Search results: food policy action

I got sent a mailing from USDA: “FACT SHEET: Biden-Harris Administration Delivers on its Promises to Invest in Rural Communities, Nutrition Security, Climate-Smart Agriculture, More and Better Markets and Lower Costs for Families.”

This is a summary of an extraordinarily long list of actions taken by the administration, many of them having to do with food production and consumption.

Food System Transformation: USDA is transforming the food system and improving the resilience and security of the food supply chain through more than 60 programs so that today’s markets work better for family farmers and the families they support. This multi-billion dollar effort …touches all parts of the food supply chain – from food production, food processing, food aggregation and distribution, to consumers.

A great many other sections also deal with food issues.  Here are a few examples of the range.

Food System Transformation: USDA is transforming the food system and improving the resilience and security of the food supply chain through more than 60 programs so that today’s markets work better for family farmers and the families they support. This multi-billion dollar effort is funded largely by ARP with some additional investments from the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021 (CAA), the Coronavirus Aid, Relief, and Economic Security (CARES) Act, and the Commodity Credit Corporation (CCC). It touches all parts of the food supply chain – from food production, food processing, food aggregation and distribution, to consumers. Select programs include:

• The Farm and Food Workers Relief Grant Program will make beneficiary payments to reach at least 1 million farmworkers, meatpacking workers, and front-line grocery workers who incurred pandemic-related health and safety costs.
• Organic Transition Initiative: USDA launched a $300 million Organic Transition Initiative including establishing the Transition to Organic Partnership Program (TOPP) in six regions across the U.S. as part of USDA’s Organic Transition Initiative to help transitioning and recently transitioned producers who face technical, cultural, and market shifts during the transition period and the first few years of organic certification.
• A new online tool called FarmerFairness.gov allows farmers and ranchers to report potentially unfair and anticompetitive practices in the livestock and poultry sectors.
• Assistance for Distressed Producers: USDA provided nearly $800 million in financial assistance to more than 13,000 distressed farmers and plans to provide assistance to thousands more in 2023. This work accompanies an ongoing effort to transform USDA’s farm lending programs with a focus on proactive loan service and support to keep farmers farming, rather than requiring farmers to become distressed before assistance is provided.
• In August, USDA announced up to $550 million in funding to support projects that enable underserved producers to access land, capital, and markets, and train the next, diverse generation of agricultural professionals.
• More than 41 million Americans participated in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and 2022 marked the first full calendar year that participants received a 21% average increase in monthly SNAP benefits due to USDA’s reevaluation of the Thrifty Food Plan – the first permanent increase to the purchasing power of SNAP benefits since the Thrifty Food Plan was introduced 45 years ago.
• USDA’s Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) launched a new initiative to reduce Salmonella illness linked to poultry through a strong, comprehensive framework to address Salmonella in poultry that is responsive to evolving food safety hazards and embraces the latest science and technology.
• USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service is advancing tribal self-determination and awarded $5.7 million to eight tribes for demonstration projects that gave them more options to directly select and purchase foods for their Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR). This is an important step to increasing tribal food sovereignty in the program and support tribal economies, vendors, and producers.

As seems always the case with USDA, there are so many small programs (“trees”) under discussion that the big picture (“forest”) gets lost.

The forest is the need to support food system transformation to focus agricultural policy on the health of humans and the planet.  Will trees get us there one by one?

Only if there are enough of them.

*******

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

Here’s what’s going on.

SNAP costs are high

• SNAP data table, participation and costs: In 2022, 41 million SNAP participants received an average benefit of $230 per month for a total yearly cost of $119.2 billion ($113.7 billion in benefits plus $5.5 billion in administrative costs).
• Congressional Budget Office (DBO) Budget and Economic Outlook: 2023 to 2033: This projects a drop in SNAP costs by $21 billion in 2023 but only because the additional benefits awarded during the pandemic have now been reduced (CBO Baseline projections for USDA farm programs do not cover SNAP).

Even with the reduction, this is an expensive program and it’s no surprise that Republicans want to cut it.

SNAP is under constant criticism and not only because of cost.  Advocates want it to do a better job of promoting nutrition and health, as shown in two recent reports.

Advocacy Report #1.  Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program as a health intervention (by Jerry Mande and Grace Flaherty)

After reviewing the evidence on SNAP’s impacts on food insecurity, dietary quality, and health as well as research on the health impacts of other more successful federal food assistance programs, we provide three policy recommendations to strengthen SNAP’s effectiveness as a health intervention for children and families.

These are:

• Make diet quality a core SNAP objective.
• Srengthen requirements for SNAP-authorized retailers to promote healthier retail food environments.
• Pair incentives for purchasing fruits, vegetables, and other healthy foods with restrictions on unhealthy foods and sweetened 2beverages.

Advocacy Report #2.  Making Food and Nutrition Security a SNAP: Recommendations for the 2023 Farm Bill (from the  Bipartisan Policy Center’s Food and Nutrition Security Task Force.

Some of its major recommendations:

• Make sure benefit levels are adequate to achieve healthy diets.
• Make sure eligibility and work requirements do not preent undue barriers to participation.
• Encourage consumption of nutritious foods through existing and demonstration projects.

If I read this right, “demonstration projects” is a euphemism for not permitting sugar-sweetened beverages to be purchased with SNAP benefits.

The Lancet has just published its commissioned series on breastfeeding, vs the commercial formula industry: three papers, an editorial, and a comment.

Breastfeeding has proven health benefits for both mothers and babies in high-income and low-income settings alike. Yet, less than 50% of babies worldwide are breastfed according to WHO recommendations. For decades, the commercial milk formula industry has used underhand marketing strategies, designed to prey on parents’ fears and concerns, to turn the feeding of infants and young children into a multibillion-dollar business—generating revenues of about $55 billion each year.

Editorial: Unveiling the predatory tactics of the formula milk industry

For decades, the commercial milk formula (CMF) industry has used underhand marketing strategies, designed to prey on parents’ fears and concerns at a vulnerable time, to turn the feeding of young children into a multibillion-dollar business. The immense economic power accrued by CMF manufacturers is deployed politically to ensure the industry is under-regulated and services supporting breastfeeding are under-resourced.

Breastfeeding: crucially important, but increasingly challenged in a market-driven world. R Pérez-Escamilla,, et al.

In this Series paper, we examine how mother and baby attributes at the individual level interact with breastfeeding determinants at other levels, how these interactions drive breastfeeding outcomes, and what policies and interventions are necessary to achieve optimal breastfeeding.

Marketing of commercial milk formula: a system to capture parents, communities, science, and policy.  N Rollins et al.

We report how CMF sales are driven by multifaceted, well resourced marketing strategies that portray CMF products, with little or no supporting evidence, as solutions to common infant health and developmental challenges in ways that systematically undermine breastfeeding. Digital platforms substantially extend the reach and influence of marketing while circumventing the International Code of Marketing of Breast-milk Substitutes.

The political economy of infant and young child feeding: confronting corporate power, overcoming structural barriers, and accelerating progress.  P Baker, et al.

First, this paper highlights the power of the commercial milk formula (CMF) industry to commodify the feeding of infants and young children; influence policy at both national and international levels in ways that grow and sustain CMF markets; and externalise the social, environmental, and economic costs of CMF. Second, this paper examines how breastfeeding is undermined by economic policies and systems that ignore the value of care work by women, including breastfeeding, and by the inadequacy of maternity rights protection across the world, especially for poorer women. Third, this paper presents three reasons why health systems often do not provide adequate breastfeeding protection, promotion, and support.

Comment: Stemming commercial milk formula marketing: now is the time for radical transformation to build resilience for breastfeeding, by Tanya Doherty et al.

One of the striking messages of the Lancet Breastfeeding Series is that the consumption of commercial milk formula (CMF) by infants and young children has been normalised. More children are consuming CMF than ever before. Only 48% of the world’s infants and young children are breastfed as recommended, despite the huge body of evidence on the lifelong benefits of breastfeeding. This situation reflects the stranglehold the CMF industry has on governments, health professionals, academic institutions, and increasingly on caregivers and families through pervasive social media.

*******

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

President Biden signed H.R. 2617, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2023.  

I’m interested in what the $1.7 trillion , 1600-page bill does for food issues.  It mentions the word “food” 786 times.  It mentions “agriculture” 213 times.  Fortunately, most of this is in Division A.  Even so, one longs for summaries. For whatever they are worth, here are a few I’ve collected.

• Senate Appropriations committee summary
• Sen. Patrick Leahy’s bill highlights
• Sen. Patrick Leahy’s highlights for USDA and FDA funding 
• Rep. Sanford Bishop’s summary for USDA and FDA funding 
• Rep. Sanford Bishop’s fact sheet 
• Congressional explanation of intent about Division A funding

Let me see if I can make some sense of this.

USDA highlights

• $25.48 billion in discretionary spending (more than last year, less than what Biden asked for).
• $3.7 billion for research ($1.74 billion for the Agricultural Reseach Service and $1.7 billion for the National Institute of Food and Agriculture
• $1.17 billion for Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS), more than $60 million above last year’s.
• $1.15 billion for the Food Safety and Inspection Service, including funding to reduce user fees and to retain veterinarians.
• Nutrition programs: $154 billion for SNAP; $6 billion for WIC; an increase of $6.6 million for commodities; an increase of $11 million for emergency food assistance.
• International food assistance: $1.75 billion for Food for Peace grants (an increase), and $243 million for the McGovern-Dole education program (an increase).

FDA 

• $6.56 billion for everything (but this includes a large percentage to be derived from food, drug, and tobacco user fee revenues).  These include increases for food safety and  some core functions.

The bill does some other things worth mentioning.  It includes: funds to:

• Expand the Summer EBT program and makes it permanent as of 2024.
• Addresses SNAP EBT skimming (stealing benefits across state lines).
• Test for testing for per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS—forever chemicals)
• Make sure lobster and crab fisheries are in compliance with rules about whales.

It takes a lot of expertise to analyze all of this.  Here are two reactions.

Heritage Action: This omnibus package represents the very worst of Washington: back-room deals, $1.85 trillion dollar spending bills full of pet projects and partisan priorities, and an Establishment more interested in their own power than the wellbeing of the American people. The GOP must stand united in their opposition to this bill.

The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: The biggest disappointment of the year-end bill by far is the failure to expand the Child Tax Credit. The American Rescue Plan’s expanded credit and other relief measures drove the child poverty rate to a record low of 5.2 percent in 2021. But with the expansion’s expiration, that record progress in reducing child poverty in 2021 has sharply reversed.

There are lots of other criticisms of this bill floating around, mainly having to do with what the Biden Administration asked for but did not get, and concerns about inadequate funding of FDA for food safety.

On this last point, let me again say that the perennially underfunded FDA gets its appropriations from agriculture committees, even though it is an agency of the public health service.  Agriculture subcommittees could not care less about FDA.  FDA needs a mandated home in Congress and much better support than it now gets.

Happy new year.

********

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

TODAY: 3:30 pm, lecture followed by a reception.  Robertson Auditorium, Mission Bay Conference Center, 1675Owens Street Unit 251.  Register here.

**********

FRAC, the Food Research & Action Center, emailed this press announcement:   FRAC and More Than 30 National Organizations Urge Senators to Include Provisions to Expand Community Eligibility in Child Nutrition Reauthorization

The groups signed a letter calling for:

• Lowering the eligibility threshold for community eligibility (making school meals universal) from 40 percent identified students to 25 percent
• Raising the federal reimbursement so participating schools can serve students
• Creating a statewide community eligibility option, which would make universal school meals statewide.

Yes!

Here’s what FRAC says about community eligibility:

Community eligibility allows high-need schools to offer free meals to all students at no charge. It reduces administrative work for school districts; allows them to focus on providing healthy and appealing meals to students; supports working families who don’t qualify for free school meals; ensures that all students have the nutrition they need to learn and thrive; and eliminates unpaid school meal fees…Studies have shown participation in school meals improves students’ attendance, behavior, and academic achievement, and reduces tardiness. Students who eat breakfast at school perform better on standardized tests than those who skip breakfast or eat breakfast at home, and have improved scores in spelling, reading, and math.

We had universal school meals during the pandemic.  This was:

• Good for students and their families; kids were fed decently
• Good for schools; the didn’t have to police and stigmatize kids whose families couldn’t pay for meals

Universal school meals would save administrative costs.  Yes, they would cost more, but not that much more.

And the payoff in kids’ health would be terrific.

This one is a no brainer.

Do it, please.

***********

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

My book talk today: Online with Hunter’s Food Policy Center in conversation with Charles Platkin, 9:30 to 10:30 a.m.  Registration is HERE.

******

The Center for Science in the Public Interest (CSPI) announces that it and the Consumer Federation of America and the National Consumers League are filing a lawsuit calling on the Treasury Department to compel a decision on mandatory alcohol content, calorie, ingredient, and allergen labeling on alcoholic beverages.

Plaintiffs seek relief from Defendants’ nearly nineteen-year delay in responding to a 2003 petition submitted by Plaintiffs, 66 other organizations and eight individuals, including four deans of public health.  [See Petition]…The Petitio urged TTB to reequire alcohol labelig with the same basic transparency consumers expect in foods.  For alcohol, that means labeling that has alcohol content, calorie, and ingredient information—including ingredients that can cause allergic reactions.

Nineteen year delay?  Yes.  Why?  The alcohol industry would much rather that you don’t know what you are drinking.  It has opposed virtually every attempt to expose what’s in its products.

Just for fun, I looked up the alcohol labeling chapter in my book with Malden Nesheim, Why Calories Count: From Science to Politics.

We titled the chapter, “Alcohol labels: industry vs. consumers.”

Here, for your amusement, is the table illustrating current labeling requirements.

CSPI deserves much applause for trying to fix this situation and for its patience.

We need something a lot better than this.

***********

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

Despite chaotic organization (see note below), the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health was inspiring (you can watch it on YouTube here).  It was exciting to be in the room where it happened, as you can see from my photo-taking (courtesy of tweet by Suzanna Martinez).

The conference had a laser-like focus on ending hunger and hunger inequities.  Although there was much talk of diet-related diseases, it was not at all about preventing obesity and its chronic disease consequences in the general population.  Instead, its aim was to make sure that poor people, especially those of color, have access to healthy, culturally appropriate diets at a price they can afford.

Common themes

Bipartisan: Ending hunger has to be a united effort (Republicans were barely represented, but not for lack of trying)

Diet-related disease: none of us ever expected to hear that phrase from high elected officials, let alone POTUS

Lived experience: Many of the panels included people who had grown up on foods stamps, and President Biden was introduced by Jimmieaka Mills of Houston, TX (her name was not listed in the program; I found it on Twitter) who spoke eloquently of how much food assistance meant to her life.

Food at the center: it must stop being an afterthought.

Food as Medicine: This refers to the health care system’s use of food prescriptions or distributions.  Alhough his idea is sometimes perceived as paternalistic—food should really be about pleasure and culture (see ConscienHealth)—it plays well politically.

Impressions

Almost everything related to the conference is on the website.  My reactions.

How it felt: It was a joy to see old friends and colleagues who care deeply about food and preventing hunger.  We hadn’t seen each other since before the pandemic.  Hugs all around.

The tone: This was a packed auditorium with a standing room audience, happy to be there, appreciative, and enthusiastic.

The love: Almost everyone thanked Congressman Jim McGovern who has tried to get this conference held for years.  He got—and deserved—standing ovations.

The speeches

The President: Biden mostly reiterated the main points of the National Strategy, but insisted on the value of the Child Tax Credit (see my previous post on this).  This got a standing ovation (along with a couple of others).  Ending food insecurity, he said, is a way to treat each other with decency.

Jim McGovern: When he worked with George McGovern (no relation, a Democrat) and Republican Bob Dole on food issues,  ending hunger was a bipartisan goal.  Now, 35 million Americans needi food assistance; hunger should be illegal.

Cory Booker: Americans are in the midst of a storm of diet-related disease.  Congress will hold hearings on Food as Medicine.  We need to put the F back in FDA (ovation).

The plenary panel

Debbie Stabenow, who heads the Senate Ag Committee; “We will not cut SNAP.”

Rosa de Lauro, who heads the House appropriations committee: “I like holding the gavel.  We will fund what we need to.”

Eric Adams, mayor of New York City: “We are making healthy eating the default.”

The major speech

José Andrés: This was the major political speech of the conference: the problem, the moral imperative, and the policies needed (ovation). My favorite line: “We must stop giving breadcrumbs and start building bakeries.”

My assessment

The conference put hunger on the agenda of Susan Rice, who heads Biden’s Domestic Policy Council (and who stayed throughout the entire meeting), and on that of the President himself.

• It gave high visibility to the issue.
• It highlighted the fabulous work of individuals and organizations who are working to  help bring people out of poverty.
• It called for—and got—commitments from organizations and corporations to take real action to address food insecurity and its consequences.
• It generated excitement and hope among people working on these issues.

Will it lead to real change?  Will it improve the current situation?  Will it lead to reduced hunger?

Not without public pressure, I’m guessing.

A note on the organizational chaos: last-minute invitations (mine arrived Sunday night after 9:00 p.m. and Eric Adams’ staff, who attended, never did get theirs; no advance schedule until a couple of days before, when it was still quite vague; a 6:00 a.m. announcement to be there at 7:30 to register because security lines would be long; badge printers that didn’t work; no printed program; no clear listing of speakers and times; auditorium too small for audience (most were in overflow room); a mystery as to who was in charge—a committee of the Domestic Policy Council, apparently.  Still, it all worked!

A note on the meals and swag: The James Beard Foundation arranged the lunch—vegan, bison, or chicken. These were packed in heavy plastic lunch trays, later washed and packed along with cutlery into Oxo bags given to participants.  The only real souvenir is the name badge, to be treasured.

A note on Biden’s blooper: He called out Jackie Walorsky— “Where’s Jackie?” — which got gasps from people who knew she had died in a traffic accident in August.   Later, a video tribute to her brought people to tears.

************

Coming soon!  My memoir, October 4.

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.

At 9:09 on Sunday night, I received a rather lat-minute invitation to this conference.  I think it’s worth going to, and will.

Whatever it turns out to be, this will be an historic occasion.

Almost everything public about it is on the conference website.

Here’s what it says will happen:

On Wednesday, September 28, the Biden-Harris Administration will host the White House Conference on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health. The Administration will also release a National Strategy with actions the federal government will take to drive solutions to these challenges.

As it happens, the White House released The Biden-Harris Administration National Strategy on Hunger, Nutrition, and Health yesterday.  I will say more about this tomorrow, but here’s a summary of Pillar 1:

Improving food access and affordability, including by advancing economic security; increasing access to free and nourishing school meals; providing Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) benefits to more children; and expanding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) eligibility to more underserved populations.

The opening speakers have been announced:

• President Joseph R. Biden, Jr.
• Second Gentleman Douglas Emhoff
• Ambassador Susan E. Rice, White House Domestic Policy Advisor
• Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack
• Secretary of Health and Human Services Xavier Becerra
• Chef José Andrés

It can be watched online:

• Click here to get the link to view the conference online and let the organizers know if you plan to host a Watch Party or Satellite Event.
• Check out the conference agenda.
• Find or host a satellite event.
• Share your ideas and stories

It will be interesting to see what the National Strategy might be, and what emerges from the conference.

In the meantime, to inform the conference:

• Feeding America has just published a report on the results of the pre-conference listening sessions, “Elevating Voices to End Hunger Together: Community-Driven Solutions to Address America’s Hunger Crisis.”
• The Meridian Institute, Johns Hopkins Center for a Livable Future, Bread for the World, World Wildlife Fund (WWF), Farm, Food, Environment Policy Consulting, and the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition (NSAC) have produced a memo: A Food Systems Approach to Nutrition.
• Bill Frist writes: It’s Time To Prioritize Nutrition: Better Diet Quality [in SNAP] Leads To Better Health And Wellbeing For Americans

************

Coming soon!  My memoir, October 4.

For 30% off, go to www.ucpress.edu/9780520384156.  Use code 21W2240 at checkout.