HB0323 requires the Wyoming director of the Department of Family Services to request a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture by July 1, 2025, seeking authority to exclude candy and soft drinks from the list of foods that may be purchased with Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits. The bill defines “candy” and “soft drink” for this purpose, and if the federal waiver is approved, the department must prohibit SNAP purchases of those items. If the waiver is denied, the department must renew the request each year until it is granted.
The bill is a targeted welfare and nutrition-policy measure focused on restricting the use of SNAP benefits for certain sugary products. It does not directly change federal SNAP rules, but it directs a state agency to pursue federal approval and, if approved, to implement the restriction in Wyoming. The act takes effect immediately upon completion of the constitutional process for enactment.
Impact
HB0323 would amend Wyoming law by creating a new statutory requirement in W.S. 42-2-115 directing the Department of Family Services to seek a USDA waiver related to SNAP eligible foods. If the waiver is granted, the bill would affect SNAP recipients and retailers by barring the purchase of candy and soft drinks with SNAP benefits in Wyoming. Because SNAP is federally regulated, the practical effect depends on federal approval, but the bill establishes a continuing state obligation to seek that approval annually until successful.
Sentiment
The available voting history suggests the bill had meaningful support in the House, passing committee 7-1 and then passing third reading 48-11. That pattern indicates broad but not unanimous agreement, with a clear majority favoring the measure. No committee transcript is available here, so the discussion record does not show detailed arguments, but the vote totals suggest the bill was generally viewed favorably by most members.
Contention
The main point of contention is the policy choice to restrict SNAP purchases of candy and soft drinks, which supporters likely view as a nutrition and public-health measure and opponents may view as an unnecessary limitation on benefit recipients’ choices. Another likely issue is federalism and administrative practicality, since the bill depends on a USDA waiver and requires repeated annual requests if the waiver is denied. The split vote in the House indicates some members objected either to the substance of the restriction, the burden on recipients, or the likelihood and value of pursuing a waiver.