Do sugary drinks undermine the core purpose of snap?

Ross and MacKay (2017) argue that excluding sugar-sweetened beverages from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) is 'in principle morally permissible' because it does not violate the central obligation that SNAP is meant to discharge-the obligation to ensure that citizens have secure access to food adequate to meet their nutritional needs. I query this argument, and suggest two other ways of understanding the core purpose of SNAP. According to the first, the core purpose of SNAP includes promoting good nutritional outcomes; thus, one might argue, including sugary drinks in SNAP undermines its core purpose. According to a second conception of SNAP, its core purpose ought to be much broader: promoting good nutritional outcomes, ensuring food security and providing secure access to other food-related goods, such as pleasure, social experiences and cultural expression.