Meeting Public Comments

Subcommittee meeting and times are as follows:

A bill for an act relating to the double up food bucks program, the supplemental nutrition assistance program, including a waiver for eligible foods, and making an appropriation.(See HF 796, HF 970.)

Subcommittee members: Nordman-CH, Johnson, R., Lundgren

Date: Wednesday, February 26, 2025

Time: 12:00 PM - 12:30 PM

Location: RM 304

Names and comments are public records. Remaining information is considered a confidential record.

Comments Submitted:

02-24-2025

Kathleen Thomas [Citizen]

SNAP benefits need to be left untouched. It is ironic that a government which says it wants to give parents more rights in choosing for their children, now doesnt like the choices parents make and want to control that. Trust parents to raise their own children. Their choices can not be controlled by government.

02-25-2025

Tamara DeSchepper

Vote no on this bill. Basically, you are saying that if you are poor you are not allowed to be vegetarian (wouldn't even be allowed to buy protein staples like tofu) or be allowed to access alternate ways to get drinkable protein (like almond milk) if you have milk allergies. What is the point of this bill other than to make life even harder for those that are already suffering from poverty how very Christian of you.

02-25-2025

Katrina Anderson

The best approach to help Americans make good choices is not to penalize them, but to educate them. Lets put our efforts into increasing nutrition/health education and home economics instead of restricting and punishing people accessing assistance.

02-25-2025

Elizabeth Wagner

This bill aims to keep people in poverty and ignores the root causesof food insecurity. We praise "parent choice" in this state yet revoke that choicefor folks utilizing SNAP leaving little regard for food allergies or religious and dietary needs. This is an unnecessary and cruel bill that will only increase food insecurity in our state. Pleasevote no on HSB 216.

02-25-2025

John Boller [Coralville Community Food Pantry]

Iowas food pantries and churches are already struggling to meet the soaring demand for assistance. Restricting SNAP choices wont help familiesit will only push more pressure onto overburdened nonprofits. These limits are not only ineffective but overreaching, stripping families of the freedom to make their own food choices.

02-25-2025

Barbara Zilles

Many Iowans live in food deserts and have no access to transportation. Instead of reducing the food available to them we should INCREAS it! Anyone who wants to reduce it needs to spend a month in those conditions (without the help of your rich and powerful friends).

02-25-2025

Tiffany Welch

I appreciate the funding of double up food bucks, but linking it to absurdly restrictive food waivers is ridiculous. Trust Iowans to make appropriate food choices, and they will. Fund double up food bucks, help the Iowa economy, and stop taking away the dignity of a family to choose their food

02-25-2025

Rita Carter

I oppose HSB216 as it is written now. I fully support and encourage the Double Up Food Bucks program. This successful pilot program should be implemented statewide to benefit both Iowa families and Iowa communities. However, tying that program to the USDA allowing the food stipulations for SNAP in this bill is not the right thing to do!Please trust all Iowans to buy the food they need to stay healthy. By stipulating the foods in the bill does not take into account the medical conditions that may preclude some of the listed items. I heard testimony from one person in a hearing last session about this that opened my eyes.Please do not advance HSB216 as it is written now.

02-25-2025

Erika Uthe

I believe access to adequate nutrition is a foundational part of living together and we need to support and protect all people in their access to food. We need to be supporting those who struggle to acquire food, not make it more difficult. As a Christian and Iowan I ask that you vote no on this bill so that we can continue to help feed Iowans. I appreciate the extra funds appropriated, however, am concerned that Iowans won't receive them if the USDA does not grant the waiver, and they will be restricted anyway. The way to better nutrition for Iowans is greater access, not limited.

02-25-2025

Tina Brown

I oppose this bill. Appropriating double up food bucks is wonderful. Making it tied to an unrealistic waiver from the USDA to restrict food, including food that is medically or culturally appropriate, is not the way to go about creating healthy Iowans. Respect parent's choice to feed their families appropriately.

02-25-2025

Tabitha Simms-Quigley

I strongly oppose this bill. Fund double up food bucks, a program that benefits famers, grocers, and those eating the food. Stop creating extra barriers to families feeding food that is culturally relevant and medically needed. Stop policing food choices. My tax dollars pay your salaries, but I don't police what you buy. Allow Iowans the dignity to provide foods that fit their needs

02-25-2025

Mandi Remington

As a former state employee who struggled to keep fresh produce and dairy in the house at the end of the month despite working fulltime, I understand the challenges families face in accessing nutritious food. That is why I oppose HSB 216, which would impose sweeping restrictions on how Iowans can use their SNAP benefits. This bill creates unnecessary barriers for families, retailers, and the state while failing to address the root causes of food insecurity.SNAP already follows federal guidelines to ensure benefits are used for food. Research has consistently shown that restrictions like these do not lead to better nutrition but instead create more red tape, higher costs, and additional burdens for those who rely on the program. The biggest barrier to nutrition for SNAP participants is affordabilityhealthy food costs more, and many families already struggle to make their benefits last through the month. The majority of SNAP participants report that they want to buy more fruits and vegetables but simply cant afford them. Restricting purchases wont change that reality. While HSB 216 includes funding for the Double Up Food Bucks program, tying this funding to federal approval of food restrictions puts Iowans at risk. Double Up Food Bucks is an effective program, but its available at less than 1% of SNAP retailers statewide. Expanding access to proven nutrition incentives would do far more good than limiting food choices.This bill would also create unnecessary burdens for small businesses and rural grocery stores,forcing them to overhaul their inventory systems to track and block restricted items. The state would face new bureaucratic challenges in enforcing these rules, spending more on administration and enforcement without achieving meaningful improvements in nutrition or public health.Instead of restricting choice, we should focus on solutions that improve access and affordability. Iowans should be trusted to make the best food decisions for their families.I urge you to reject HSB 216.

02-26-2025

Emily Shearer [Food Bank of Iowa]

Good morning,I am submitting comment to ask to please remove any and all restrictions to SNAP from consideration, including the restrictions listed in this bill. The vast majority of SNAP users are purchasing protein, dairy, and produce with their SNAP benefits and suggestions otherwise only add to the stigma associated with public benefit programs. SNAP is intended to benefit individuals and families and so severely limiting the foods they are eligible for reduces positive nutritional impacts often seen through SNAP. Those facing food insecurity are most harshly impacted by these proposed changes, but I am also asking members to consider who else would be impacted. Who else should be a part of this conversation. Considering the large, positive impacts retailers and grocers see through SNAP, restrictions like this only further complicate the program. Additional barriers to SNAP impact sales and at what point will the program become too complex for them to operate. Cuts and barriers to using SNAP don't only impact food insecure individuals, it impacts business owners, local economies, and can impact job security for those working in these industries. Thank you.

02-26-2025

Jordan Carter

I oppose HSB 216. Current SNAP benefit regulations already restrict what items are elegible for recipients to purchase. To impose further restrictions would increasingly limit access to benefits for Iowan SNAP recipients, especially considering that over 98% of retailers statewide dont participate in the Double Up Food Bucks program.

02-26-2025

Kate Schaechter

I am writing to express my concern for HSB216 on behalf of my nieghbors. The appropriation for doubleup food bucks is hypothetically awesome, but not at the expense of further limiting SNAPapproved foods. Iowans deserve to be treated with dignity and respect. This includes allowing Iowans utilizing SNAP to make decisions for themselves and their families about what kind of food they bring home from the grocery store. HSB216 further stigmatizes food assistance by limiting SNAP recipients ability to get the items they might need. Adding more restrictions to a vital social service is not reflective of our values as Iowans.

02-26-2025

Toni Allen

I am OPPOSED to the SNAP restrictions included in HSB 216. I understand that this is a meatproducing state with a strong lobby, but let's give parents a way to make basic nutrition choices for their children within the constraining limitations of SNAP.

02-26-2025

Paige Chickering

I am the Iowa State Manager for Save the Children Action Network. I work closely with the Hunger Coalition here in Iowa to fight child hunger and ensure our kids have enough to eat and I am very concerned by this bill. I would like to start by saying I do understand the goal behind this bill improving diets and health in Iowa is critical. However, studies have shown that restricting the foods SNAP participants can purchase does nothing to improve healthy eating. Rather, programs that incentivize healthy eating by providing additional benefit dollars for the purchase of fresh produce like Double Up Food Bucks (DUFB) have proven to be far more successful in improving diet quality with a USDA study showing a similar program resulted in participants eating 26% more fresh fruits and vegetables than non participants. Aside from the fact that unfortunately this legislation will not be effective in improving diet, I have some deep concerns about its implementation. There are over 650,000 food products on the market right now and 20,000 new items introduced annually with average grocery stores carrying about 40,000 different items. In order to comply with these sweeping regulations retailers or the state would have to go through every item to classify whether it is included on SNAP and update POS systems to reflect this. While some items may be straight forward like sliced deli meat, many are not. For example is flour counted as a grain and purchasable or are kids snack packs that have meat and cheese but also crackers allowed to be included. This will likely be very costly and challenging for the state and retailers alike. And if the burden of these regulations pushes some smaller grocers to opt out of the SNAP program that could have dire consequences on food insecurity in our state especially for folks in rural areas with already limited access. We fully support the Double Up Food Bucks program. It is a fantastic way to help lowincome families improve their diets and we would love to see that legislation passed without these harmful regulations as has been proposed by the Iowa Senate this year. In closing I want to share a few final thoughts on SNAP. According to the census bureau SNAP lifted 1.5 million children out of poverty in 2017 and in Iowa (according to our HHS data) 32% of SNAP recipients are children. SNAP is currently our best tool to fight food insecurity for kids in our state. I implore you to vote against this legislation that could greatly impact the effectiveness of this program. Thank you. Sources: Effects of Inclusion of Food Purchase Restrictions and Incentives in a Food Benefit Program on Diet Quality and Food Purchasing: Results From a Randomized Trial. Harnack, Lisa J. et al. Journal of the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, Volume 124, Issue 5, 569 582.e3 Healthy Incentives Pilot Final Evaluation Report USDA, 2014. https://www.fns.usda.gov/research/snap/hip/finalevaluationreport Pros and cons of restricting SNAP purchases Brookings, 2017. https://www.brookings.edu/articles/prosandconsofrestrictingsnappurchases/ Supplemental Poverty Measure Shows Who Benefits From Government Programs United State Census Bureau, 2018. https://www.census.gov/library/stories/2018/09/supplementalnutritionassistanceprogramliftsmillionsoutofpoverty.html Welfare Reform, Thrive Iowa, Aging and Disability Resource Centers Presentation Iowa HHS, 02/24/2025. https://nam12.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/