USDA Approves Waivers for Six More States to Restrict "Unhealthy Foods" in SNAP, Expanding "Make America Healthy Again" Initiative

U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke L. Rollins announced today the approval of waivers for six additional states, allowing them to remove specific "unhealthy foods" from items purchasable through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). This move, part of the "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) initiative, aims to enhance public health by restricting certain food types, with changes set to take effect in 2026, as reported by the USDA.

The initiative seeks to restore SNAP to its "true purpose – nutrition," according to Secretary Rollins, who stated that these steps are designed to reverse the chronic disease epidemic in the country. U.S. Secretary of Health and Human Services Robert F. Kennedy Jr. has also emphasized that the program should not fund products contributing to diabetes and chronic illnesses.

The newly approved waivers apply to Hawai'i, Missouri, North Dakota, South Carolina, Virginia, and Tennessee. These states join 12 others, including Arkansas, Florida, and Texas, that have already received similar approvals, bringing the total number of states implementing such restrictions to 18, according to FOX 9.

While specific exclusions will vary by state, common targets for restriction include soft drinks, energy drinks, and various candies. For instance, North Dakota's approved waiver will prohibit the purchase of items like soda, energy drinks, and certain baking ingredients and chocolate-covered nuts by September 2026, as detailed by the North Dakota Office of the Governor.

This expansion of food restrictions within SNAP has ignited a broader debate, balancing the administration's goal of improving nutritional outcomes with concerns about recipient autonomy and the practical challenges of implementation. Proponents argue for responsible use of taxpayer dollars, while critics highlight potential stigma and administrative burdens, according to the Brookings Institution.

Governors from the participating states have expressed strong support for the waivers, with Missouri Governor Mike Kehoe stating his state is "proud to partner with the Trump administration on the Make America Healthy Again movement" to maximize nutritional health for families. South Carolina Governor Henry McMaster also praised the move, noting it will ensure federal funds are used for nutritional value.

• Historical Context of SNAP Food Restrictions: The debate over restricting food purchases within SNAP is not new, with the program, formerly known as food stamps, having evolved significantly since its inception. Historically, the USDA has resisted efforts to exempt certain foods, citing the complexity of defining "good" or "bad" foods and the potential for increased administrative costs and ineffectiveness, as reported by kcur. The Food Research & Action Center notes that past attempts to limit food choices, such as in the 1964 Food Stamp Act, were rejected due to administrative burdens.

• The "Make America Healthy Again" Initiative: The "Make America Healthy Again" (MAHA) initiative is a comprehensive program led by the Trump administration, with HHS and USDA encouraging states to request SNAP waivers to prioritize wholesome foods over unhealthy items. Beyond SNAP, MAHA aims to address the chronic disease epidemic through various strategies, including overhauling dietary guidelines and investigating health issues, according to hhs.gov. Secretary Rollins stated that the administration is taking "bold, historic steps" under MAHA to reverse chronic diseases.

• Arguments for Restrictions: Proponents of these restrictions argue that SNAP should align more closely with its goal of improving nutrition, especially since the program was renamed to emphasize "nutrition" in 2008. They contend that allowing benefits for sugary drinks and highly processed foods contradicts the program's purpose and contributes to poor health outcomes, leading to increased healthcare costs that taxpayers ultimately bear, as noted by Forbes. Texas Governor Greg Abbott stated that restricting unhealthy foods helps ensure the "health and well-being of Texans".

• Arguments Against Restrictions: Critics, including researchers like Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, argue that such restrictions could undermine SNAP's effectiveness and efficiency. They highlight the immense administrative challenge of categorizing over 650,000 food and beverage products and the potential for increased stigma and logistical difficulties for recipients at checkout, according to the Brookings Institution. The Georgetown Journal on Poverty Law & Policy also suggests that these proposals are based on "faulty, paternalistic, and racially biased assumptions" about SNAP participants' eating habits.

• Specifics of State-Level Waivers: The waivers grant states the flexibility to define what constitutes "unhealthy foods." For example, North Dakota's waiver specifically bans soft drinks, energy drinks, candy, certain baking ingredients like chocolate chips, and even chocolate-covered nuts and caramel apples, with implementation by September 2026, as reported by the North Dakota Office of the Governor. Texas's waiver, effective April 1, 2026, prohibits candy and drinks with artificial sweeteners or more than five grams of added sugar, according to Governor Greg Abbott's office.

• Economic and Social Implications: The implementation of these restrictions could have significant economic and social impacts. Retailers will need to update their systems to comply with varying state-specific bans, potentially increasing operational costs. For SNAP recipients, these changes could limit food choices, particularly in areas with fewer healthy options, and may exacerbate food insecurity if not carefully managed, as discussed by CLASP. nasdaq reported that states with high SNAP caseloads face budget pressure from administrative costs, potentially leading to difficult decisions about program operations.

• Political Dynamics and State Autonomy: The approval of these waivers reflects a broader push by the Trump administration to empower states with greater control over federal programs, particularly within SNAP. Secretary Rollins' "Laboratories of Innovation" initiative encourages governors to propose state-driven solutions, leading to a more decentralized approach to nutrition assistance, as noted by the USDA. This shift allows states to tailor SNAP rules to their specific health priorities, with governors like Virginia's Glenn Youngkin praising the flexibility.

• Future Outlook and Research Needs: The long-term effectiveness of these restrictions in improving public health outcomes remains a subject of ongoing debate and will require rigorous evaluation. Experts suggest that simply banning certain foods may not significantly alter overall dietary patterns and could instead increase administrative burdens without inducing behavioral changes, according to the Brookings Institution. Forbes emphasizes the need for states and the USDA to rigorously evaluate whether these restrictions genuinely make families healthier, suggesting that alternative approaches like incentives for healthy food purchases might be more effective.