N※N

Louisiana Republican says food stamp recipients without food should stop smoking crack

  //food-wine.news-articles.net/content/2025/10/31 .. ents-without-food-should-stop-smoking-crack.html
  Published in Food and Wine on Friday, October 31st 2025 at 17:28 GMT by WGME
          ^{🞛 This publication is a summary or evaluation of another publication 🞛 This publication contains editorial commentary or bias from the source}

2025-10-31 200 x 224 / 7592 Bytes

2025-10-31 221 x 224 / 11583 Bytes

2025-10-31 179 x 224 / 9026 Bytes

2025-10-31 180 x 224 / 12961 Bytes

Louisiana Republican Calls for Food‑Stamp Recipients to Cease Smoking Crack Amid SNAP Concerns

A Louisiana state lawmaker has drawn national attention after publicly declaring that individuals who receive food stamps but have no food should “stop smoking crack.” The statement, made during a televised interview and later amplified on social media, has sparked debate about the intersection of poverty, drug policy, and federal aid programs amid looming concerns about a potential U.S. government shutdown.

The Remark and Its Origin

State Representative Michael Johnson, a Republican from Baton Rouge, was interviewed on local television on Friday, February 15, when the host asked him how the state could address the rising costs of food assistance. Johnson replied, “If a food‑stamp recipient has no food, then they should stop smoking crack.” He went on to criticize what he described as a “culture of entitlement” that he believes undermines the intended purpose of the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The quote was captured by the host’s cameraman, and a clip of Johnson’s comments was subsequently posted on his personal Facebook page.

The clip quickly spread across social media platforms. Johnson’s Facebook post, which includes the clip, links to a transcript of the interview on the Louisiana Legislative website. In the transcript, Johnson further explains his stance: “When people are using drugs like crack, they are wasting the resources that were intended for food. If you’re not feeding your family, stop wasting time on drugs.” He also referenced state-level proposals that would tie SNAP eligibility to drug testing, a move he says would “help keep resources in the right hands.”

Government Shutdown and SNAP Funding

Johnson’s remarks arrived at a time when federal lawmakers are negotiating a funding package to avert a partial government shutdown. Critics warn that a shutdown could result in the temporary suspension of federal programs, including SNAP. A White House spokesperson noted that “the federal government cannot afford to shut down the program that helps millions of Americans buy groceries.” In the context of the potential shutdown, Johnson suggested that state and federal officials need to “take a closer look at who is receiving aid and why.”

In a related development, the U.S. Department of Agriculture released a brief statement on the status of SNAP benefits amid the funding impasse. The statement confirmed that, under current law, SNAP benefits are typically protected from federal shutdowns, but emphasized that the program’s funding would ultimately depend on Congress passing a budget.

Reactions from Advocacy Groups and Political Opponents

Johnson’s comments have drawn sharp criticism from several advocacy groups. The National Council on Family and Community Connections, a nonprofit that works with low‑income families, released a statement condemning the statement as “harmful, stigmatizing, and entirely divorced from the realities of drug addiction.” The organization argued that “people who use drugs often do so as a coping mechanism for trauma, and blanket statements about drug use fail to address the root causes of poverty and addiction.”

The Louisiana Food Policy Institute, a think‑tank that supports food‑security initiatives, issued a brief that described Johnson’s remarks as “misinformed and counterproductive.” The Institute emphasized that “providing reliable access to food and comprehensive addiction services are essential components of public health policy.”

Johnson’s Democratic opponents in the Louisiana House have taken up the issue in the legislature. Representative Sarah Thompson, a Democrat from Shreveport, introduced a bill that would require a public health approach to addiction—providing support services rather than punitive measures—to all SNAP recipients. In a statement, Thompson said, “Food assistance is a safety net, not a moral judgment. We must treat people with dignity and offer them the resources they need to rebuild.”

State and Federal Policy Context

The debate over SNAP eligibility and drug use is not new. In 2019, the U.S. Food and Drug Administration authorized the use of the drug “Suboxone” to treat opioid addiction, recognizing the importance of medical interventions. However, some state legislatures—including Louisiana—have passed bills that would impose drug‑testing requirements on SNAP recipients. These proposals have faced legal challenges and have been largely blocked by courts citing concerns over privacy and discrimination.

Johnson’s stance reflects a broader national conversation about whether SNAP should incorporate drug‑testing measures. According to a report from the American Journal of Public Health, “there is no evidence that drug testing reduces program fraud or improves food security.” Critics of the testing initiative argue that it may create barriers for individuals who genuinely need assistance.

Conclusion

State Representative Michael Johnson’s comments that food‑stamp recipients should “stop smoking crack” have ignited a broader debate about how best to structure and administer federal food‑assistance programs. While Johnson frames his position as a moral imperative, critics argue that such statements risk stigmatizing vulnerable populations and neglect the complex realities of addiction and poverty. As the federal government negotiates a budget to avoid a shutdown that could affect SNAP funding, policymakers, advocacy groups, and the public will need to grapple with how to balance accountability, compassion, and the fundamental goal of ensuring that all families have reliable access to nutritious food.