. Americans at that time were making most of their meals at home and from scratch. However, shopping and eating habits have dramatically shifted in the past 50 years. Today, the majority of Americans rely on the flexibility of being able to buy hot, prepared foods, whether it be a rotisserie chicken, a cup of soup or a hot sandwich. Yet an elderly person or mom on SNAP do not have that same flexibility because of the hot foods restriction.

Still, the hot foods restriction is not always in place. Several times a year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture grants waivers to allow the purchase of hot foods in areas that have been struck by a natural disaster such as a hurricane and wildfire. These waivers have been successful in giving SNAP participants in those areas critical access to food. There is no reason not to provide the same flexibility and convenience to SNAP families on every other day of the year.

NACS is advocating for Congress to introduce common sense legislation that would remove the hot foods restriction, giving SNAP participants the flexibility to purchase a hot meal when they need it from the same stores where they buy other food.

 

Anna Ready Blom

Anna Ready Blom

Anna Ready Blom is NACS director of government relations. She can be reached at [email protected].

Share:
Print: