On Thursday, Rep. Brandon Gill (R-TX) interrogated nutrition awareness advocate Gina Plata-Nino about Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) dollars covering sugary drinks and her organization’s conflicts of interest with food companies.
Plata-Nino is the SNAP director at the Food Research and Action Center, according to the organization’s website, and her job is to “wield her expertise to raise awareness about the importance of SNAP in helping tens of millions of families put food on the table.”
At a hearing for the House Subcommittee on Delivering on Government Efficiency, Gill asked Plata-Nino whether taxpayer dollars should be used to buy sodas. She replied, “Taxpayers’ money should be utilized to ensure that individuals have access to the food that they need to survive.”
“Do they need sugary sodas to survive?” Gill asked.
“Some of them do, who have low blood [sugar] issues, who may have kidney issues,” Plata-Nino responded.
“Is that right? You think they need Coca-Cola to survive? … Do you think that’s the most appropriate use of our tax dollars?” he asked.
“I am not a physician but medical records and expertise do show that in some circumstances,” Plata-Nino said.
“You were just citing the health needs, apparently, of the American people,” Gill said. “So, do the American people need Coca-Cola to survive?”
After a brief pause, she responded, “I did not say that,” adding, “I will not answer for individuals and their choices.”
He pressed Plata-Nino again, “I think most people can rationally say you don’t need Coca-Cola to survive. Wouldn’t you agree?”
She dodged Gill’s question, saying, “I agree that we have a hunger crisis and that we need to address it, ensuring that individuals have the food resource that they need.”
Gill then had Plata-Nino state what SNAP stands for: Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, and then asked what is nutritional about Coca-Cola.
“I am not a nutritionist,” she replied. “I am a food security expert in ensuring that individuals have the food resources that they need.”
He denied the need for expertise, saying, “This is a common sense question, and all of these have been common sense questions. I’m just asking you — is there a nutritional value to sugary sodas? It’s a yes or no question.”
“I’m not an expert. I will have to look at the dietary guidelines,” Plata-Nino said.
“Are you that ideologically dug in that you want our tax dollars paying for sugary sodas, that you will not, in a straightforward way, admit that sugary sodas are not healthful for the American people?” Gill said. “A lot of our tax dollars are spent on soda, which is why I’m asking about it … Do you believe that perhaps drinking sodas every day is healthy?”
“The worst health outcome is hunger,” Plata-Nino declared.
“Do you satiate hunger with Coca-Cola?” he asked.
“I did not say that,” she said.
He then moved his questioning to asking about her Food Research and Action Center’s funding.
“Is your organization funded by soft drink makers?” Gill asked.
“I am not in charge of development, but no,” Plata-Nino said.
“Is your organization funded by organizations that make money from food stamps?” Gill questioned.
“I can’t comment to that,” she replied.
“Does General Mills fund your organization?” he said.
“I don’t have access to that information,” Plata-Nino replied.
“I do, it’s right here,” Gill stated, holding up a paper from FRAC’s website listing General Mills, along with major soda retailers such as Amazon, Instacart, National Co-op Grocers, Albertsons Companies Foundation, and the Walmart Foundation, as their sponsors. “They do fund your organization. Do they profit off of food stamps?”
“Retailers are the major beneficiaries of [our organization],” she confessed.
“Do you think that’s a conflict of interest? … They’re profiting off of your advocacy,” Gill declared.
Plata-Nino remained visibly silent, refusing to affirm whether funding of General Mills was a “conflict of interest.”
The congressman smiled and concluded his time, saying, “I think that most people think that’s a conflict of interest. I know you don’t want to answer.”
The subcommittee later said in a statement that the hearing had found that “SNAP integrity is undermined by waste, fraud, and abuse.”
The Trump administration has recently been focused on preventing abuse of SNAP dollars to fund unhealthy lifestyles. Citing evidence from the Economic Policy Innovation Center that soda is the #1 product bought with SNAP dollars, the Trump administration has allowed five states to block SNAP money from buying candy and sugary drinks, a policy that an Obama-appointed judge ruled unconstitutional Tuesday.
.png)
.png)
