Got A Sweet Tooth? It Shouldn't Be On Taxpayers To Fund It | Tomi Lahren

There’s a new debate cooking hot on social media: Should SNAP and EBT users be able to spend their taxpayer-provided assistance on junk food? 

I mean, this should be a rhetorical question, but, alas, it is not.

Some folks really believe those who benefit from the tax-dollar-funded assistance afforded to them by others, should be able to buy whatever the heck they please with other people’s hard-earned money.

Some even argue it takes away freedom, independence and autonomy from those on food stamps. They also argue they should be able to "treat themselves" to sugary drinks, chips and candy.

Um, no. 

Those assistance programs exist to lend a helping hand. They should be temporary, and they should come with work requirements for the able-bodied, drug tests, and yes, parameters and stipulations. 

This is indeed a free country and if you so choose to stuff your face with little Debbies and Dr Pepper that’s on you. Even worse, if you choose to feed your children that crap, that is ill-advised but also on you.

But your "RIGHTS" end where your "assistance" begins, homie. 

You don’t get to use my hard-earned tax dollars to poison your body and then, wouldn’t ya know it, I’m supposed to pay for your healthcare, too?

Here’s what should happen. Honestly, we should bring back this plan from the first Trump Administration.

The "America’s Harvest Box" was an inspired idea. Instead of handing out debit cards to folks to use on whatever they damn well please. The food assistance should come in the form of a box packed with 100 percent U.S.-grown and produced food.  

Items in the original concept included things like shelf-stable milk, peanut butter, canned fruits and meats, and cereal.

That way these kids whose guardians are on assistance, would get wholesome and healthy food options. 

And as an added bonus, our American farmers and ranchers would get a boost. 

Bring back the box and let’s cut the crap.

And those are my Final Thoughts.