Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Current and Proposed Restricted Food Expenditures.
Am J Prev Med. 2018 09; 55(3):e70-e77.AJ

Abstract

INTRODUCTION

Between 2000 and 2017, a total of 23 states proposed legislation to further restrict Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchases. In the absence of a pilot program, the potential effect of such restrictions is unclear. The objective of this study is to provide insight on the proposed restrictions' effectiveness by characterizing SNAP households' expenditures on current and proposed restricted foods, and comparing them with their cash expenditures. Restrictions on sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods, and foods ineligible under the Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) are considered.

METHODS

The National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (collected 2012-2013) provided weekly food expenditures for 1,234 SNAP households. Descriptive statistics and t-tests (completed in 2017) were used to characterize and compare households' cash and restricted food expenditures.

RESULTS

On average, SNAP households' allocated 7%, 6%, 17%, and 66% of their food expenditures to currently restricted foods, sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods, and WIC-ineligible foods. Given a sugar-sweetened beverage or snack food restriction, the average SNAP household can cover their restricted expenditures with cash. However, the average household's expenditures on current restricted and WIC-ineligible foods exceed their cash expenditures by a mean of $40.84 (SE=$2.44). Note that results characterize the impact of proposed SNAP restrictions on the average SNAP household. Individually, it is likely that some SNAP households would be affected by a sugar-sweetened beverage or snack food restriction.

CONCLUSIONS

Legislation restricting specific foods will likely be less effective at altering SNAP households' food expenditures than legislation seeking to restrict all WIC-ineligible foods.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Department of Economics, South Dakota State University, Brookings, South Dakota. Electronic address: andrea.leschewski@sdstate.edu.Department of Agricultural, Food and Resource Economics, Michigan State University, East Lansing, Michigan.

Pub Type(s)

Journal Article
Research Support, U.S. Gov't, Non-P.H.S.

Language

eng

PubMed ID

30033027

Citation

Leschewski, Andrea M., and Dave D. Weatherspoon. "The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Current and Proposed Restricted Food Expenditures." American Journal of Preventive Medicine, vol. 55, no. 3, 2018, pp. e70-e77.
Leschewski AM, Weatherspoon DD. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Current and Proposed Restricted Food Expenditures. Am J Prev Med. 2018;55(3):e70-e77.
Leschewski, A. M., & Weatherspoon, D. D. (2018). The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Current and Proposed Restricted Food Expenditures. American Journal of Preventive Medicine, 55(3), e70-e77. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.amepre.2018.04.029
Leschewski AM, Weatherspoon DD. The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Current and Proposed Restricted Food Expenditures. Am J Prev Med. 2018;55(3):e70-e77. PubMed PMID: 30033027.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program: Current and Proposed Restricted Food Expenditures. AU - Leschewski,Andrea M, AU - Weatherspoon,Dave D, Y1 - 2018/07/20/ PY - 2017/11/14/received PY - 2018/03/22/revised PY - 2018/04/23/accepted PY - 2018/7/24/pubmed PY - 2019/10/23/medline PY - 2018/7/24/entrez SP - e70 EP - e77 JF - American journal of preventive medicine JO - Am J Prev Med VL - 55 IS - 3 N2 - INTRODUCTION: Between 2000 and 2017, a total of 23 states proposed legislation to further restrict Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) purchases. In the absence of a pilot program, the potential effect of such restrictions is unclear. The objective of this study is to provide insight on the proposed restrictions' effectiveness by characterizing SNAP households' expenditures on current and proposed restricted foods, and comparing them with their cash expenditures. Restrictions on sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods, and foods ineligible under the Special Supplemental Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) are considered. METHODS: The National Household Food Acquisition and Purchase Survey (collected 2012-2013) provided weekly food expenditures for 1,234 SNAP households. Descriptive statistics and t-tests (completed in 2017) were used to characterize and compare households' cash and restricted food expenditures. RESULTS: On average, SNAP households' allocated 7%, 6%, 17%, and 66% of their food expenditures to currently restricted foods, sugar-sweetened beverages, snack foods, and WIC-ineligible foods. Given a sugar-sweetened beverage or snack food restriction, the average SNAP household can cover their restricted expenditures with cash. However, the average household's expenditures on current restricted and WIC-ineligible foods exceed their cash expenditures by a mean of $40.84 (SE=$2.44). Note that results characterize the impact of proposed SNAP restrictions on the average SNAP household. Individually, it is likely that some SNAP households would be affected by a sugar-sweetened beverage or snack food restriction. CONCLUSIONS: Legislation restricting specific foods will likely be less effective at altering SNAP households' food expenditures than legislation seeking to restrict all WIC-ineligible foods. SN - 1873-2607 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/30033027/The_Supplemental_Nutrition_Assistance_Program:_Current_and_Proposed_Restricted_Food_Expenditures_ DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -