Proposed Food Stamp Soda Ban Leaves a Sour Taste

(Oct. 7) -- Kathleen Castillo already eats her vegetables. So when New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg today proposed banning the use of food stamps to buy soda and other sugary drinks, she was a little put off.

"I'm offended because, you know, it just seems like they want to pick on the people that don't have anything, people who are relying on food stamps to make changes in their lives," 24-year-old Castillo, who uses food stamps, told AOL News in a phone interview today. "But at the same time it's probably for the better. Those drinks are keeping the population in a vicious cycle of obesity."

In his latest anti-obesity push, the mayor has requested permission from the U.S. Department of Agriculture to prevent federal food stamp benefits from being spent on sugar-filled drinks. He said today the move would "give New York families more money to spend on foods and drinks that provide real nourishment."

Bloomberg contends that sugary soft drinks are a major source of the city's rising diabetes rates, and has also tried -- and failed -- to impose a tax on sugary drinks.

But this time, the mayor's proposal specifically puts low-income New Yorkers in the spotlight, which has left some with a bitter taste in their mouths. Joel Berg, executive director of the New York City Coalition Against Hunger, said poor people were being unfairly singled out.

"There is not an iota of evidence that poor people on the food program shop any less nutritiously than anyone else," he said today in a phone interview. "The problem is not that low-income people don't know how to shop any better. The problem is that low-income people don't have enough money to buy healthy foods."

Castillo, who walks 10 city blocks from her home in order to buy fresh fruit and vegetables, said she'd buy healthier food more often if it were closer to her home and less expensive. But she said she supports the mayor's proposal. "It's kind of a double standard, but in the long run, it will probably help people."

That double standard, though, is exactly what has some people upset, even those who agree that Americans need to cut back on their soda consumption. "We have no problem giving subsidies to Goldman Sachs, but when it comes to poor people, we want to say, 'I want to make damn well sure that every penny goes where I think it's supposed to go,' " Berg said.

Tanya Frazier, 36, who used food stamps, said she supports the proposed ban, but said she already eats well.

"You're categorizing us. You've categorized us as individuals who aren't eating in a health-conscious way. When I shop, I purchase health-conscious things. To me, soda is a luxury," she said.

George Hacker, a senior policy adviser for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, worries the proposal will further stigmatize poor people.

"The world would be better, I think, if people limited their purchases of sugared beverages," he told The New York Times. "However, there are a great many ethical reasons to consider why one would not want to stigmatize people on food stamps."

But Hacker's colleague, Michael Jacobson, the center's executive director, said the government has a responsibility to protect the health of its citizens.

"It makes sense to say, 'If you want soda pop, buy it with your own money,'" Jacobson told AOL News. "There are limits already on the [food stamp] program. You can't buy beer. You can't buy vitamin pills. Why not soda?"

The soft drink industry opposes the proposed ban.

"This is just another attempt by government to tell New Yorkers what they should eat and drink, and will only have an unfair impact on those who can least afford it," the American Beverage Association said in a statement.

Many experts think Bloomberg's request will likely be denied by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which in 2004 turned down a request by Minnesota to ban the purchase of junk food with food stamps. According to the Times, the department said such a ban would "perpetuate the myth" that Americans on food stamps make unhealthy eating choices.