Skip Navigation
Marion Nestle

Marion Nestle - Marion Nestle is professor of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University, and the author of Food Politics, Safe Food, What to Eat, and Pet Food Politics. More

Marion Nestle is Paulette Goddard Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University. She also holds appointments as Professor of Sociology at NYU and Visiting Professor of Nutritional Sciences at Cornell. She is the author of three prize-winning books: Food Politics: How the Food Industry Influences Nutrition and Health (revised edition, 2007), Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety (2003), and What to Eat (2006). Her most recent book is Feed Your Pet Right: The Authoritative Guide to Feeding Your Dog and Cat. She writes the Food Matters column for The San Francisco Chronicle and blogs almost daily at Food Politics.

How to Stop Fast Food Companies From Accepting Food Stamps

By Marion Nestle
Sep 13 2011, 3:01 PM ET Comment

Let your representatives know that you want a safety net for people who are out of work that enables them to eat healthfully

FoodStamps-Reuters-Post.jpg

Readers Robyn and Will sent me a link to an ABC News story about Yum! Brands efforts to get more states to authorize the use of food stamp (SNAP) benefits in fast food restaurants.

Michigan, California, Arizona, and Florida already do this. Yum! wants it to go national.

They write:

We believe that food stamps should be used to buy nutritious food for kids and families, not junk food! This nonsense has to stop! This is a government program -- it should not be a means for corporations to sell products that will eventually lead to ever-increasing health problems -- obesity, heart issues, diabetes, etc. What can we do to be heard?

USA Today did a story on this last week. It elicited more than 1,000 comments. I'm not surprised.

The issue thoroughly divides the food advocacy community. Public health and anti-hunger advocates sharply disagree on this issue, as they do on the question of whether sodas should be taxed.

USA Today quoted Kelly Brownell, director of Yale's anti-obesity Rudd Center:

It's preposterous that a company like Yum! Brands would even be considered for inclusion in a program meant for supplemental nutrition.

But then the article quoted Ed Cooney, executive director of the Congressional Hunger Center and a long-time anti-hunger advocate:

They think going hungry is better? ... I'm solidly behind what Yum! is doing.

Of course he is. Want to take a guess at who funds the Congressional Hunger Center?

Yum! is listed as a "Sower," meaning that its annual gift is in the range of $10,000. I'm guessing Yum! is delighted that it is getting such good value at such low cost.

USA Today was negligent in not mentioning Mr. Cooney's financial ties to Yum! and other food brands. Such ties matter, and readers deserve to know about them.

But Mr. Cooney's argument worries me on grounds beyond the evident conflict of interest.

For one thing, it smacks of elitism. "Let them eat junk food" argues that it's okay for the poor to eat unhealthfully. I think the poor deserve to be treated better.

For another, promoting use of SNAP benefits for fast food and sodas makes it and other food assistance programs vulnerable to attack.

Rates of obesity are higher among low-income groups, including SNAP recipients, than in the general population.

Anti-hunger and public health advocates need to work a lot harder to find common ground if they want food assistance programs to continue to help low-income Americans.

Let's be clear about what's at stake here. SNAP is an entitlement program, meaning that anyone who qualifies can get benefits.

In June 2011 alone, according to USDA, 45 million Americans received an average of $133 in benefits at a total cost to taxpayers of more than $6 billion.

That's a lot of money to spend on fast food. Yum!'s interest in getting some of that money is understandable.

If you think low-income Americans deserve better:

  • Complain to Congress for permitting the legal loophole that allows this.
  • Insist to USDA that SNAP benefits be permitted only for real food.
  • Get your city to recruit farmers' markets, grocery stores, and other sources of healthy food to low-income areas.
  • Let your congressional representatives know that you want a safety net for people who are out of work that enables people to eat healthfully.
  • And tell the Congressional Hunger Center and similarly inclined anti-hunger groups that you think conflicts of interest interfere with their ability to help the clients they are supposedly trying to serve.

Image: REUTERS/Tomas Bravo.

TEMPLATEFoodPolitics02.jpg

This post also appears on Food Politics.



Presented by

More at The Atlantic

Study: We're Biased Against obese People—Even If They Get Thin Obesity Stigma Stays
Even After Weight Loss
This Graph Is Disastrous for Print and Great for Facebook—or the Opposite! The End of Print Media
in 1 Simple Graph
Oops! Now You Can Track the Tweets Politicians Tried to Delete Now You Can Track the Tweets Politicians Tried to Delete
The Fraught Mobile Politics of the United States of Amercia [Sic] The Fraught Mobile Politics of Amercia [Sic]
Under Bloomberg's Soda Ban, The Original Four Loko Would Be Legal Under Bloomberg's Soda Ban, Four Loko Would Be Legal

Join the Discussion

After you comment, click Post. If you’re not already logged in you will be asked to log in or register.
blog comments powered by Disqus
View All Correspondents

The Biggest Story in Photos

The Unreal World

May 31, 2012

Subscribe Now

SAVE 59%! 10 issues JUST $2.45 PER COPY

Facebook

Newsletters

Sign up to receive our free newsletters

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)

(sample)