Nebraska has become the first state to secure a federal waiver to restrict the purchase of soda and energy drinks using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, commonly known as food stamps. This groundbreaking move, announced on Monday by U.S. Agriculture Secretary Brooke Rollins, impacts approximately 152,000 Nebraskans enrolled in SNAP—a federal assistance program aimed at helping low-income families afford groceries.
The decision to ban sugary beverages from SNAP purchases marks a significant shift in federal policy, as Nebraska leads the charge to curb unhealthy food and drink consumption among vulnerable populations. Governor Jim Pillen hailed the waiver as a necessary step, stating, “There’s absolutely zero reason for taxpayers to be subsidizing purchases of soda and energy drinks. SNAP is about helping families in need get healthy food into their diets, but there’s nothing nutritious about the junk we’re removing with today’s waiver.”
Nebraska is not alone in pursuing such restrictions. Six other states—Arkansas, Colorado, Kansas, Indiana, Iowa, and West Virginia—have requested similar waivers. Some states seek to ban specific products like sugary drinks and candy, while others aim to expand access to hot meals for SNAP recipients. These proposals align with broader efforts championed by Secretary Rollins and Health Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr., who emphasize improving nutritional outcomes for Americans receiving federal food assistance.
Rollins described Nebraska’s waiver as “a historic step to Make America Healthy again,” underscoring the administration’s commitment to promoting healthier eating habits among food-insecure populations. However, full details of Nebraska’s waiver are expected to take effect on January 1, and the precise implementation plan is yet to be released.
While the policy aims to foster healthier diets, it has faced criticism from anti-hunger advocates and nutrition experts. Critics argue that banning certain foods could exacerbate food insecurity by adding administrative burdens and stigmatizing SNAP recipients. Gina Plata-Nino, deputy director at the Food Research & Action Center, cautioned that the waiver “ignores decades of evidence showing that incentive-based approaches—not punitive restrictions—are the most effective, dignified path to improving nutrition and reducing hunger.”
SNAP is a $100 billion federal program serving roughly 42 million Americans, administered through the U.S. Agriculture Department and local state agencies. The program’s authorizing legislation, the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008, broadly allows benefits to be used for “any food or food product intended for human consumption,” excluding alcohol, tobacco, and hot prepared foods ready for immediate consumption.
Over the past two decades, multiple states have debated restricting SNAP purchases of items ranging from sugary beverages and snacks to bottled water and luxury meats. Historically, the USDA has rejected such restrictions, citing the lack of clear criteria to differentiate between “good” and “bad” foods. The agency also expressed concerns about the administrative complexity, increased costs, and uncertain impact on recipients’ buying habits or health outcomes like obesity rates.
The Nebraska waiver represents a departure from past USDA positions, signaling a more aggressive stance on public health through federal nutrition policy. This development may foreshadow additional restrictions nationwide, as states weigh the balance between nutritional guidance and access to food.
Critics emphasize the importance of supporting SNAP recipients through positive incentives rather than prohibitive bans. Strategies like offering extra benefits for purchasing fruits and vegetables have been demonstrated to encourage healthier eating without restricting choices. The debate continues over the best methods to address diet-related health disparities among low-income Americans.
The Nebraska waiver’s impact on SNAP participants and community health will be closely watched by policymakers, advocates, and researchers alike. It raises fundamental questions about how federal nutrition assistance programs can best support both food security and public health in an equitable and effective manner.
As the waiver takes effect next year, SNAP recipients in Nebraska will face new purchasing rules that exclude soda and energy drinks. The state and USDA will likely provide guidance on compliance and enforcement, and measure the policy’s outcomes to determine its broader applicability.
In summary, Nebraska’s historic federal waiver to ban soda and energy drink purchases under SNAP marks a pivotal moment in the intersection of food assistance and public health policy. While it seeks to reduce consumption of sugary beverages linked to chronic health conditions, it also highlights ongoing debates about choice, dignity, and effective nutrition interventions for vulnerable populations. As other states pursue similar measures, the nation is watching closely to see how these policies shape the future of SNAP and the health of millions of Americans.
