Twinkies and the Farm Bill

i-8f13fc590a3c870741e9c06a1276f35e-USDA Farm Bill Forum top half.jpg

While doing some background research on democracy, science, and environmental policy, I found myself reviewing some of the thousands of public comments offered for the 2007 Farm Bill we've referenced at this site several times (here's one, on science). Interesting Stuff.

Farm Bill legislation has been in the works for a few years, with public hearings across the nation and opportunities for input into the process by farmers, farm associations, environmental groups, and agro-business all the while. It was passed by the House this Summer and is now being debated in the Senate.

When I first saw the comment I've pasted above, I only looked quickly and thought it was from a crank and so I laughed. Yes, out loud. I laughed out loud. They should come up with an acronym so I don't have to type that all out. This guy is moaning about the snacks they provided at these public forums. Free food and he's complaining? But then I reread it, actually reading in full (pasted below), and saw that he was making a fair point. It was indeed a very solid point.

i-160046ac1a20a165ebc71b7fac7cb573-Farm Bill Public Comment.jpg

The comment speaks to a practice-what-you-preach principle, with the assumption that the USDA should be producing healthy food and thus giving away healthy food as snacks. It really is remarkable that the USDA itself would provide fatty snacks when given the opportunity to show that they're aiming towards a more amenable diet. The above public comment is also subtle, in that it provides but a small glimpse into what Americans consider "normal" -- and when things are normal they are not debatable. As in, Who would even think to gripe about chips at a USDA forum? They're everyday fare.

But consider too that the role of the sugar and candy and junk food industries in the crafting of this bill is enormous. From Foodbattle.org and the folks that brought us "The Meatrix" spots, this video illustrates the basic point:

It seems like old hat to me - sugary treats or healthy apples. But it has direct relevance and immediacy here. And while we're here, along the same lines you might want listen to this additional, somewhat nuanced story about the power of the Sugar Lobby in the recent debates on the floor.

All very tasty.

More like this

We at The World's Fair are proud to bring on the Grand Hotel Regina as our alternative sponsor for the month. It isn't just that we see a natural fit between the two of us -- they, in complete harmony with majestic Eiger and Jungfrau vistas; we, in complete unanimity with our distaste for the…
As you probably know the 2012 Farm Bill has food stamps on the block.  I write a lot about food stamps because they are incredibly important - one in seven Americans uses them.  One in four children is on food stamps.  When you subsidize food for this many people, you functionally transform the…
When President Obama signed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act in 2010, he also ushered in the first major nutrition changes in the school meal program in 15 years. Perhaps, not surprisingly, the changes received a good bit of pushback, with many arguing that healthier foods would mean fewer kids…
In a new New York Times Magazine piece, John Tierney pulls together the results of several studies that suggest willpower is finite and decisionmaking exhausting. While these findings are important in many ways (Tierney leads off with an example from the criminal justice system), I was especially…

Are you suggesting that the USDA is somehow not entirely doing its work for the benefit of the people? Well, as for the snacks, I think that if they would have thrown in an apple with some sliced cantaloupe they could have easily called it a small lunch/meal, and no one would have cared.