Since RFK Jr. became the Secretary of Health and Human Services, state lawmakers across the country have proposed bills that promote Kennedy’s MAHA initiative. During his visit to Arizona in early April, RFK Jr. praised Arizona’s proposed ban on ultra-processed foods from school lunches and vocalized support for the public health measure HB2165.

HB2165 requests permission from the USDA to remove soda as an eligible purchase through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP).

However, the bill died on the Governor’s desk. Why? According to our Governor, prohibiting SNAP recipients from using the program to buy soft drinks reduces their “purchasing power and relegates them to a new underclass of grocery shoppers.”

Hobb’s consumer rights argument for striking down the law is flawed. SNAP paying for soda subsidizes unhealthy habits, excluding soda will not limit consumer choice, and it ignores the severity of the public health impact.

It’s no secret that soda is unhealthy. But sugary drinks are the single most significant contributor to excess calorie consumption and “provide no nutritional benefit.”

American children consume an average of 172 calories per day from sugar-laden drinks, with each additional drink daily increasing the probability of becoming obese by 60%. A study by Tufts University found that sweetened drinks contributed to 330,000 deaths annually, double the number estimated in 2010.

Excessive soda consumption disproportionately impacts low-income Americans. Studies have found an inverse relationship between income and soda consumption. People living below the poverty line are “1.7 times more likely to drink soda.” But even among low-income Americans, SNAP recipients averaged over seven sugary drinks a week, versus “ low-income non-recipients” who consumed about five weekly.

Since there is a relationship between poverty, obesity and soda consumption, the SNAP program allowing participants to use their benefits for sweetened drinks is adding fuel to the fire.

Keeping soda on the table not only uses tax dollars to exacerbate the obesity epidemic. It will also undermine the original goal of the SNAP program, improving the nutrition of disadvantaged Americans.

Governor Hobbs justified vetoing HB2165 because it would create an underclass of consumers. HB2156 doesn’t legally bar those who receive SNAP from using their disposable income to buy sodas. If permitted by the USDA, it could prevent them from using SNAP benefits to purchase sugary beverages.

No one has a right to non-essential treats. We must recognize that soda is a luxury, not a dietary staple. SNAP supplying needy families with nutritious foods is a laudable goal, but this aid should not extend to sugary sodas. 

There is a strong precedent for SNAP restricting benefits from being used on specific items such as alcohol and tobacco. These items are not accessible through the program due to health concerns. The same worries can apply to treating soda like an essential food. If an initiative to have the USDA extend SNAP benefits to beer, people would be up in arms. Why should soda get a pass?

Hobbs brandishing the veto-stamping on this bill is baffling. Obesity is a problem here in Arizona. About 31.9 % of Arizona adults and 55.3% of children living below the poverty line are obese. Obesity-related treatments cost AZ Medicaid approximately $962.9 million-$2.5 billion annually. Considering the healthcare costs alone, it is hard to justify tax-funded access to soda.

To make matters more confusing, Hobbs signed HB2164 into law banning schools from serving and selling “ultra-processed foods.” Clearly, she doesn’t have an issue with limiting access to unhealthy food.

I hope Governor Hobbs isn’t overlooking the health impact of HB2165 due to partisanship. Arizona has a contentious political culture. In 2023, Hobbs vetoed a whooping 143 GOP-backed bills. As noted by Arizona Republic’s Elvia Diaz, HB2165 didn’t have Democratic support, writing Democrats “couldn’t stomach giving Republicans a win”. 

If HB2165 had survived the veto stamp, it would have been the first step toward reforming the SNAP program. Using these benefits on sodas and junk food fails to fulfill the nutritional needs of Arizona’s poorest residents. While Hobbs might appreciate the intentions behind HB2165, apparently, the public health impact wasn’t enough for her to greenlight the bill.

Peter Clark is an Arizona-based writer. His work has been published by AzCentral, AZ Capitol Times, FEE, AIER, Inside Sources, OC Register, Tobacco Reporter & RealClear Markets.