LINCOLN — Local grocers sounded alarm bells Tuesday about the potential negative impacts that incoming restrictions to Nebraska’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program could have on businesses and the more than 150,000 Nebraskans who use the program. 

During this year’s legislative session, lawmakers passed waivers to SNAP — a government food assistance service some also refer to as food stamps. The updates would remove soda and other energy drinks from the list of SNAP-eligible purchases starting in 2026. 

Nebraska would be the first state in the nation to ban soda and energy drinks from SNAP purchases. Gov. Jim Pillen has publicly supported the state waivers, referring to the affected drinks as “junk.”

“There’s absolutely zero reason for taxpayers to be subsidizing purchases of soda and energy drinks,” Pillen said at a USDA event in May. 

The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently approved the waivers, and Nebraska’s Department of Health and Human Services held a hearing Tuesday to hear public comments on the proposed changes. The updates still require approval from DHHS’ Office of Economic Assistance, Pillen and the Attorney General before they take effect. 

USDA approval also comes on the heels of congressional passage of the federal budget reconciliation bill, which will increase work requirements for SNAP participation, requirements not addressed during the state hearing. 

Only two people spoke at the hearing — representing advocacy group Nebraska Appleseed and the Nebraska Grocery Industry Association — though more organizations submitted written testimony that were not immediately made available to the public. 

Public comments

Shannon McCord, vice president of the grocer group’s board of directors and operator of a local grocery store in Superior, Nebraska, said the “state-by-state patchwork approach” to SNAP regulations is confusing to retailers and could do more harm than good. 

“Even if the intention is good, these waivers are going to add costs and do real harm to local grocers,” McCord said. 

The waivers would require grocers to update their payment systems, which McCord described as a “costly and complex task” that would be significantly harder for small and rural retailers like himself to accomplish. His store in Superior is also near the Kansas border, which does not have the same SNAP restrictions, and he fears the changes could encourage his customers to travel across the border for their groceries. 

For businesses operating on slim margins like his own, McCord said the restrictions could force owners to make layoffs or other cutbacks, or even close their doors. Additionally, he said it would add shame and stigma to customers who depend on SNAP. 

“If (retailers) disappear and we develop a food desert, are we really solving a health problem when customers are only getting food from dollar stores and processed boxed foods?” McCord asked. 

Madison Castor, law clerk with Nebraska Appleseed, said past attempts at restricting access to SNAP have undermined the program’s effectiveness. Rather than imposing restrictions, she claimed that efforts to add incentives to use SNAP benefits on healthier food items like produce have proven more effective at promoting healthier living. 

By forcing businesses to update their payment systems, Castor feared that would reduce the number of businesses that accept SNAP as payment overall. This would greatly impact the health and livelihoods of Nebraskans who rely on the service. 

“SNAP is a vital and temporary lifeline for thousands of Nebraskans,” Castor said. “Over 150,000 of us count on SNAP to help put food on the table at a time when costs are high and family budgets are tight. These proposed rules seek to implement a SNAP restriction waiver that harms the dignity and autonomy of Nebraskans.”