Conservatives Should Stand for Consumer Freedom – Not Restrictions
Amid an ongoing budget battle, the normal legislative process in the House has grounded to a halt. The political reality could delay the reauthorization of the nation’s agriculture and hunger programs in the Farm Bill which is reauthorized every five years. While the Bill is supposed to ensure farmers are equipped with the best resources to feed Americans and that American food programs are funded properly, this year, however, some want to include a misguided prohibition on certain purchases at the grocery store.
Last year, a band of congressional members introduced the Healthy SNAP Act – legislation to restrict consumer freedom in the grocery store. Specifically, the proposal would prohibit recipients from purchasing certain food items such as soft drinks and snacks. Government shouldn’t be the food police. Americans who need help with groceries deserve to have choices at the grocery store. We should trust their judgement, not demonize it.
The bill also fails to consider the fact that Americans get their calories from various sources, not just in one aisle of the grocery store. Sure, some people like to drink soda, but calories can also come from food items like nuts (which are high in fat,) fruits (which have high sugar content,) and frozen meat (which may be high in sodium). Promoting healthier lifestyles is certainly commendable, but this legislation would ultimately restrict consumer choice and pins the blame for America’s obesity problem on a few items among the thousands in the grocery store instead of the entire diet.
We should trust Americans to make their own educated decisions and not have the federal government be the people’s nutritionist. Consumer freedom means giving consumers the freedom to choose what they should feed their families.
The Healthy SNAP Act also fails to consider changing consumer behavior, which has changed significantly over the last several years. Over the past decade consumers have shifted toward products with less sugar and fewer calories without government mandates. And the industry is following suit. For example, nearly 60% of soft drinks sold today have zero sugar. Calories from beverages account for less than six percent of the calories in the average American diet. Yet, obesity rates have skyrocketed. Since 2000, obesity prevalence has risen over 10% while calories from soda have been going down at the same time. If the two were connected, those rates should have gone down with the drop in soda consumption.
Certainly, the government has a place in overseeing the marketplace through limited and reasonable regulation. But creating unnecessary red tape in one’s grocery cart does not promote healthier lifestyle choices. It only places restrictions on working-class families who are entirely capable of making their own decisions.
We know what happens when we give the government an inch, it takes a mile. Restricting a few products could soon turn into an entire food group. Unchecked political influence could inspire some progressives to target red meat or even fish in the future. That’s exactly what precedent could be established if this legislation sneaks its way onto the president’s desk.
Conservatives should be supporting more choices for American families and promoting healthier lifestyles without creating unnecessary red tape. SNAP benefits exist to support consumers and we should not be disproportionately punishing them.
