A bipartisan coalition of lawmakers, including 55 House Republicans, joined Democrats on Thursday to block an effort to prohibit SNAP recipients from using food benefits to purchase sugary sodas.
The move triggered sharp criticism from conservatives and health advocates who are decrying the $9 billion of SNAP money spent each year on sodas $9 billion in SNAP funds is spent each year on sodas — representing 10% of the program's total budget and the top food item purchased.
Critics note the sugary soda are not only costly, but provide consumers almost zero nutrition while actually promoting disease conditions that fuel federal healthcare costs.
In a 238-186 vote, the House rejected an amendment from Rep. Keith Self, R-Texas, that would have barred soda and other sugar-sweetened beverages from being eligible under SNAP.
SNAP, formerly called food stamps, is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, the federal food assistance program serving more than 40 million low-income Americans.
The opposition included 183 Democrats, with a surprising number of Republicans – 55 – voting "no" to the Self Amendment.
Critics of the vote were quick to condemn the decision, arguing it undermines both taxpayer interests and public health goals.
"The House just voted against banning soda from SNAP," Rep. Nancy Mace, R-S.C., wrote on social media. "Why should the government fund your soda purchases?"
She added, "If SNAP recipients want to buy sugary drinks, they can do it on their own dime, not on the backs of a taxpayer-funded nutrition program."
Others in Congress were puzzled by the break in GOP ranks to support the soda boondoggle.
"It's so disappointing that 55 Republicans can't take the first step in stopping something so obviously wrong and that hurts the moral fiber of the country," Rep. Glenn Grothman, R-Wis., told Newsmax.
Nutrition experts and fiscal conservatives also pointed to growing evidence that dietary patterns among SNAP participants may contribute to chronic health problems — and rising government healthcare costs.
A widely cited study by researchers at Stanford University and the University of California found that restricting SNAP purchases of sugary-sweetened beverages could significantly reduce obesity and Type 2 diabetes rates.
The study, which analyzed data from more than 19,000 SNAP participants, concluded that such a ban would lead to measurable declines in calorie consumption, obesity prevalence, and diabetes.
Specifically, researchers estimated that banning sugary drinks from SNAP would reduce obesity prevalence by nearly 1 percentage point and lower Type 2 diabetes incidence by about 1.7%, equating to roughly 240,000 fewer cases nationwide.
"The logic behind SNAP policy changes is that taxpayers are potentially subsidizing unhealthy food consumption and paying for its downstream health consequences," the study noted.
Health advocates argue those consequences are substantial.
Low-income populations—including SNAP recipients—already face disproportionately high rates of obesity and diabetes, conditions that drive billions in federal healthcare spending through programs like Medicaid.
"This is not just about personal choice — it's about public cost," one nutrition policy analyst said.
"When the government subsidizes unhealthy consumption, taxpayers ultimately pay twice: once at the grocery store, and again through healthcare."
The study also found that SNAP participants consume more calories from sugary beverages than from fruits and vegetables.
Despite the findings, some lawmakers and anti-hunger groups opposed the soda restriction, arguing it could create administrative burdens and limit consumer freedom.
Beverage makers and bottling companies reportedly lobbied heavily in the House to defeat the amendment.
"It makes me very worried about the country's future when an anti-family program like this is backed by so many Republicans," Grothman said.
© 2026 Newsmax. All rights reserved.