LANSING, Mich. — State Sen. Jonathan Lindsey on Thursday introduced two bills that seek to improve health outcomes for Michiganders.
Senate Bills 227 and 228 tackle issues essential to making Michigan healthy again. SB 227 would promote purchasing affordable, nutritious food with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits, while SB 228 would remove harmful chemicals from food served to children at school.
“Both of these bills address a sad truth: Government is currently subsidizing, at taxpayer expense, food and drinks that contribute to negative health outcomes,” said Lindsey, R-Coldwater. “The keyword when it comes to SNAP is nutrition. Soda and its high sugar content have become a serious detriment to the health of Michiganders. These drinks possess no nutritional value.”
SB 227 would add Michigan to the growing number of states seeking waivers to remove the ability to purchase soda with SNAP benefits. Recently, Indiana, Arkansas and Idaho announced their intentions to also seek a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture.
SB 228 would ban foods with harmful additives and dyes from being sold or served inside Michigan schools. Foods containing dangerous substances, such as brominated vegetable oil, titanium dioxide and Red 40, among others, would not be provided, offered for sale or made available to students. Red 40, a widely recognized food dye, is linked to exacerbated ADHD symptoms in children and has been shown to cause tumors in mice in test studies.
“Removing these harmful chemicals from our schools is a great first step to protect Michigan’s children,” Lindsey added.
House Bill 4305 was also introduced by Rep. Brad Paquette, who has been at the forefront of fighting to improve health outcomes in the Michigan Legislature. Paquette’s bill provides a House version of Lindsey’s SB 227.
“The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program should supplement nutrition or change its name,” said Paquette, R-Niles. “We can begin by removing pop from purchasable items here in Michigan. This doesn’t mean anyone wants pop banned; it means that we do not want the taxpayer to pay for it when the program is meant to supplement food and drinks that offer nutritional value.”
###