Idaho barring ‘candy’ from SNAP results in arbitrary rules | Opinion

Idaho’s new rule blocking candy and soda purchases through SNAP is being promoted as a public health improvement. On paper, that sounds reasonable.

SNAP is meant to help families buy food, and better nutrition is a worthy goal.

However, once you look at how the rule actually works, it starts to feel less like smart reform and more like symbolic politics.

The biggest problem is how inconsistent the definitions are. Not all candy is treated the same.

Under the current rules, certain chocolate bars that contain flour, like Kit Kats or Twix, are still allowed. A plain chocolate bar without flour is not. The average shopper would reasonably assume both are candy. The state has decided one counts and one does not.

The same thing happens with drinks. Powdered drink mixes are still eligible. Some sweetened beverages that contain juice are allowed. But a bottle of soda is not. If the goal is to reduce sugar consumption, these distinctions feel arbitrary. They do not reflect how people actually eat or shop. They reflect how products are labeled.

SNAP was designed as an anti hunger program. It increases purchasing power for families who are already navigating high grocery prices. It was not designed to be a tool for regulating behavior. Once government starts dividing food into approved and unapproved categories for one income group, it changes the purpose of the program.

There is also the economic reality. Fresh produce, lean proteins, and whole foods often cost more per calorie than processed options. Families stretch their budgets however they can. Removing a few treat options does not suddenly make healthier food affordable. If lawmakers truly want better nutrition outcomes, expanding incentives for fruits and vegetables would likely have a greater impact than restricting candy bars.

There is a broader fairness issue too. Idaho leaders frequently speak about personal freedom and limited government. Yet this policy tells low income residents that the state knows better than they do when it comes to their grocery cart. Adults who receive SNAP are still adults.

Improving public health is a legitimate goal. I think most would agree policies should be clear, consistent, and grounded in economic reality. When Kit Kats qualify but a standard chocolate bar does not, it is hard to argue the system is working as intended. At some point, it stops being about health and starts being about control.

Rowan Astra is a Boise based artist and community advocate whose work explores religious freedom, civil liberties and local politics.