Disagreement over the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program once again threatens to stall progress on the farm bill.

Lawmakers are trying to hammer out a compromise on work requirements for SNAP recipients.

Currently, able-bodied adults without dependents from ages 18 to 49 can only receive SNAP benefits for three months if they work or sign up for a training program.

The proposal would extend work requirements until age 65. States would decide who gets exemptions.

House Agriculture Chairman Mike Conaway, a driving force behind the proposal, told Politico that he was defending cuts to SNAP and the proposal would not not shrink benefits.

"In fact, not one person would be forced off SNAP due to the work or training requirements we have been discussing. Not one," he said.

But the Secretaries' Innovation Group, an organization of conservative state officials responsible for administering SNAP, blasted the proposal for potentially removing work requirements for more adults with children.

Soda Fizz

Meanwhile, health advocates are squaring off against anti-hunger groups after a task force recommended cutting sugary drinks from the list of approved SNAP purchases.

The anti-hunger group Food and Research Action Center pushed back against the report, calling the proposal "counterproductive," and warning that such a move would risk harming SNAP by "stigmatizing beneficiaries and throwing sand in the gears of this very successful program."

Retail industry groups like The Food Marketing Institute and The American Beverage Association were predictably against it, while the United Fresh Produce Association applauded the report.

A study last year from the advocacy group Voice of the People and the University of Maryland's public policy school found that 70 percent of Americans favor banning soda and candy from SNAP purchases.

A report last year from the US Department of Agriculture found that sugary drinks made up 5.4 percent of the grocery budget of SNAP recipients, more than any other food category. By comparison, non-SNAP households spend about 4 percent of their grocery shopping on soft drinks.

In a New York Times article, nutrition professor Marion Nestle called those findings "shocking."

"In this sense, SNAP is a multibillion-dollar taxpayer subsidy of the soda industry," she told the Times.

But as pointed out in a Huffington Post article, the USDA had concluded that the difference was small - that there were "no major differences" in the spending habits of SNAP and non-SNAP households.

Read More:

Food stamp Proposal Infuriates Both Left And Right (Politico)

Congress Could Cut Soda and Candy from SNAP, but Big Sugar is Pushing Back (Civil Eats)

In the Shopping Cart of a Food Stamp Household: Lots of Soda (New York Times)

No, Food Stamp Users Aren't Buying ‘Lots' Of Soda (Huffington Post)