South Dakota seeks to ban use of food assistance for soda purchases as court ruling clouds issue

The South Dakota Department of Social Services said Monday that it submitted a request to the U.S. Department of Agriculture to bar the purchase of soft drinks with government food assistance, after a June court decision vacated similar bans in five states and caused some other states to delay implementing their bans.

A Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program waiver from the federal government is necessary for states to limit the kinds of food or beverages that can be purchased using the benefits, which in South Dakota are loaded onto cards that function like debit cards. South Dakota’s Legislature and governor approved a law earlier this year requiring the state Department of Social Services to seek a waiver to ban soft drink purchases, and to submit the waiver application by this Tuesday. 

The new law defines a “soft drink” as “a nonalcoholic beverage that contains natural or artificial sweeteners,” with exemptions for milk or milk products; rice, soy or similar milk substitutes; and some juices.

North Dakota postpones ban on using food assistance for soda, candy

Benefits are available to income-eligible families, and in South Dakota they can be used to purchase nearly any kind of food or beverage. Roughly 72,000 people, or 36,500 households, receive benefits in South Dakota, according to the department.

The department said in a news release that the ban on soft drinks will begin six months after federal approval, though it did not address the federal court decision or delays in other states.

North Dakota was set to ban candy, soda and other sweetened drinks this week, but delayed its rollout. The North Dakota Health and Human Services Department received a letter from the USDA citing the recent federal court decision that struck down similar bans in five states. The decision criticized the USDA for not following requirements to publish notice of the restrictions and accept public comment.

North Dakota and South Carolina are among the states postponing their restrictions to Nov. 1 to allow the USDA to consider the impact of the court decision, publish a public notice in the Federal Register and assess public comment before each state’s ban goes into effect.

The USDA has approved 23 SNAP food restriction waivers, according to its website, including the five states where the waivers were vacated by the court ruling.

Sioux Falls Republican Rep. Taylor Rehfeldt introduced the bill requiring South Dakota to seek a waiver. Rehfeldt, a nurse anesthetist, said the submitted waiver is “progress,” despite the potential delay.

“I think it’s important that we move forward with what’s best for South Dakota,” Rehfeldt said. “And what’s best for South Dakota is getting unhealthy, sugary drinks out of the SNAP program — both from a patient and holistic health standpoint and as responsible stewards of taxpayer dollars.”

Opponents said during the legislative session that the bill would create administrative burdens for the state and retailers without producing the desired effects.

“If our goal is better nutrition, we should reward nutritious choices instead of punishing food choices,” said Rep. Liz May, R-Kyle, during debate on the bill in February. May is a grocery store owner.

An estimate prepared by the Legislative Research Council said hiring the staff and paying for the software necessary to implement a ban would cost the state $310,000 in the first two years, and about a quarter-million dollars annually thereafter.