My wife works in public health. She works for the state of Oregon and facilitates programs that aid single moms, kids and families. She is a great resource when it comes to larger issues in food politics. Even though she is not in ‘food policy’ per se, the field of public health must consider food and people’s diets as a piece of the larger pie (pun intended.)

This morning, while munching on some granola (homemade and gluten-free and super yummy (everyone should make their own granola at least once)) my wife gave me a packet of papers and said, “Read this. I am curious to hear your thoughts on it.” Well, unbeknownst to her, I will be telling the vast world of internet peoples first, before we discuss the reading at dinner tonight.

The article is called “Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences,” funded and published by the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA.) As you might expect with any government-funded study, the report is humungous and this particular reading is just the introduction and first chapter. But before I say too much more, let me be the first to admit that I did not read the whole article. Why? You may ask. Well, to be honest, I was frustrated to see that the government spent x amount of dollars to study the obvious (common in policy and academic institutions.) That said, I suggest checking out the link above and reading beyond the first chapter. I intend on skimming this so I can pursue my passion for sensible ranting.

According to the Economic Research Service of the USDA,

This report fills a request for a study of food deserts—areas with limited access to affordable and nutritious food—from the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008. The report summarizes findings of a national-level assessment of the extent and characteristics of food deserts, analysis of the consequences of food deserts, lessons learned from related Federal programs, and a discussion of policy options for alleviating the effects of food deserts. Overall, findings show that a small percentage of consumers are constrained in their ability to access affordable nutritious food because they live far from a supermarket or large grocery store and do not have easy access to transportation. (I highlighted the term ‘food deserts.’)

The food desert. Do you live in a food desert? Do I live in a food desert? Although I have never heard the term, I like it and I think it makes perfect sense. The combination of food desert, low-income communities and sky-rocketing rates of type 2 diabetes and/or obesity is not surprising (in my opinion.) The USDA wanted to find out what the connections are between these factors and this study examined the many nuances to the situation. I am not going to summarize their findings; but I am going to complain; I am going to rant even. Please bear with me.

This study was funded by the USDA as part of the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008 aka the Farm Bill. I do not know everything about the Farm Bill, in fact I probably do not know very much. But what I do know does piss me off. For example, the Farm Bill provides the massive subsidies for corn, wheat and soy. These subsidies trickle into the consequential massive market of corn syrup and high-fructose corn syrup, both of which are incredibly unhealthy  (i.e. soda, candy and chips.) When subsidies are offered by the government (or anyone else) it provides an incentive for the producer to make that product. One of the many, many consequences of these subsidies is the proliferation of huge farms that only grow corn or wheat or soy. Overtime these 3 products have been transformed into many forms, like high-fructose corn syrup. So the government (via the Farm Bill) is “supporting” farmers with these subsidies and then this financial backing prevents other crops from being grown. Of course other plants are available but the scale and complexity of the corn market humbles the brussel sprout market.

What I am trying to get at is the utter contradiction in funding this report. On the one hand you have the USDA trying to find out why or how all these cheap and non-nutritious foods are affecting low-income people; and then at the same time, the USDA is funding farmers and factories to produce these problems. The very fact that these subsidies continue underlie the big issue of access to junk food. If farms growing a diversity of crops (ideally organic) were to be subsidized in the same way, you would see an explosion of cheap whole foods. If this were the case, I would not hear friends complain at the price of organic produce or farmer market prices. Instead we would complain of the high price of candy and other processed foods.

And with the abundance of cheap food, where do we sell it? In poor communities of course! They don’t know any better; in fact, times are so rough that if we make this “food” cheap we will be able to feed the masses! But if  we prevent all these people from binging on candy and soda and chips and all those products with unpronounceable ingredients – where would we put all this extra food.?  (Note my sarcasm and cynicism.)

The problem are the subsidies. Deep down under all the issues on nutrition, affordability and accessibility is the darker issue of subsidies. As long as companies are paid to produce cheap and unhealthy food we will have an excess of these items. As long as we have an excess, poor people will get sick and die from diseases that are preventable. The government is capable of ending the HUGE public health challenges like this but it does not. Why? You might ask. The only answer I have is that the Democrats (god bless their mediocrity and inability to fight for radical change) are the party backing the Farm Bill. So if you are a Democrat and you care about these issues, do some research and find out if your representatives voted for this devastating bill. I know I want to learn more on the last version of the Farm Bill so that I can rant some more.

To end my complaints and to preview more to come, let’s ask the following question:

• Will urban farms ever be subsidized?
• Will urban land usage ever be encouraged to grow food?
• What role do urban farms have in this complicated issue?

Related posts:

1. A Tax on Soda = Illogical Food Policy
2. Food Subsidies – Our Biggest Threat
3. Local Food Movement Gains Serious Support
4. Capitalism vs. Environmentalism
5. USDA Destroys Local Economies

Tags: Food Politics, local food movement, Nutrition, Urban Ag, USDA