Arguments Used in Public Comments to Support or Oppose the US Department of Agriculture's Minimum Stocking Requirements: A Content Analysis.

BACKGROUND

In 2016, the US Department of Agriculture (USDA)'s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) Retailer Rule proposed several changes for SNAP-authorized retailers, including: requiring retailers to have at least 85% of their food sales come from items that are not cooked or heated on site before or after purchase; requiring stores to stock seven varieties of qualifying foods from four staple food groups; requiring stores to carry perishable foods in three of the four staple groups; requiring stores to carry six units of qualifying foods at all times (depth of stock); disqualifying multiple ingredient foods and accessory foods from counting toward depth of stock requirements.

OBJECTIVES

To better understand arguments used to support or oppose the USDA's proposed rule that all SNAP-authorized retailers carry more nutritious foods.

DESIGN

We conducted a qualitative content analysis of a random sample of public comments posted to the US Federal Register (a publicly available database) in response to the USDA's proposed rule.

PARTICIPANTS/SETTING: A random sample of 20% of all public comments submitted by individuals and organizations to the US Federal Register were analyzed (n=303) for this study.

RESULTS

Three main themes were discussed: 1) arguments used in opposition to the rule; 2) arguments used in support of the rule; and 3) facilitators to assist stores in implementing the rule. Some of the subthemes included focusing on definitions used in the rule, reduced food access caused by stores leaving the SNAP program, lack of space and equipment for healthy foods, and the potential for increasing healthy food access.

CONCLUSIONS

Nutrition and dietetics practitioners may be tasked with working with stores to implement healthy changes. Nutrition and dietetics practitioners must understand the role that the USDA has in food policy. In addition, understanding how federal food policy influences the environments in which dietetics professionals' clients are making food choices is important.