This is from one of those daily newsletters I get about what’s happening in the food industry.  This one covers baked goods, snacks, and candy.  And this particular collection of articles deals with chocolate as an instrument of international trade policy.

BakeryAndSnacks.com says:

Chocolate’s use in bakery is a booming business in China: Once perceived as an exotic delicacy – bought only as a luxury gift or an extravagant treat – the Chinese consumers’ taste for chocolate is growing and the ingredient is quickly cementing a niche for itself in bakery. Read more

• Penchant for Western products supports China’s bakery boom, says analyst: China’s bakery sector is a thunderous market, spurred on by consumers who have a great desire to develop their knowledge of Western products. Read more
• ‘Even a niche in China is lucrative’: Rich Products Corporation: China is set to become one of the most attractive cereals and bakery markets worldwide, with the bakery sector reaching $47bn by 2020 as more people chose to eat snacks on the go. Read more
• Be it baguette or mooncake: China’s dynamic bakery market shows no signs of slow-down: Chinese appetites for bakery products continues to grow unabated, despite a market saturated with Asian brands and a continued upswing in foreign offerings. Read more
• China to familiarize Western market with ‘pinyin’ baked treats: China’s diverse bakery industry – encompassing bakers of traditional ‘pinyin’ (literally translated as ‘Chinese style cakes and snacks’) and producers of modern items like croissants and waffles – is growing at a rate that far exceeds most other segments. Read more

I can’t help thinking about all those calories in chocolate-laden baked goods, and their effects on Chinese waistlines….

As I noted earlier, Congress passed the 2018 Farm Bill without gutting SNAP but President Trump exacted a price for signing it—making it harder for States to exempt participants from work requirements.

The USDA released its new work-requirement rules just as Congress was passing the bill (here is the USDA’s quick Infographic summary).

As Politico put it, “USDA unveils crackdown on SNAP waivers.”

In his Orwellian press release, USDA Secretary Purdue said the new rules are:

intended to move more able-bodied recipients of Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) benefits to self-sufficiency through the dignity of work. The rule is meant to restore the system to what it was meant to be: assistance through difficult times, not lifelong dependency…Long-term reliance on government assistance has never been part of the American dream.

In an even more Orwellian op-ed, Purdue said:

This restores the dignity of work to a sizeable segment of our population, while it is also respectful of the taxpayers who fund the program.

Americans are generous people who believe it is their responsibility to help their fellow citizens when they encounter a difficult stretch. That is the commitment behind SNAP. But like other Federal welfare programs, it was never intended to be a way of life. A central theme of the Trump administration has been to expand prosperity for all Americans, which includes helping people lift themselves out of pervasive poverty.

Trump’s statement outdoes anything Orwell could have imagined:

Today’s action will help Americans transition from welfare to gainful employment, strengthening families and uplifting communities…That was a difficult thing to get done, but the farmers wanted it done. We all wanted it done. I think, in the end, it’s going to make a lot of people very happy.

Why Orwellian?

Farmers?  Strengthening families?  Uplifting communities?  Making people happy?  Trump has to be kidding.

The true purpose of the new requirements is to reduce SNAP enrollment, never mind that most people who participate in SNAP really need it.  The USDA says the new policy will 755,000 people out of the current 39 million.

Under current SNAP rules, adults who can work (able-bodied adults without dependents— ABAWDs) must work or be in training at least 80 hours per month.  Otherwise they are only allowed to get SNAP benefits for up to three months in a three-year period.

But states can apply for waivers of this time limit, and 36 states have done so.

One reality check: Because the USDA does not keep data on food stamp recipients who participate in state employment and training programs, or on whether such programs do anything useful to help SNAP recipients achieve self-sufficiency, there is no way to know whether the new requirements will do any good.

I’m not the only one saying so.  The Government Accountability Office has just issued a report making precisely this point.

As the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities explains:

Taking essential benefits like food benefits away from those who are unemployed wouldn’t address the inequities in the labor market or the challenges that so many workers face. Instead of punishing struggling workers, policymakers should support them through ideas with bipartisan support, such as a higher minimum wage, a stronger Earned Income Tax Credit, and paid family leave.

Maybe someday.

Pillsbury got me started thinking about this tradition.

But lots of other people have also thought about putting foods on Xmas sweaters.

I particularly like the design of this one.

Pizza seems to be a theme:

Or if the thought of wearing a sweater like these seems terrifying, you can eat the cookies!

Happy holidays!

I was lucky to be in Ithaca for the end of the farmers’ market season on Saturday and the not-to-be-missed Rutabaga Curl, now in its 21st year.

Contestants hurl rutabagas toward a traffic marker.  The one that gets closest wins.

Ithaca’s mayor, the charismatic Svante Myrick, does the opening curl.

The event begins with the kid curlers:

This is Ithaca, after all, so there are protesters.

I’m not much of a sports fan, so I come for the performance of the Rutabaga Chorus by Ithaca’s Vociferous Cruciferous Choir to the tune of Handel’s Messiah (its last-minute rehearsal).

• You can listen to the audio of a previous performance here.
• Or watch a 2012 performance here.

I went once before in 2012 (unfortunately, the links seem to have disappeared).

But my favorite lines remain the same: “Rutabaga! Rutabaga!  Repeat refrain, forever and ever.  Rutabaga.”

Happiest of holiday seasons.

Jia-Chen Fu.  The Other Milk: Reinventing Soy in Republican China.  University of Washington Press, 2019.

Here’s my blurb for this one:

The Other Milk tells a fascinating story—how nutrition science transformed the place of soybeans in the Chinese diet from humble components of traditional cuisine to instruments of physical and social development, only to be replaced by dairy foods as markers of modernity.  This book is a superb example of how cultural history, cuisine, science, and globalization intersect around one food–soybeans.

Here is a small taste: Fu, an assistant professor of Chinese at Emory University, explains that the use of soybeans in Chinese cuisine dates back to 500 B.C. or so, but she begins her analysis in the early 1900s with an account of Li Shizeng’s promotion of soy milk—in Paris, of all places.

Li’s soybean experiment in Paris proved short-lived, but his insistence that soybeans offered a key to a modern, industrial China did not fail to impress his compatriots.  Popular accounts celebrated the soybean’s many industrial and gastronomic uses and as late as 1920, highlighted Li’s foresight and ingenuity in promoting an indigenous product, doujiang (soybean milk), as both more nutritious and sanitary than cow’s milk, on the world stage.

If the soybean could signify modern, industrial development, could it also challenge perceptions of Chinese physical and nutritional precarity, of China as “the sick man of Asia”? When coupled with a newly emergent discursive concept of the Chinese diet as a thing scientists and social scientists could measure and adjust, the aspiration grew for soybeans to change not just Chinese history but Chinese bodies.

I subscribe to GlobalMeatNews.com’s daily newsletter to find out what’s going on in the international meat market.  Here is a sample of the type of issues it covers.

Special Edition: Focus on Poultry

The global poultry market is heating up with some major consolidation taking place. This focus on poultry looks at MHP and Cargill’s expansion plans as well as Costco’s decision to move up the food chain and manage its own supply. We also look at which countries are becoming the big players in poultry.

• MHP plans to acquire Perutnina Ptuj: Ukrainian poultry producer MHP has announced that it is seeking to acquire meat processor Perutnina Ptuj… Read
• Costco takes control of meat supply chain: Retailer Costco is setting a new “protein precedent” for the US market by taking ownership of the chicken supply chain from farm to fork, a new report from CoBank Knowledge Exchange has revealed… Read
• Global poultry market facing challenges: The growing incidents of African Swine Fever (ASF) across the globe could have a knock-on effect on the international poultry market… Read
• Cargill to acquire Konspol: Processor Cargill has reached an agreement to acquire Konspol, a leading Polish value-added food company… Read
• Asia driving global poultry growth: With poultry predicted to become the most consumed meat in the world in the next few years, where will this growth come from?.. Read
• Jamaican Broilers Group grows US presence: Poultry processor Jamaica Broilers Group has expanded further into the US with the acquisition of a feed mill in Georgia for an undisclosed sum… Read
• Singapore fresh chicken distributors fined S$27m: Thirteen fresh chicken distributors have been fined a total of S$27m (Singapore dollars) for anti-competitive behaviour and price-fixing… Read
• Canada resists US pressure to weaken poultry supply management system: Canada’s Government has been talking tough about protecting the country’s supply management system, as negotiators conduct what might be the final round of talks to renew the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), with the United States and Mexico… Read
• Hong Kong reports human case of AI in China: Hong Kong’s Centre for Health Protection has revealed that a 42-year-old man from Guangxi, China has been infected with H5N6 avian influenza (AI) after handling poultry… Read
• Master Good set to expand Kisvárda plant: Hungarian poultry processor Master Good is to embark on a HUF15 billion (bn) expansion plan for its Kisvárda plant, aided by a Government grant of HUF3.4bn… Read

Two new Index Systems rank countries for sustainability and corporations for promoting health.

I.  Sustainability Index.

The Economist and Barilla have devised a new, interactive Index that ranks countries on the basis of food loss and waste, sustainable agriculture, and the ability to meet nutritional challenges.  Its scoring system goes from 0 (terrible) to 100 (perfect).

The top ten scoring countries are:

None of the scores is exemplary.  The US rank is #26.

II.  Access to Nutrition Index

The Access to Nutrition Foundation (Netherlands) ranks corporations on their strategies, policies, and actions to address obesity and diet-related diseases in the US.

The overall rankings, shown here, are relatively low.  Some do better than others on governance, products, accessibility, marketing, lifestyles, labeling, and engagement.

The highest scores are for labeling.  The lowest scores are for accessibility.

Indexes like these are useful for understanding where we are.  They should inspire us to action.

I’m on record as calling previous Farm Bills “visionless.”

Given what’s happening in Congress, some consider it a bipartisan win?  It is, but only because, as the Washington Post put it, the outcome is bad but could have been a lot worse.

The 2018 Farm Bill remains a visionless mess.  It continues to favor Big Agriculture and mean-spiritedness over what this country badly needs: a food system explicitly aimed at promoting public health, basic support for the poor, the livelihoods of real farmers and farm workers, and environmental sustainability.

The bill takes up 807 pages, with a table of contents of 11 pages.  It will cost taxpayers $867 billion over ten years. That’s more than $1 billion per page.

How to approach the Farm Bill

Start by using the search function to look for key words.  These turn up in the Table of Contents, which gives section numbers.  Then search by section number.  Items dealing with sustainable agriculture and production of food—as opposed to feed or fuel—generally turn up in the Horticulture title.  For the rationale behind these decisions, see the Senate’s explanation.

Items of immediate note:

SNAP

Recall that more than 75% of Farm Bill expenditures go for SNAP—The Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly Food Stamps).

The “bipartisan win”? Attempts to cut SNAP expenditures and introduce work requirements failed to pass (whew), although Congress is still working on ways to cut enrollments.

Commodity payments

The bill allows payments to more distant relatives of farm owners—cousins, nieces, nephews—a gift to the already rich.  Payments can still go to those earning more than $900,000 a year in adjusted gross income (sigh).

Organics

The bill authorizes $395 million in research funding over the next 10 years, and small amounts for data collection, offset of certification costs, and technology upgrades.  But the bill weakens restrictions on chemicals that can be used in organic production.

Hemp

The bill grants $2 million a year for support of hemp as a crop, and authorizes USDA to study the economic viability of its domestic production and sale.  It also authorizes Indian tribes (that’s the term the bill uses) to grow hemp.

Cuba

The bill allows funding for USDA trade promotion programs in Cuba.

The Managers recognize that expanding trade with Cuba not only represents an opportunity for American farmers and ranchers, but also a chance to improve engagement with the Cuban people in support of democratic ideas and human rights…The Managers expect that the Secretary will work closely with eligible trade organizations to educate them about allowable activities to improve exports to Cuba under the Market Access and Foreign Market Development Cooperator Programs.

One sweet gift: in memory of Gus Schumacher

The Managers also agree the FINI [Food Insecurity Nutrition Incentive]  and Produce Prescription should be renamed the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program, in recognition of Mr. Schumacher’s role in the establishment of nutrition incentives nationwide. Mr. Schumacher was a magnificent advocate for farmers and families and saw the importance in building access and affordability through incentive programs.

Commentary

Dan Imhoff’s analysis in Civil Eats is particularly worth reading:

Still, the revised farm bill will ensure that citizens continue to pay for their food at least three times: 1) at the checkout stand; 2) in environmental cleanup and medical costs related to the consequences of industrial agriculture; and 3) as taxpayers who fund subsidies to a small group of commodity farmers deemed too big to fail.

FERN’s explainer video is also worth another look.

Documents

• Agriculture Improvement Act of 2018 conference report
• Congressional Budget Office score
• Senate explanation of conference report on farm bill_18 of the bill (253 pages)