by Jonathan Eberle | Mar 26, 2025 | News
By Jonathan Eberle |
The Arizona State Senate is considering a bill that would prohibit Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) recipients from using their benefits to purchase soda. House Bill 2165 (H.B. 2165) directs the state’s Department of Economic Security (DES) to seek a waiver from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) to implement the restriction.
The measure, which has already passed in the Arizona House of Representatives by a vote of 32-27-1, would require the DES Director to request the waiver. If granted, the purchase of carbonated beverages containing more than one gram of added sugar or artificial sweeteners would be banned for SNAP recipients. If the waiver is denied, the bill mandates that Arizona reapply annually until it is approved.
SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program, is a federally funded initiative that assists low-income households in purchasing groceries. The program currently allows for the purchase of a variety of food products, including bread, meat, dairy, and infant formula, but excludes items such as alcohol, tobacco, vitamins, and non-food goods.
Supporters of the bill argue that it promotes healthier choices for low-income families and ensures that taxpayer-funded benefits are used for nutritious food. Critics, however, contend that the restriction unfairly targets SNAP recipients and could create logistical challenges in enforcing the ban.
The bill was assigned to the Senate’s Health and Human Services (HHS) Committee for further consideration. If passed and signed into law, the restriction would take effect following the USDA’s approval of the waiver.
The financial impact of the legislation is expected to be minimal, as no additional costs to the state’s General Fund have been identified. The debate over the bill is expected to continue as lawmakers weigh the balance between nutritional policy and personal choice.
Jonathan Eberle is a reporter for AZ Free News. You can send him news tips using this link.
by Matthew Holloway | Feb 21, 2025 | News
By Matthew Holloway |
In a bipartisan effort between Republican Congressman Eli Crane (AZ) and Democrat Congressman Mike Levin (CA), the “Hire Veterans Act” was reintroduced to the U.S. House of Representatives. If enacted, the bill would employ U.S. military veterans in vacant, critical roles within the U.S. Forest Service, National Park Service, and Bureau of Land Management.
According to Crane, all three of the federal land management agencies have been suffering from serious staffing shortages that have negatively impacted their operational effectiveness. In particular, both Congressmen cited the U.S. Forest Service facing an ongoing struggle to recruit and train staff in multiple critical roles with what they referred to as “a noticeable gap in the experience and skill sets of candidates, affecting their capacity to address increasing wildfire threats.”
“As a 13-year veteran of the U.S. Navy, I’m all too familiar with the obstacles servicemen and women face when transitioning to civilian life. I’m also well-aware of the challenges our federal land management agencies currently face, particularly in filling vacancies for firefighters, park rangers, and foresters,” said Crane in a press release.
As reported by the New York Times, 3,400 employees from the U.S. Forest Service were terminated by the Trump Administration on Thursday, amounting to approximately 10% of the service’s workforce. Many of the newer employees would have been hired under the Diversity, Equity, and Inclusion regimen of the Biden Administration.
“With this bill, Congress has the opportunity to both streamline the employment process for veterans AND better ensure that our natural resources are protected for future generations. I’m grateful to be able to introduce this legislation that serves our veterans while furthering the responsible stewardship of U.S. land,” Crane added.
“Our veterans sacrifice so much for our nation. We have an obligation to ensure that veterans returning to civilian life can get jobs and support their families,” said Rep. Levin. “I’m glad to be partnering with Rep. Crane on our bipartisan bill to expand opportunities for veterans and help connect them to jobs in federal land management agencies. I look forward to working with my colleagues to advance this important legislation.”
According to a press release from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which manages the Forest Service, U.S. Secretary of Agriculture Brooke Rollins issued a memorandum to rescind all Diversity, Equity, Inclusion, and Accessibility (DEIA) programs and celebrations. Instead, the USDA will reprioritize unity, equality, meritocracy, and color-blind policies.
Rollins said in her opening remarks at the USDA, “We will neither commemorate nor celebrate our immutable characteristics, neither among ourselves nor among Americans at large. We will instead celebrate the things that make us American: merit, faith, and liberty first among them. All Americans deserve equal dignity, and at this Department they will receive it. On this precipice of the 250th anniversary of our Revolution, we will rededicate ourselves to ‘the proposition that all men are created equal.’”
Matthew Holloway is a senior reporter for AZ Free News. Follow him on X for his latest stories, or email tips to Matthew@azfreenews.com.
by Corinne Murdock | Jul 28, 2022 | Education, News
By Corinne Murdock |
On Tuesday, Arizona Attorney General Mark Brnovich sued the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) for requiring schools to adopt gender ideology practices in order to receive free or reduced lunch funds. About half of Arizona’s children rely on those meals.
The federal government supplements states with funds to provide free or reduced meals for low-income K-12 students. As AZ Free News reported, the Biden administration updated its Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) guidelines for its Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to clarify that protected classes within anti-discrimination policy included sexual orientation and gender identity. In the context of Biden’s correlating executive order, the guidelines would likely require schools to allow bathrooms, locker rooms, and sports teams open to gender identity.
Brnovich asserted in a press release that the Biden administration’s actions are unlawful.
“USDA Choice applies to beef at the market, not to our children’s restrooms,” said Brnovich. “This threat of the Biden administration to withhold nutritional assistance for students whose schools do not submit to its extreme agenda is unlawful and despicable.”
Arizona’s lawsuit is part of a 22-state coalition led by Tennessee Attorney General Herbert Slatery. The remainder of the coalition includes Indiana, Alabama, Alaska, Arkansas, Georgia, Kansas, Kentucky, Louisiana, Mississippi, Missouri, Montana, Nebraska, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Utah, Virginia, and West Virginia.
Altogether, the 22 states receive over $28.6 billion in SNAP benefits for over 15.4 million individuals.
The states’ complaint asserted that President Joe Biden directed federal agencies to rewrite federal law in order to align with his January 2021 executive order to “prevent and combat discrimination on the basis of gender identity.” The lawsuit further asserted that the USDA circumvented the mandatory legal process outlined in the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) to implement their new guidelines.
The states described the new guidelines as “arbitrary, capricious, [and] an abuse of discretion.” Specifically, their lawsuit alleged that the Biden administration failed to observe procedures required by law for guideline updates, misinterpreted Title IX, violated anti-commandeering and non-delegation doctrines, and violated the Constitution’s Spending Clause, First Amendment, Tenth Amendment, and separation of powers.
“To be clear, the States do not deny benefits based on a household member’s sexual orientation or gender identity. But the States do challenge the unlawful and unnecessary new obligations and liabilities that the Memoranda and Final Rule attempt to impose — obligations that apparently stretch as far as ending sex-separated living facilities and athletics and mandating the use of biologically inaccurate preferred pronouns,” read the complaint. “Collectively, the Memoranda and Final Rule inappropriately expand the law far beyond what statutory text, regulatory requirements, judicial precedent, and the U.S. Constitution permit.”
Brnovich’s decision to join the coalition lawsuit wasn’t the only action Arizona officials took in response to the USDA guidelines. Earlier this month, Congresswoman Debbie Lesko (R-AZ-08) introduced legislation to nullify the gender ideology compliance requirement.
Corinne Murdock is a reporter for AZ Free News. Follow her latest on Twitter, or email tips to corinne@azfreenews.com.
by Terri Jo Neff | Aug 28, 2021 | News
By Terri Jo Neff |
One Arizona produce company has resolved a reparation order issued last year by the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) in favor of a seller, while two other companies have yet to make payment.
According to the USDA, Rio Rico-based Lorex Produce LLC has satisfied a $48,826 reparation order issued under the Perishable Agricultural Commodities Act (PACA) in February 2020 involving unpaid produce transactions with a Florida seller. As a result, Lorex Produce can continue operating in the produce industry upon applying for and being issued a license under PACA.
In addition, company officials Francisco Alejandro Lopez Rodriguez and Enok Aristiga Ayala may now be employed by or affiliated with any PACA licensee.
The USDA’s PACA Division is part of the Fair Trade Practices Program in the Agricultural Marketing Service. It provides an options for handling disputes involving contractual obligations in the buying and selling of fresh and frozen fruits and vegetables produce transactions.
The USDA is authorized to suspend a PACA license -or impose sanctions on an unlicensed business- for failure to pay a reparations award. The agency can also prohibit sole proprietors, partners, members, managers, officers, directors or major stockholders of any sanctioned company from being employed by or affiliated with any PACA licensee without securing USDA approval.
Last week’s announcement that Lorex Produce has fully satisfied its PACA order leaves two other Arizona companies on the reparation list.
Perfect Harvest Inc., operating in Nogales, was sanctioned last year for failing to pay a $243,240 reparation award in favor of an in-state seller. As of the issuance date of the order, Jorge A. Mercado was listed as the officer, director and major stockholder of the business. He may not be employed by or affiliated with any PACA licensee without securing USDA approval.
The other company, Arizona Lemons LLC, operated out of Phoenix. It is the subject of a $16,776 reparation award in favor of a Minnesota seller who was not paid. Company officials Martha E. Bombela and Jose R. Partida may not be employed by or affiliated with any PACA licensee without securing USDA approval.
When the USDA announced its sanctions against Lorex Produce last year, the agency noted it “continues to enforce the prompt and full payment for produce while protecting the rights of sellers and buyers in the marketplace.” In the past three years, more than 3,600 claims were resolved involving more than $104 million.
Page 1 of 11
