Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr. just dropped a truth bomb on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). He’s calling out food stamps for bankrolling soda and candy purchases, claiming they’re driving a diabetes epidemic that’s hitting kids hard, as the New York Post reports. This isn’t just a policy tweak -- it’s a wake-up call to stop subsidizing sickness.
Kennedy argues that SNAP, meant to help low-income families afford food, is being misused to buy junk that fuels obesity and diabetes. Taxpayers fund this program, only to get hit again with Medicaid and Medicare costs for diet-related illnesses. It’s a vicious cycle, and Kennedy’s not here for it.
On Sunday, Kennedy took to WABC 770 AM’s Cats Roundtable to lay it bare. “Taxpayers should not be financing that,” he said, slamming the use of food stamps for sugary drinks and candies. That’s not freedom of choice -- it’s a government-enabled health disaster.
A staggering 18% of SNAP benefits go toward candy and sugared drinks. That’s billions of taxpayer dollars every year, funneled into products that Kennedy says are “poisoning” Americans. Meanwhile, nearly 40% of kids are grappling with juvenile diabetes, a statistic that’s as alarming as it is avoidable.
SNAP was designed to feed struggling families, seniors, and the disabled, not to pad the profits of soda giants. Eligibility hinges on household size and income, but there’s no guardrail stopping recipients from loading up on junk. It’s a loophole big enough to drive a sugar truck through.
Kennedy is not just whining -- he’s pushing for change. He’s cheering on 14 states that have secured waivers to block SNAP funds from being used on non-nutritious items like soda and candy. These waivers are a middle finger to the woke idea that personal choice trumps public health.
“We are actually paying for people to get diabetes,” Kennedy told host John Catsimatidis. He’s right -- SNAP dollars buy the poison, and then taxpayers shell out again for the fallout through healthcare programs. It’s like funding a fire and then paying to put it out.
The Trump administration is backing Kennedy’s push, making headway on restricting SNAP to healthier options. This isn’t about nanny-stating poor folks; it’s about ensuring taxpayer money doesn’t bankroll chronic disease. The left might cry “stigma,” but enabling bad choices isn’t compassion.
Sugary and fatty foods are a one-way ticket to obesity and diabetes, and Kennedy’s calling it like it is. The science isn’t woke -- it’s clear that processed junk is a public health menace. SNAP should be a lifeline, not a sugar-coated trap.
Fourteen states are already on board, using waivers to curb SNAP spending on soda and candy. This isn’t just red-state bravado; it’s a pragmatic move to prioritize nutrition over indulgence. The USDA says these waivers ensure “nutritious options that improve health outcomes.”
“We’re paying again when they get [treated] through Medicaid and, ultimately, Medicare,” Kennedy said. He’s exposing the double-dipping scam where taxpayers fund both the problem and the cure. It’s a fiscal and moral outrage that demands action.
The waivers are a start, but they’re not a cure-all. Changing SNAP rules requires state-level grit and federal cooperation, and Kennedy’s rallying governors to step up. The goal? Make SNAP live up to its name -- nutrition, not nonsense.
Kennedy’s crusade isn’t about shaming SNAP recipients; it’s about breaking a system that’s rigged against their health. The progressive mantra of “choice above all” ignores how junk food addiction hurts the vulnerable most. Real freedom means giving people tools to thrive, not to self-destruct.
The USDA is backing these waivers as “a key step” toward healthier SNAP spending. It’s a rare moment of government clarity, cutting through the fog of political correctness. Taxpayers deserve a program that doesn’t subsidize sickness.
Kennedy’s plan is bold, but it’s not perfect. Critics will wail about restricting choice, but when 40% of kids face diabetes, it’s time to rethink what “choice” means. This is a fight for health, not control, and it’s one worth having.
