I was having a conversation with a friend while grabbing snacks, just about to buckle down for exam week. As I was going through the simple act of picking out my goodies, I was reminded of an article I’d seen about the possibility of banning certain “pleasure foods” — junk food, candy, soda — for SNAP beneficiaries.

So I did what most people do when they have a question these days: I Googled it. That’s when I discovered the bill had actually been passed during the Trump administration.

In case you didn’t know, this policy limits what food and drink options can be purchased with SNAP benefits. As someone who cares deeply about social equity and public policy, I have serious concerns about how these restrictions will harm low-income families — especially school-age kids. The more I looked into it, the more I realized just how misguided this approach truly is.

I frankly don’t see how this bill could magically erase the health concerns all throughout the U.S. Robert F. Kennedy Jr., amongst other representatives claim they are looking out for the health of Americans on SNAP. I say they really just want another excuse to cut and restrict benefits from recipients.

Oklahoma rep. Josh Breechan said, “If someone wants to buy junk food on their own dime, that’s up to them.” You can do whatever you want with your own money, yes. But to claim that this bill deconstructs the harmful statistics of health diseases for all of the U.S. is contradicting. Breechan is adamantly proclaiming prejudice in my opinion. Further promoting the class differences between Americans not on SNAP.

What’s most odd to me is that many of our political leaders claim it time for taxpayers to stop paying for the “unhealthy” decisions of SNAP beneficiaries. But I’ve never heard of a more dystopian explanation. This suggestion lacks humanity and compassion and it’s all-around uneducated. We live in Louisiana, any food here is rich in ingredients and consequences — even the “junkier” ones. To suggest that just by being a SNAP recipient you are more susceptible to disease is stigmatizing.

We’ve got them taking away benefits from SNAP recipients, who aren’t even allowed to buy hot food with their benefits, in case you didn’t know. I didn’t think they’d bring their drama to our kitchens. Banning candy, soft and energy drinks. It is a small step toward further restriction for beneficiaries of the state. It starts with junk foods and it ends with our accessibility.

My main issue with this ban is that it isn’t coming from a “we want Louisiana to be healthy.” perspective as Gov. Jeff Landry claims. When in reality it seems to be about decrepit politicians worrying about unnecessary regulations, abusing their power instead of fighting for the integrity of our people and their wants and needs against “big gov.”

Now I have also learned that an order submitted by David N. Matlock to USDA excluding candy, soft and energy drinks will also include an incentivized plan for SNAP users to buy more fruits and vegetables. I am more disgusted as I continue to read on this bill. The word “incentivized” for people receiving a benefit from the government is basically calling them cattle. They will have to earn being rewarded for using their own benefits the way the state chooses. It’s shameful.

We should do a little experiment. I want all the politicians of Louisiana who support this ban to make an in-depth YouTube video of their pantries, I want them to show off all the food they have in their homes, and I want them to explain why they chose to purchase each and every single one. And then, let’s do the same for lower-income-families on SNAP and compare and contrast.

That’s all the research we need.

If you can look at that comparison and still support these restrictions, then maybe the problem isn’t with comprehension — it’s with compassion.

I worry that the banning of these food items is not able to be truly understood by children, it’s hard enough to tell a kid no at the check-out of a Walmart when they ask for candy, now some of them can basically never get it? It’s wild and I know I would’ve struggled to comprehend that.

But also, who eats candy and drinks sodas and energy drinks more than children of this generation? It’s embedded into youth culture. Kids have their idols like the Paul brothers, who are perpetually coming out with more energy drinks for the market. Not to mention Mr Beast and his bars.

At the end of the day, you’re denying kids the ability to be as equal as their classmates. While I was blessed enough to attend private school, we still had kids who received government funding.

Luckily though, when the time came for our Halloween parties, my friends who received aid were still able to bring candy and treats for everyone in class. Unbeknownst to some, they were able to do this because of their SNAP benefits. They’re able to have a sense of normalcy because of the ability to buy candy, which sounds so unimportant but remains so true.

This bill will ensure that kids feel the effects of classism earlier in life. We will most definitely see the effects of exclusion as these kids continue to grow up.

The kicker is, no one has an issue with this bill being passed because it doesn’t affect the elite upper class. Gov. Landry and RFK Jr. will continue to be able to have the freedom to go to any grocery store and choose whatever they please. Their children can go in and get a range of candy or sodas or energy drinks all because of the luck of their circumstance. Whereas low-income families will suffer at the hands of ostracization, which can be heavily damaging to our youth.

This bill’s message is clear: our government cares more about the luck of your circumstance, not about the needs in your situation. Representatives can try and say they care about the health of Americans, but they really want to remind us of their control.

Blair Bernard is a 21-year-old theatre major from Lafayette, La.