There is widespread belief among Americans that the government works best when it is more limited and efficient. The core of this involves balancing bloated budgets, cutting red tape and reining in federal overreach. And it’s those principles of freedom and individual liberty that can and should apply to how the nation structures the food supply and improves health.
Undoubtedly, government responsibilities must consider the costs to the budget and personal freedoms in any policy idea.
One instance is the Make America Healthy Again Commission’s report. The document outlined many important areas while also previewing some prospective national directives, which will be detailed in August.
Among many public health matters, the commission materials may address measures surrounding the government’s role in supplying nutrition benefits that families depend on, and provisions to assess the longstanding FDA scientific guidance on food ingredients.
SNAP, which puts food on the table for 41 million Americans monthly, certainly has room for improvement. The Department of Agriculture is right to target criminals defrauding American taxpayers and to ensure benefits are used exclusively for food. However, the possibility of curtailing how families can fill their grocery lists may prompt additional consequential questions.
Experts agree that restricting specific items from SNAP, like soft drinks, sports drinks or snacks, won’t make people healthier. It could have implications for bureaucracy, increasing program costs, and affecting Americans who rely on SNAP.
Data show that SNAP households make food choices that mirror the general population. Obesity rates continue to climb even as consumption rates of items such as sugar-sweetened beverages have declined. That tells us the problem isn’t one product or one aisle; it’s a bigger and more complex predicament.
In many ways, Americans are already taking responsibility for their health. Across income levels, they’re choosing healthier options. They are asking better questions about what they eat. Transparency continues to be on the rise with new industry efforts to outline facts and safety information about ingredients.
Re-evaluating food ingredients additionally introduces questions about using substitutes that may elevate costs or prompt complex sourcing practices from outside the country.
Let’s take a broader look at our food supply and ensure that it remains strong for Americans. Let’s refine SNAP and make sure benefits help families in need.
In the interest of supporting improved outcomes, the Consumer Action for a Strong Economy is seeking to continue the dialogue on health policy by collecting perspectives from key stakeholders on the latest developments. Ultimately, we all want to ground public health policies in sound science and ensure they serve the best interests of children and families.
The ideals of limited government and reduced bureaucracy provide the right platform for reviving the nation’s health landscape.
Matt Kandrach is the president of Consumer Action for a Strong Economy/InsideSources