HOT Rotisserie Chicken Act: letting federal food assistance (SNAP benefits) recipients buy hot rotisserie chicken

Photo by Amanda Lim on Unsplash

“A rotisserie,” stand-up comedian Mitch Hedberg quipped, “is like a really morbid Ferris wheel for chickens… I like dizzy chicken.”

What the legislation does

The HOT Rotisserie Chicken Act would allow federal food aid to be spent on hot rotisserie chicken, now banned. Under current law, only cold rotisserie chicken is allowed.

The acronym HOT in the title stands for Healthy Obtainable Tasty.

Rep. Rick Crawford (R-AR1) introduced the House version on April 30, while Sen. Jim Justice (R-WV) introduced the Senate version that same day. Even though the House and Senate lead sponsors are Republicans, the cosponsorship is bipartisan.

Context

SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), is the federal government’s primary food benefit for low-income Americans. Called “food stamps” until 2008, the program is sometimes still colloquially called by that name.

The program bans participants from buying warm or hot prepared foods, including heated soups, steamed vegetables… and hot rotisserie chicken.

Why? In the original 1964 legislation, the government wanted to encourage families to cook meals in the home – presumably, though not explicitly stated, for the wife or mother of the household to do so.

That was a very different era, though. Women’s labor force participation rate was only 38% back then, versus 57% now. People don’t have as much time to prepare their own meals anymore – see the rise of “fast casual” dining options, particularly in the past two decades.

What supporters say

Supporters argue that a program with 41 million participants should be able to purchase one of the best foods.

“It is just plain common sense to allow SNAP participants to purchase a rotisserie chicken with their benefits,” Rep. Crawford said in a press release. “Hot rotisserie chicken is healthy, widely available, popular in grocery stores, and aligned with the new Dietary Guidelines for Americans.”

“Allowing folks on SNAP to buy hot rotisserie chickens is truly just common sense,” Sen. Justice said in a separate press release. “We have to give people the option to put a healthy, protein-dense choice on the table that actually tastes good and doesn’t take an hour and a half to cook.”

What opponents say

Opponents come from both sides of the political spectrum. Indeed, an April House vote on the subject saw both Republican and Democrat votes against.

“I voted against it to send a message that the amendment does not go far enough to expand SNAP eligibility,” Rep. Angie Craig (D-MN2), the House Agriculture Committee’s top Democrat, said in a press release. “There is no question that SNAP recipients need access to more hot food options, but this amendment was pushed by big grocers and retailers and the chicken industry. We can do better.”

What happens next

On April 30, the House approved the provision by a 384-35 vote, as an addition to a larger farm bill: the Farm, Food, and National Security Act.

Both parties overwhelmingly supported the provision, though opposition came from both sides: Republicans voted 187-23, Democrats voted 196-12.

The Senate could still potentially strip the provision from the larger legislation, though – if they even pass it at all. That’s why supporters also introduced it as standalone legislation.

The Senate version has attracted three bipartisan cosponsors, for an exactly equal mix of two Republicans and two Democrats. It’s been referred to the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee.

The House version has attracted 25 bipartisan cosponsors, for a total of 17 Republicans and nine Democrats. It’s been referred to the House Agriculture Committee.

Going even further?

Another bill, the Hot Foods Act, would allow SNAP recipients to purchase all warm or hot prepared foods, not just hot rotisserie chicken.

Rep. Grace Meng (D-NY6) introduced the House version on March 31, while Sen. Michael Bennet (D-CO) introduced the Senate version that same day.

While it’s attracted considerably more cosponsors than the rotisserie chicken legislation, they’re almost entirely on one side. Democrats comprise 93 of the 102 House sponsors, while Democrats and Democratic-leaning independents comprise all of the Senate’s 10 cosponsors.

With such skewed partisanship, odds of passage seem much lower in the Republican-controlled Congress.