Wisconsin Bill Would Treat Organic Milk, Sharp Cheddar, Brown Eggs as "Junk Food"

Share/Save Share this

Wisconsin ranks 44th in the nation for new job creation. Rather than rolling up their sleeves and finding new and innovative ways to help create jobs, the Wisconsin legislature is spending its time telling people needing food assistance what they should be eating. AB 110, which will be up for a vote in the Assembly on Tuesday, May 7, is geared toward limiting "the amount of food stamp benefits that could be spent on junk food." But some of the fine print of the bill, bizarrely, would ban people from choosing more healthy and less expensive options for their families. The bill is one of many being considered that are unduly punitive of the poor.

Restricting Access to Organic and Other Whole Foods

WIC EggsAs of March 2013, 858,000 Wisconsinites receive FoodShare benefits. The bill, AB 110, would limit FoodShare, Wisconsin's food stamp program funded through the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). As the Center for Media and Democracy (CMD) has reported, Governor Scott Walker has already proposed to require all "able-bodied adults" who receive food stamps (and don't have dependent children) to train or search for work in order to continue receiving those benefits. This even though Walker has failed to create the 250,000 jobs he promised when running for office in 2010.

Now Representative Dean Kaufert (R-Neenah) is sponsoring another bill to further limit FoodShare. Kaufert told the Wisconsin Radio Network that the bill would make it so that a benefit recipient "can't buy six bags of nachos and four cases of soda."

Specifically, the amended program would allow only a third of an individual's FoodShare benefits to be spent on a full range of food as they currently can be. The remaining two-thirds would be subject to the same restrictions as the federal Women, Infants, and Children (WIC) nutritional program, with some small modifications. (Both programs, of course, bar restaurant food, cigarettes, alcohol, and pet foods.)

WIC MilkWIC is a federal program intended to supplement food stamp benefits for a particularly vulnerable population of women and young children. As such, it has strict -- and at times very odd -- guidelines to focus these supplemental food dollars on nutritionally dense staple foods.

Wisconsin's AB 110 would mandate that two-thirds of a person's FoodShare benefits could be spent only on foods on the WIC-approved list. Exemptions have been added so recipients can also purchase fish, beef, pork, chicken, and potatoes. Strangely, exemptions were not added so that the "healthy" two-thirds could also be spent on a full range of healthy Wisconsin farm products and fresh food.

The result is that the bulk of your FoodShare dollars can be spent on milk, but not organic milk; on eggs, but only on white eggs by the dozen, not on brown, free-range, or organic eggs; on 100 percent whole wheat bread, but not on gluten-free bread for those with Celiac disease; on slices of American cheese, but not sharp cheddar. FoodShare dollars can be spent on dry beans, but not if they come from a money-saving bulk bin at your local food coop. You can get juice boxes for your children, but only Juicy Juice brand juice boxes.

In order for the state Department of Health Services to implement changes to FoodShare purchasing guidelines, it would need to attain a federal waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). But when Minnesota tried to prohibit purchase of candy or soda in 2004, and New York City tried to ban purchase of certain sugary drinks in 2010, both waiver requests were denied. The USDA points out the lack of clear standards to define foods as healthy or unhealthy.

As Bill Approaches Vote, Public Input Needed

According to the Associated Press, the Assembly committee heard input from food companies, grocery stores, and food banks. They told Wisconsin lawmakers that restrictions "would shame recipients and burden businesses with enforcement." Democrats on the committee -- who voted against the measure -- said it "would stigmatize poor people who already have limited options in buying food."

In addition to Rep. Kaufert, AB 110's supporters include Representatives John Nygren (R-Marinette), Kathy Bernier (R-Chippewa Falls), Ed Brooks (R-Reedsburg), Jeff Stone (R-Greendale), Paul Tittl (R-Manitowoc), Garey Bies (R-Sister Bay), Samantha Kerkman (R-Powers Lake), Scott Krug (R-Wisconsin Rapids), Pat Strachota (R-West Bend), Daniel LeMahieu (R-Cascade), Howard Marklein (R-Spring Green), Mike Kuglitsch (R-New Berlin), Michael Schraa (R-Oshkosh), Alvin Ott (R-Forest Junction), Mike Endsley (R-Sheboygan), Jeffrey Mursau (R-Crivitz), and Travis Tranel (R-Cuba City). In the Senate, the bill's supporters include Senators Robert Cowles (R-Shawano), Joe Leibham (R-Sheboygan), Frank Lasee (R-Casco), and Glenn Grothman (R-West Bend).

As Wisconsin Assemblymembers gather to vote on this bill May 7, these elected officials should expect to hear from those whose lives and food choices would be directly affected by the bill.


NOTE: AB 110 passed the Wisconsin State Assembly on May 7, 2013.

Comments

Comment viewing options

Select your preferred way to display the comments and click "Save settings" to activate your changes.

What does it matter

What does it matter how they spend their little funds. If they chose to get all organic, they will just be able to buy less of it. It's not like they get a voucher for a carton of eggs, they get a $5 food stamp to use. Just because a family falls on hard times should not mean they are no longer entitled to eat Cheddar cheese or gluten free bread. This is america, let they worry about their own budget. Worry more about the lazy minority gaming the system that about the family that have found they need to rely on help.

"I am limited to them because

"I am limited to them because my budget limits me"
If you have (as an example) $200 per month for food, you can spend it in any way you choose.

If you buy something of better quality in one area, you are choosing to buy lesser quality (or quantity) elsewhere... just as someone who uses foodshare does.

I regularly buy from the 99c old produce bin at Woodman's (used to be 79c until very recently). I'll buy store brand beans (canned & dry), store brand rice, store brand spices, store brand canned vegetables; most of what I buy is under $2/lb so that when I do buy higher quality foods I have the money to do it.

So yes, I do occasionally use my foodshare money to buy meat, or cream, or a cake mix, or juice, or tea, or even cookies. For my birthday I buy a bag of shrimp or a piece of salmon. But I've scrimped on other foods in order to do it.

And BTW, I'd love to be able to get a job which would allow me to support myself. Finding a job at all is hard, finding one with a living wage and healthcare benefits is proving next to impossible.

Really

Maybe if you were to get a better job you wouldn't have to buy the value brand kick rocks and mind your business. People who recieve food share is not lazy. This information comes from the foolish ones

Dear "sir," (and I use the

Dear "sir," (and I use the term loosely...

I work hard for my money too, and have, when times were bad, or in between jobs, used Food Stamps. Money that I had already been contributing to via the taxes I paid.

I also tend to put a higher value on foods that have ingredients that I can pronounce. I save a little extra each month to ensure that my children are not eating pesticide-laden foods, or toxic chemicals. And that's my choice as a parent.

"Quit whining and get a job..." (first off, you spelled it incorrectly, and secondly, when was the last time you looked for a job? In this economy, you'd be surprised who is and who is not on food stamps.)

Instead of whining yourself, what are your solutions? If a woman has a child, and the only option is a job that pays LESS per week than the cost of living, should she just suck it up and feed her child saltine crackers and water? Are you aware that a minimum wage job, at 40 hours per week, which most employers will NOT offer, because then they'd have to offer benefits, which no employer wants to do. On average, the monthly rental of an apartment is $1000-$200, depending on location, size, etc. The frugal amount one can spend on utilities per month is approximately $150.00 (and that's being frugal). Continuing the frugal theme, you can feed a family of 4 for about $400.00 per month in an urban metropolis. Then there's daycare - the cheap daycares are about $200.00 per week (AT BEST). A monthly transportation card (cheaper than a car!) is about $100.00 per month. Add it up, on the cheap end? BARE bones to just eek by, and heaven forfend you get sick, or your kid needs to go to the doctor, or you want to eat more than beans and rice, is about $2,500.00.

If you are making minimum wage, at a rate of $7.25-$8.25 (higher in an urban metropolis such as NYC or Chicago), you're getting about $300.00 GROSS per week. Which is about $1100.00 per MONTH, and that's BEFORE taxes.

So you do the math, sir. There's something wrong with this country when we demand folks get a job, but aren't willing to pay them to cover their BASIC needs.

Maybe some can budget?

The list is pretty arbitrary. American cheese and juice boxes are junk. I suppose I can understand why wic doesn't allow organic, it is cost. But it sounds like food share is like EBT in RI and people are allotted money for groceries. If you want to buy organic eggs and cheddar cheese and skip the juice and excess meat, I don't see why that is a problem. If you need to make the money last all month, you'll figure it out.
If we're going to set limits, let's say no packaged snack foods, no single serving juice. Pick things that make sense.

ADA violation

The portion of this bill relating to gluten-free bread is a violation of the American Disabilities Act. Someone should put the sponsors of this bill on notice with regard to this violation. How - embarrassing!

This makes no sense.

I have a severe dairy allergy, making it impossible to consume any milk product. So I use my FoodShare to get soy or almond milk. How exactly does that make me a bad person who is somehow abusing the system? I drink alternative "milks" because I have to, not because I want to. I'm not being fancy. I'm just having a damn bowl of cereal.

Besides, it's not as though people on FoodShare who buy these "fancy" or "junk" items are allotted extra credits for them. The "milk" I buy is more expensive than cow milk, so I have to budget my FoodShare accordingly, generally sacrificing any non-essentials and relying more on bulk/frozen/canned goods rather than fresh. Again, what's the problem? I'm trying to stay healthy by eating things that don't make me sick (and, thus, unable to be a productive member of society). I have several friends with similar problems-- celiac disease, medically-required reduced consumption of animal fats, and so on. Go ahead and prevent FoodShare recipients from buying junk food-- nobody should be eating that crap, let alone on the State's dollar-- but restricting eggs to "white only?" Give me a break. If people want to eat fewer foods because they purchase more expensive items, let them. It all comes out even in the end.

I dont think you get it

If you have a medically proven reason you can't eat something ok that is one thing however if you just prefer this to that then that's an issue. There is no reason that you, or anyone not just picking on you, should be eating say soy milk,organic eggs etc. while the people paying taxes into that system cannot afford to it that. There comes a point when you have to think that those living off the tax payers are living better then the taxpayers and that's where we are today. Things need to be cut back from food choices to funding, you know i know someone who gets $200 a month for groceries and that's just for him lol i spend less then half of that.

YOU don't get it

Someone on assistance who uses it to buy soy milk and cheddar cheese isn't costing the taxpayers one dime more than if they use it for white milk and American cheese. So why do you care?

You are assuming that people

You are assuming that people receiving foodstamps are not working. Every single person I worked with at my previous job, that had children, still qualified for food assistance even while working full time. That should be more appalling then someone buying a six pack of soda with their benefits.