Earlier this week, the Senate Health & Welfare Committee advanced Senate Bill 14 by Sen. Patrick McMath, which (among other things) seeks to ban the purchase of soft drinks with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program benefits. The Times-Picayune | Baton Rouge Advocate’s Emily Woodruff reports on this far-reaching bill, and the fear that it will drive down participation rates in SNAP, which currently serves roughly 1 in 5 Louisianans.
SNAP has a long history of alleviating food insecurity, the leading indicator of wellbeing for children in the U.S. It’s a popular program because it’s easy, with participants using a preloaded debit card accepted nearly everywhere groceries are sold. “It preserves the dignity and autonomy of recipients,” said Craig Gundersen, an economist who studies food assistance programs at Baylor University. “They shop alongside neighbors and friends.” Changing it to be more restrictive, said Gundersen, could make the program less effective because fewer people may participate.
As Governing’s Carl Smith notes, some policy experts believe ‘junk food’ bans will be used to justify cuts to SNAP.
Marion Nestle, a nutritionist and New York University professor who has also written a book about soda bans, told The Atlantic that though she’s spoken in favor of SNAP soda bans in the past, she believes these latest efforts from Republicans are “a cover for what the real motivation is, which is to cut SNAP.” The Foundation for Government Accountability has also been pushing for policies that would reduce the number of people eligible for SNAP, the outlet reports.
Research shows that SNAP recipients spend their food dollars in the same way as families that don’t use the program:
A 2016 USDA study looked for differences between the food purchases of people using food stamps and other Americans. … Like other families, SNAP recipients spend about 20 cents of every dollar on sweets (including sweetened beverages) and salty snacks, they found.
The anti-SNAP bill is part of a package of “health”-related bills that include a stupid attempt to get rid of fluoride in drinking water. The Advocate’s Emily Woodruff:
Fluoride, a naturally occurring mineral in water, soil and food, strengthens tooth enamel. Since the 1940s, many U.S. communities have added fluoride to their water supplies for that purpose, and it is largely celebrated as a win for public health. Research suggests that drinking water with added fluoride can reduce cavities by up to 25 percent.
Louisiana’s immigrant detention hellhole
Louisiana trails only Texas in the number of immigrant detainees in Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) facilities. Tulane law professors Laila Hlass and Mary Yanik, writing in a guest column for the New York Times, explains why the state has become a hot spot for immigration detentions:
It is no coincidence that they all were sent to the same state — a place where they are far from their families, communities and legal counsel. … Louisiana is notorious for a trifecta of compounding barriers to effectuate the rights of immigrants: conservative courts, scarce access to legal support and horrific detention conditions. The resulting black hole, as civil and human rights groups have called it, threatens to erode America’s rule of law well beyond the immigration legal system.
A Times-Picayune | Baton Rouge Advocate editorial urges state and federal leaders to stop making Louisiana a collaborator in deportations that lack due process:
It’s hard not to wonder now if Louisiana residents face increased risk of being ensnared in ICE actions simply because of our proximity to detention centers. Data show the number of immigration cases have skyrocketed in our federal courts. It’s also hard not to wonder if some saw our state’s poor record on criminal justice and decided it would be the ideal proving ground for how to conduct mass deportation without due process. Our courts and our state cannot continue to turn a blind eye to actions that go against the United States Constitution. The world is watching.
State leaders push back on DOGE
Americorps recently terminated $400 million in grants, which help states support education, respond to natural disasters and strengthen a host of other initiatives. The move came at the direction of DOGE – Elon Musk’s government dismantling initiative. Politico’s Sophia Cai and Ben Johansen explain how state leaders are pushing back:
“All those services are so well used in Louisiana,” said Billy Nungesser, the Republican Lt. Gov of Louisiana, where 13 AmeriCorps programs were cut, hitting 330 volunteers, including around three dozen veterans placed in universities and community college campuses to help other veterans transition back to civilian life. “I’m hoping that the president can look at it again. If they need to make cuts, let us decide what programs are worthy. It’s hard for them to see from Washington what impact these programs have,” Nungesser said.
Louisiana’s senior senator is also speaking out:
Sen. Bill Cassidy (R-La.), a longtime supporter of AmeriCorps, criticized the cuts on Musk’s platform, X, on Friday : “I support improving efficiency and eliminating waste, but I would have to object to cutting AmeriCorps grants like those that support Louisiana’s veterans and organizations that provide crucial support after hurricanes and natural disasters.”
Creating statewide solar regulations
In recent years, many political and business leaders have witnessed the positive impact that new solar projects could have on job creation, energy production and the broader state economy. But a patchwork of local regulations is creating headaches for industry leaders and local governments. The Times-Picayune | Baton Rouge Advocate’s Blake Paterson reports on legislation that aims for a statewide solution:
House Bill 615 was the result. Sponsored by Geymann, the bill would require mile-long buffers between solar projects and residential properties. It would also create approval processes at three state agencies, the Department of Energy and Natural Resources, the Department of Wildlife and Fisheries, and the Department of Agriculture and Forestry, to ensure projects don’t intrude on wildlife or replace valuable agricultural land. In a committee hearing on the bill last week, Geymann said his goal is to put guardrails in place so solar can flourish “in a way that doesn’t have a negative impact on our state and our communities.” “I’m not here to kill solar,” he said.
Geymann’s bill drew opposition from a broad colation:
Property owners who have leased land for solar projects said the measure would trample on their property rights. Solar developers said it would kill future developments in Louisiana. The petrochemical sector — which is increasingly turning to renewables to make its products more desirable overseas — also signaled opposition. “The legislation in its current form decimates new utility-scale solar generation at a time when it is needed most,” said Jeff Cantin, board chair of Gulf States Renewable Energy Industries Association and CEO of Louisiana-based Solar Alternatives, which installs solar panels for commercial and residential customers.
Number of the Day
590,640 – Number of Louisiana households that claimed the state-level Earned Income Tax Credit in 2023. (Source: Invest in Louisiana)