US Iowans won't be able to buy pop, candy with SNAP dollars after USDA approves waiver request

Stephen Gruber-Miller
Des Moines Register
May 22, 2025, 8:25 p.m. CT


Gov. Kim Reynolds hopeful the Trump administration will grant Iowa a Summer EBT waiver
Reynolds says she plans to seek a waiver from the federal Summer EBT program so Iowa can set up its own summer meal program for kids.

Key Points​

  • Beginning in 2026, Iowans will be banned from using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program dollars from buying certain foods, including pop and candy.
  • President Donald Trump's U.S. Department of Education granted Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds' request for a federal waiver on May 22, allowing Iowa to restrict SNAP dollars from being used for some foods.
Iowans will be banned from using Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program dollars to buy certain types of food after President Donald Trump's administration granted Gov. Kim Reynolds' request for a waiver.

When it takes effect, the federal waiver will only allow Iowans to use SNAP dollars to buy foods that are exempt from sales tax in Iowa. That means beginning Jan. 1, 2026, Iowans will not be able to use SNAP dollars to buy items such as candy, pop and other carbonated beverages.

"Soaring obesity rates have brought our nation and state to a crossroads," Reynolds said in a statement. "To promote healthy eating and protect future generations from disease — and to ensure SNAP fulfills its core function — we need a change. Thank you to Secretary Rollins and her team for helping make that change happen."

Reynolds, a Republican, announced May 22 that U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins had approved the state's request from a waiver to exempt certain foods from SNAP, which is run by USDA. It took Rollins just 10 days to grant the request after Iowa submitted it May 12.

"President Trump has given our nation a once in a generation opportunity to change the health trajectory for our entire country," Rollins said in a statement. "On my first day as secretary, I sent a call to states to innovate, and Gov. Kim Reynolds stepped up to take action. I look forward to signing even more waivers in the days ahead as we continue to restore the health of our country."

Anti-hunger advocates have said Iowans should be trusted to make their own choices about what foods they buy.

"Iowans should be trusted to make the best food choices for their families," Sheila Hansen, a board member of the Iowa Hunger Coalition and policy advocate and government relations manager for Common Good Iowa, said when the state submitted its waiver request. "Let’s make sure all Iowans have greater access to nutritious food, not punish our low-income neighbors and deny kids a candy bar when they want a treat."

Nearly 260,000 Iowans were enrolled in SNAP as of fiscal year 2024.

Republicans in Iowa and nationally are pursuing changes to SNAP, food programs​

Earlier this month, the USDA granted a separate waiver request from Reynolds to exempt Iowa from the Summer EBT program. Instead, Iowa will start up a program called "Healthy Kids Iowa" that will allow low-income families with kids to access $40 worth of food per child each month during the summer at food distribution sites around the state.

Iowa will receive $9.1 million to run Healthy Kids Iowa and the Iowa Department of Health and Human Services expects it to serve 65,000 kids.

The federal waiver comes after the U.S. House of Representatives voted to pass Trump's proposed tax cut bill, which includes changes to SNAP that would require states to pay part of the costs for the program, which has historically been 100% federally funded. The bill also changes work requirements and eligibility for some SNAP recipients.

Iowa Republicans have also tried in the past to limit which foods Iowans can buy with SNAP dollars. This year, the Iowa House passed a bill to do so, but it did not receive a vote in the Senate.

Two years ago, Reynolds signed a law instituting new asset limits and requiring regular eligibility checks for recipients of SNAP and other public assistance programs. Iowa is still in the process of rolling out those requirements.

Source (Archive)
 
I remember years ago when I worked at a gas station out west. A group of four twenty-somethings came in and loaded up on candy, beef jerky, and soda. "How much further is it to Vegas?" they asked as they paid with their food stamp card.

If you can afford to go to Las Vegas, why are the tax payers paying for your snacks?


You want a treat? Here's some raisins.
Grapes, strawberries, tangerines, those were the best treats when we were kids.
 
Because you're always supposed to assume the most sympathetic scenario, for some reason.

Anytime you see someone who struggles with money wasting what little they have on stupid crap, you're supposed to presume they drag themselves through three jobs a day, sleep four hours at night, normally eat nothing but ramen, and this is their one treat they've had in four years. They deserve happiness; why would you want to take that away?

The idea is supposed to fill your head with images of little Charlie Buckets having their yearly Wonka bar taken away, even though that's almost universally not the case.
Those people did exist, and I worked with them in conservation core. But those people are at most a shield. You could easily tweak this ruling on the basis of work hours, but they likely want it to apply as a blanket ban to be controversial.
 
This is a good first step, but it won't do much to make people "healthier" if it doesn't include the processed slop. While candy and soda are probably the worst offenders, right behind them are the frozen slop "breakfasts and dinners" people buy.

Every American knows what I mean when I say "Fatass with a cart full of 20 frozen dinners" because they've seen it with their own eyes. Fatass is just going to keep buying the soda and candy anyway, thankfully not on the taxpayers dime anymore. However, he will still buy and eat 2500+ calories of processed slop on your dime, then get sent to the hospital again on your dime.
"Iowans should be trusted to make the best food choices for their families," Sheila Hansen, a board member of the Iowa Hunger Coalition and policy advocate and government relations manager for Common Good Iowa, said when the state submitted its waiver request. "Let’s make sure all Iowans have greater access to nutritious food, not punish our low-income neighbors and deny kids a candy bar when they want a treat."
If you need SNAP to pay for a fucking $2-$4 candy bar "every once in awhile as a treat" (yeah right lol) or else you just won't be able to afford it at all you have serious fucking issues. Who the fuck is being "denied" a candy bar? Im sure if Laquisha stopped getting weaves, and buying a pack of smokes every day she could easily afford giving Deshawn a candy bar every once in a while without having me fucking pay for it.

Also, even if the kid doesn't have the "treats" he'll fucking live. Cry me a fucking river.
 
I genuinely don't get why this is so controversial, sweets are a luxury. There's a reason your parents only bought you candy on special occasions.
Fuck that. My parents told that growing up poor and their parents that grew up in the Great Depression, something like fresh fruit was something you would get for Christmas or other special occasions. I'd hate to be a psycho and wish for a worse Depression, but I genuinely want to see how much worse these people bitch when they have to sell all their creature comforts just to but necessities like rice, potatoes, chicken, ect.
 
Those people did exist, and I worked with them in conservation core. But those people are at most a shield. You could easily tweak this ruling on the basis of work hours, but they likely want it to apply as a blanket ban to be controversial.

Yeah, sorry, I didn't mean to imply that never happens or that the rules couldn't be better, just that, as you said, it gets used as a shield.

Like how I'm sure there are desperate people out there who steal only food to survive, but social media's "if you see someone shoplifting, no you didn't" mindset is stupid and just using those people to prop up criminals and idiots.
 
Candy I get, but soda is an overreach IMHO. And I don't even drink soda like that.
Soda is borderline worse imo. If you're getting the shit with sugar or HFCS in it, it's got just as much if not more sugar than candy, fucks with the teeth of young kids, and is just all around not something people should be drinking. It's not good to drink large portions of your calories unless you've got a fucked up stomach and then it'd probably be meal replacement shakes, which aren't the best for you.
 
I like a nice handle of rum and some cigarettes every once in a while for a special treat. Or maybe a nice bag of weed or a little bit of heroin mixed with fentanyl. Why is the dag gum government preventing me from buying those things with my food stamps? Punishing me for wanting a special treat? What did I do to deserve this?
 
When I was a grocery cashier, I always knew when someone was going to pay with food stamps/SNAP, based on the contents of their cart. Full of soda, candy, Hostess/Little Debbie snacks, and so on. Very little, if any fresh vegetables, fruits, or meats.

The people that were ashamed to be using food stamps would come in at 11 pm, and only buy fresh vegetables, chicken, lean cuts of meat, and so on. No junk at all.
 
I like a nice handle of rum and some cigarettes every once in a while for a special treat. Or maybe a nice bag of weed or a little bit of heroin mixed with fentanyl. Why is the dag gum government preventing me from buying those things with my food stamps? Punishing me for wanting a special treat? What did I do to deserve this?
I mean, trading EBT for cash is a thing.
 
Just throwing this out, but sugary sludge soda shouldn’t exist because it’s gross. Also the only candy worth keeping is Twix and Take 5, and if you can eat more than two? Lmao.
 
Iowa has some of the funniest pro Trump signs I've ever seen. Best one I saw in an article was a cage in someone's front yard with a dummy dressed as Hillary inside it. Also saw giant murals of Trump painted in various towns. Anyone upset about this decision regarding SNAP really shouldn't be. Iowa is a conservative state for the most part.
 
Yeah, they will. Only dumb fuck Boomers think this will stop it. People buy cigarettes with SNAP bennies. You just need to be in the ghetto/rough neighborhood and find a local convenient store run by a corrupt street shitter dune cook gook or chink.

It will inconvenience people but that's about it. Probably piss off a lot of poor white people. You know the people that voted for Trump. Which will probably hurt the Republicans in the midterms and in 2028.
 
Just throwing this out, but sugary sludge soda shouldn’t exist because it’s gross. Also the only candy worth keeping is Twix and Take 5, and if you can eat more than two? Lmao.

I like the 3 Musketeers candy bar because the silver wrapper reminded me of the pipes in World 3-1 of the first Super Mario Bros.
 
  • Like
Reactions: vanilla_pepsi_head
Tbh I think they should be allowed candy and soda. We dont make them eat bowls of porridge and stale bread.
Gibs should cover the bear minimum, your life on gibs SHOULD be miserable so you aspire to get out of the situation. Too bad niggers and druggies can live like literal vermin making the whole exercise moot, but at least make it so Jamal has to pay sweets out of his pocket.
 
Last edited:
Iowa has some of the funniest pro Trump signs I've ever seen. Best one I saw in an article was a cage in someone's front yard with a dummy dressed as Hillary inside it. Also saw giant murals of Trump painted in various towns. Anyone upset about this decision regarding SNAP really shouldn't be. Iowa is a conservative state for the most part.
There is a huge problem there. It really isn't at least not entirely. They went blue for Obama twice. They also went blue for Al Gore in 2000 in 1992 in 1996 for Clinton and in 1988 for Dukkakis. It's pretty much a swing state. It's also 83.1% white one of the most homogenous states in the US. so Boomers and Boomer tier types can't say "It went blue because niggers went out and voted".

It's a swing state with a lot of poor obese white people so the Republicans should tread lightly when fucking with the bennies.
 
  • Thunk-Provoking
Reactions: TokiBun
Grapes, strawberries, tangerines, those were the best treats when we were kids.
Biting into an orange quarter on a hot day did something to my brain, to where the orange taste is one of God's gifts. Don't get me wrong, there are other things I like to; but sometimes, I'll get the orange flavor and it's like static electricity to my brain.

That aside, lots of businesses, I hate to say this, but they rely on EBT/SNAP as well. I remember when it was mainly for grocery stores; but then I started seeing "EBT Now Accepted" signs at the gas stations, and other places. Because part of the racket is the government has a lump of money for the program, they don't want to administer it, so they pawn it off on the big banks who hand out the cards. The banks want to make more money, and it's easier to do that if their locked down card is accepted at more places; so they push for gas stations and other places, while as said by others, Coca-Cola and the like lobby for high sugar things to be allowed as well. It's not mismanagement, it's intentionally corrupted, like most government programs.
 
Back