Can Publicly Run Grocery Stores Solve Food Deserts — and Deliver on Nutrition Equity?
As New York and Chicago explore city-run supermarkets, new models — public, nonprofit and cooperative — are reshaping the business of feeding underserved communities.
This article first appeared in the August 2025 issue of Presence Marketing’s newsletter.
By Steven Hoffman
When New York Assembly member and mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani proposed opening five city-run grocery stores—one in each borough—he reignited a debate that cuts to the heart of capitalism, food justice, and municipal responsibility. Critics labeled it a socialist fantasy. Proponents called it long overdue. But behind the political theater lies a legitimate question: Can publicly operated grocery stores succeed where the private market has failed?
Across America, millions live in low income, low access (LILA) markets—communities without easy access to affordable, nutritious food, or what many in the media refer to as food deserts. In these neighborhoods, fast-food outlets and corner stores predominate, while supermarkets are few and far between. For decades, policy solutions have focused on tax incentives or subsidies to lure grocery chains into underserved areas. Often, those stores don’t last. Mamdani’s proposal dares to flip the script: If the private sector won’t meet the need, let the public sector step in.
Pixabay.com
It’s not an entirely new idea. In small towns and major cities alike, experiments in publicly owned, nonprofit, or cooperative grocery models have taken root. Some have succeeded. Others have shuttered. Together, they paint a nuanced picture of what it takes to make public grocery stores work—and where they can go wrong.
The Rural Proof-of-Concept
With corporate consolidation leading to fewer grocery store options as food prices soar, “people are clamoring for solutions, and that’s leading to creative thinking on what might work,” Ganesh Sitaraman, Director of the Vanderbilt Policy Accelerator, told the Food and Environment Reporting Network. Sitaraman recently published a report, Public Grocery Stores: A Guide for Policymakers.
In St. Paul in rural southeastern Kansas, a town with a population of 600, a municipal grocery store has been in operation since 2013. After the town’s last private grocer had closed, residents faced a 30-minute drive to the nearest supermarket. Rather than accept that future, the city council voted to open its own store. St. Paul’s model is humble, offering a basic selection of staples, fresh produce, and frozen goods. It doesn’t need to generate big profits—just enough to keep the doors open. In that way, it functions like any other public utility: not glamorous, but essential. More than a decade later, it remains in business.
Not every rural experiment has succeeded. In 2019, the town of Baldwin, Florida, opened a city-run grocery store, but by 2024, it had closed its doors. The reasons? Low foot traffic, challenges sourcing competitively priced goods, and the gravitational pull of the nearby Walmart. The lesson: Public stores face the same economic headwinds as private ones, and without a clear strategy and strong local buy-in, they may struggle.
A City of Contradictions
Chicago offers a case study in both the fragility of private grocery models and the resilience of community-driven alternatives. Between 2013 and 2021, the city lost at least 20 full-service grocery stores, many in predominantly Black and Latino neighborhoods on the South and West Sides. In 2022, Whole Foods Market closed its Englewood store just six years after opening with $10.7 million in city subsidies. For residents, the closure felt like a betrayal and a confirmation that public-private partnerships may not always prioritize community needs (Block Club Chicago).
But even as chains exit, grassroots solutions are emerging. The Go Green Community Fresh Market, launched in Englewood in 2022, is a nonprofit market developed in partnership with local organizations and institutions. It offers fresh produce, pantry staples, and prepared foods in a space designed to reflect community needs.
According to a report in Next City, the store is part of a broader movement toward community-led food infrastructure. Unlike traditional grocers, these models often blend retail with education, workforce development, and health services. They’re small but mighty—and in many cases, they’re succeeding where big box stores have failed.
Chicago’s city government has taken notice. In 2023, the city commissioned a study on the feasibility of municipal grocery stores. The findings, published in 2024, estimated that opening three stores would cost around $26.7 million (Chicago Sun-Times). Critics balked at the price tag. Advocates pointed out that the city has spent far more on failed economic development deals.
Mayor Brandon Johnson has voiced support for continued exploration. His administration sees food access as part of a broader public health and equity strategy—one that requires thinking beyond the boundaries of traditional retail.
New York’s Big Swing
In New York, Mamdani’s plan has drawn national attention. His proposal envisions five city-operated grocery stores with a focus on affordability, accessibility, and cultural relevance. The goal is not just to provide food, but to provide good food—including fresh produce, whole grains, and organic staples—at prices families can afford.
The backlash has been swift. Billionaire grocery executives and conservative commentators warn of government inefficiency, cost overruns, and mission creep. The Wall Street Journal editorial board argued that the plan would replicate “all the flaws of a Soviet commissary.” Mark Cuban quipped, “None of that s*** has a chance.”
But Mamdani remains undeterred. “We treat food like a luxury when it should be a public good,” he told Bloomberg. He sees the city-run grocery model as a form of infrastructure—akin to schools or libraries—that delivers long-term social ROI, not quarterly profits.
Public support appears strong, especially in districts hit hardest by inflation and store closures. In a city where the average grocery markup can exceed 25% in low-income neighborhoods, the idea of subsidized pricing resonates—and aligns with Mamdani’s broader political platform centered on economic justice (NBC New York).
Natural and Organic for Everyone?
One of the most compelling aspects of publicly operated groceries is their potential to democratize access to natural, organic, and specialty foods. In most food deserts, such items are virtually nonexistent. For households managing diabetes, allergies, or autoimmune conditions, the absence of unprocessed, nutrient-dense food isn’t just inconvenient—it could be dangerous.
Public stores, especially those not beholden to shareholder profits, could prioritize clean-label foods, support regional regenerative farms, and offer bulk bins, zero-waste options, and plant-based products typically confined to high-end co-ops. By participating in programs like Double Up Food Bucks or SNAP Match, these stores can extend purchasing power for low-income shoppers (Axios).
Imagine walking into a municipal grocery where you can use your EBT card to buy organic lentils, fresh kale, or local mushrooms—and receive a discount for doing so. That’s not just a policy victory; it’s potentially a public health breakthrough. Cities like Madison, Wisconsin, and Atlanta are already exploring similar models, indicating a growing appetite to align food equity with climate and nutrition goals.
Co-ops and Nonprofits: Lessons from the Field
In the space between private retail and public provision lies another model: the food cooperative. Owned and operated by members, co-ops have long served as alternatives to corporate grocery chains. But historically, they’ve skewed toward affluent, mostly white communities.
That’s changing. The Cooperative Development Institute (CDI) has worked to support co-ops in low-income and BIPOC communities across the Northeast. According to CDI, co-ops in food deserts thrive when they reflect local culture, offer accessible membership structures, and receive early technical and financial support.
In the majority Black-led community in Detroit’s North End, the Detroit People’s Food Co-op celebrated one year in business this past May, making fresh produce and products from locally sourced farms and producers more accessible to more than 4,000 co-op members. The term “food desert” doesn’t sit well with co-op general manager Akil Talley ― a desert, he said, is naturally occurring: “We like to call it 'food apartheid,' because a lot of it was intentional," he told the Detroit Free Press. The co-op was founded by the Detroit Black Community Food Sovereignty Network, a nonprofit organization dedicated to teaching residents about the importance of fresh food that is also behind a number of other food sovereignty initiatives.
In Chattanooga, Tennessee, the nonprofit Chattanooga Food Center strives to create a food system that offers affordable and convenient access to healthy food, bridging the gap between producers and consumers. The organization partners with farms located within 150 miles of the city to source fresh produce, meat, eggs and dairy products. Its retail store, Gaining Ground Grocery, located in the Highland Park neighborhood of the city, an area previously bereft of fresh food options, offers discounted groceries alongside nutrition education. All proceeds from the store support the continuing mission of the Chattanooga Food Center. Customers can pay for groceries via a SNAP Electronic Benefits Transfer card, and the store also participates in the Double Up Food Bucks program established by the Fair Food Network which doubles the value of SNAP dollars for fresh local produce.
In Dayton, Ohio, the Gem City Market—a Black-led co-op—was launched in 2021 after a successful community investment campaign with more than 3,200 members. Both serve as proof points that with the right support, co-ops can thrive in marginalized neighborhoods and for many communities, municipal or hybrid public/nonprofit models may offer a more sustainable path.
Yet co-ops and nonprofits face unique challenges: they often require significant volunteer labor, complex governance, and ongoing grant support. Stores in low income areas also rely on such government programs as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which serves 42 million Americans as a defense against hunger.
For example, Gem City Market is committed to making sure food is readily available to local residents of all income levels, with programs like their “WeGotchu” sale, where they match EBT/SNAP-eligible purchases at 50%. However, the SNAP program is facing the biggest funding cuts in its history with the passage of the 2025 reconciliation bill, aka the One Big Beautiful Bill Act, which could undermine the ability for low income families to access SNAP.
What Failure Teaches Us
Every closure is a lesson. Florida’s Baldwin Market closed because it couldn’t compete on price. Whole Foods Market left Englewood because it didn’t meet its margin targets. Even Rise Community Market in Cairo, Illinois, launched with fanfare, has struggled to maintain sales volume (New Republic).
These failures underscore the importance of three factors: management expertise, community trust, and economic patience. A grocery store is an operations-intensive business. Success depends on efficient procurement, cold chain management, labor stability, and pricing strategy.
Public or nonprofit ownership doesn’t remove those challenges. It only changes the priorities. Profit may not be the goal—but solvency is still essential. As one food policy analyst put it: “You can’t build equity on empty shelves.”
The Case for Investment
Despite the risks, many argue the benefits of public grocery stores outweigh the costs. The returns may not show up in balance sheets, but in reduced health care spending, increased employment, better school performance, and stronger local economies.
Public stores can act as anchor tenants, revitalizing commercial corridors and attracting additional services like clinics, pharmacies, or credit unions. They can train and employ local residents at living wages. And they can reinvest revenue into community priorities.
As Mamdani frames it: “We’re not just opening stores. We’re opening a future where no New Yorker has to choose between dinner and dignity.”
A New Chapter in Food Access
The feasibility of publicly operated grocery stores isn’t a yes-or-no question. It’s a matter of design, context, and political will. Done poorly, they risk inefficiency and failure. Done well, they can transform food systems.
What’s clear is that the private market alone will not solve food apartheid. After decades of disinvestment and unmet promises, communities are demanding something different. Whether through municipal markets, nonprofits, or co-ops, the movement is growing. And it’s not just about access. It’s about what kind of food system we want—and who it serves.
If cities like New York and Chicago can make public groceries work, they may set a new precedent: that good food is not a luxury, but a right. And that sometimes, the best way to feed the people—is to own the store.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural Marketing, a strategic communications and brand development agency serving the natural and organic products industry. Learn more at www.compassnatural.com.
The Irony of MAHA
Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s promises to promote health don’t align with staff cuts & Trump administration actions
By Steven Hoffman
I met Robert F. Kennedy, Jr. once, in 2001, when he was speaking at a sustainability conference. At the time, I was publisher of the LOHAS Journal, covering the Lifestyles of Health and Sustainability market. At the event, I gave Kennedy a copy of our magazine and expressed my admiration for his work as a leading environmentalist with Riverkeeper, a group that helped clean up the Hudson River, and for being an outspoken advocate for removing toxic chemicals from our food.
Today, Kennedy has built a large following based on these views, with the acronym Make America Healthy Again, or MAHA, as the rallying cry for his base, many of whom are leaders in the natural health movement.
Since my interaction with him in 2001, however, Kennedy has also become synonymous with the anti-vaccine movement. This single voter issue, based in large part on misinformation and mistrust, drove a significant number of natural health advocates to back Kennedy when he declared in 2023 as an independent third-party candidate for president. When he ended his candidacy and endorsed Donald Trump in August, many of these natural health voters went with him in hopes that he could change the food and healthcare system for the better as Secretary of Health and Human Services (HHS) under the new administration.
Unfortunately, Kennedy’s rhetoric is often profoundly at odds with his actions, and with the actions of the wider Trump administration. To cite just one example, while Kennedy says he seeks to improve Americans’ health by bettering their diet, the administration he serves is gutting programs that provide local and organic produce to schools and low-income residents. Likewise, promises to make Americans “healthy again” is at odds with the administration’s roll-back of regulations designed to limit pollution.
Then there are Kennedy’s ideas about vaccines.
Vaccines and vitamins
About the time I met Kennedy, it was reported that the U.S. had eliminated measles due to widespread vaccination efforts. Since then, the anti-vax movement has picked up steam, encouraged in part by Kennedy’s anti-vaccine comments over the years. Now, in 2025, under his watch as head of HHS, the disease has reappeared in the U.S., spreading from a community in Texas to more than 700 cases throughout the U.S. and two reported deaths. Moreover, Kennedy was an anti-vax advocate during a deadly measles outbreak in Samoa in 2019, which killed 83 people in a population of 200,000.
Frankly, no amount of vitamin A—a nutrient Kennedy touted in a March 4 interview on Fox News as a treatment for measles—will stop its spread. Yet, a week after the interview, when he touted the “very good” results of treating measles with vitamin A-rich cod liver oil, demand for the product skyrocketed in Texas, Yahoo News reported. Now, a number of measles patients in Texas are showing signs of vitamin A toxicity, according to the New York Times, which noted that children being treated for measles at Covenant Children’s Hospital in Lubbock, Texas, included “a handful of unvaccinated children who were given so much vitamin A that they had signs of liver damage.”
Kennedy’s conflation of anti-vaccine messaging and unsubstantiated claims about using nutritional supplements as a cure for highly infectious diseases does a major disservice to the dietary supplement industry, the health care industry—and to consumers.
In fact, the Council for Responsible Nutrition (CRN) was so concerned about how the credibility of nutritional supplements might be affected that it issued a statement on March 26: “While vitamin A is an essential nutrient that plays a critical role in supporting vision, growth, reproduction and immune function, it is not a substitute for vaccination. While vitamin A plays an important role in supporting overall immune function, research hasn’t established its effectiveness in preventing measles infection.”
Andrea Wong, senior vice president, scientific and regulatory affairs for CRN, said, “Measles is a serious and highly contagious viral disease that can lead to severe health complications. Treatment and care for measles should always be conducted under the guidance of a qualified healthcare practitioner. Consumers must make informed decisions and consult qualified health professionals before giving supplements to children—especially in large doses.”
Citing that it was becoming difficult to work with the new HHS secretary, the FDA’s top vaccine official, Dr. Peter Marks, submitted his resignation on March 29, saying he was willing to address Kennedy’s concerns about the safety of vaccines but concluded that it was not possible. “It has become clear that truth and transparency are not desired by the secretary, but rather he wishes subservient confirmation of his misinformation and lies,” Marks wrote in his resignation letter. Marks oversaw the FDA’s rapid review and approval of COVID-19 vaccines during the pandemic and is credited with coining the name and concept for “Operation Warp Speed” under President Trump’s first administration.
Office exodus
The same day, Kennedy announced he was cutting an additional 10,000 jobs from the Department of Health and Human Services, which oversees several agencies, including the National Institutes of Health, the FDA and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. The latest cuts come after the departure of roughly 10,000 employees over the past few months as a result of the drive by the so-called Department of Government Efficiency (DOGE) to cut jobs throughout the federal government. In total, the cuts amounted to approximately 25% of HHS’s total workforce being eliminated.
The job cuts, allegedly designed to improve efficiency, may well end up costing the government money. “There’s this narrative being spun that somehow by eliminating jobs and functions that taxpayer dollars are going to be saved or that programs will be more efficient,” a staffer with the Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services who asked for anonymity told Politico. “The reality is the exact opposite.”
Previous cuts to the FDA by DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk, resulted in the resignation in February of James Jones, FDA’s Deputy Commissioner in charge of food safety and nutrition, including dietary supplements, following what he called “indiscriminate” layoffs of dozens of food safety inspectors. Jones said the cuts would make it “fruitless” to continue in his role. “I was looking forward to working to pursue the department’s agenda of improving the health of Americans by reducing diet-related chronic disease and risks from chemicals in food,” Jones wrote.
Following news of DOGE’s February cuts at the FDA, which included a number of staff firings at the FDA’s office of Dietary Supplement Programs, CRN expressed concern about the federal agency’s ability to effectively oversee dietary supplements and food safety. “As the FDA deputy commissioner steps down, it’s critical that the agency maintains adequate staffing and expertise to uphold consumer confidence in the food supply,” CRN said in a statement.
“While staffing changes can occur during any presidential transition, it is critical that the FDA maintains the resources, expertise and staffing levels necessary to ensure effective dietary supplement oversight that undergirds consumer confidence in the supplement market,” said Jeff Ventura, CRN’s vice president of communications.
Growing problems
Meanwhile, at USDA, pauses and cuts to funding for school lunch programs, supplemental nutrition assistance programs and organic farming initiatives run counter to MAHA’s avowed efforts to improve public health. Pauses in funding for organic transition and soil conservation programs are leaving farmers on the hook for millions of dollars they invested on the promise of reimbursement, while “accidental” firings of bird flu researchers have raised concerns that the beginnings of a new pandemic may go undetected.
According to reporting by E&E News by Politico in February, federal officials have been withholding funding for two major organic agriculture programs that make payments directly to farmers, jeopardizing millions of dollars in funding ahead of the 2025 planting season. “The pause on the $85 million Organic Market Development Grant program and the $100 million Transition to the Organic Partnership Program has jolted farmers, nonprofits and businesses struggling to make planting and hiring decisions. Even if the pause on funding is lifted, it could put farmers out of business,” wrote reporter Marcia Brown, who noted that the USDA has yet to release funding for the programs, even though federal courts ordered an end to the across-the-board freeze.
USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamp program, is under DOGE scrutiny, while the House of Representatives budget plan seeks to cut up to $230 billion from SNAP. Such funding cuts would affect sales for natural and organic food producers, including for such healthy staples as organic dairy and plant-based foods that are frequently purchased by SNAP recipients.
On March 10, USDA Secretary Brooke Rollins announced the cancellation of $1 billion in federal funding that gave schools and food banks money to purchase food from local farms and ranchers. According to Kevin Hardy, a reporter with Stateline, the funding boosted business for more than 8,000 farmers, providing local food to food banks and schools. “The Trump administration is killing the programs, despite HHS Secretary Robert F. Kennedy Jr.’s campaign against processed food, which he says is poisoning Americans,” Hardy wrote.
When it comes to our food system, we are all for getting the chemicals out of food, and the FDA’s announcement in January that it would ban Red Dye No. 3 from food products is to be celebrated. Now, if only Kennedy and the Trump administration could start focusing on the other 9,999 questionable chemicals allowed in commercial food production.
Overall, it is difficult to square Kennedy’s rhetoric with the on-the-ground actions of the administration he serves. And that, to me, is the painful irony of MAHA.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing public relations, brand marketing, social media and strategic business development services to natural, organic, regenerative and sustainable products businesses. Contact steve@compassnaturalmarketing.com.
DOGE Days: From Supplements to Organic Farming, Natural Industry Feels Cuts
By Steven Hoffman
As the Department of Government Efficiency, or DOGE, led by billionaire Elon Musk under the administration of President Donald Trump, cuts jobs and funding for programs at U.S. agencies across the board, natural and organic food and dietary supplement producers are feeling the impact of DOGE cuts to FDA, USDA, USAID and others.
Cuts to FDA have resulted in the resignation of James Jones, FDA’s top official in charge of food safety and nutrition, following what he called “indiscriminate” layoffs of dozens of food safety inspectors. Jones, who joined the agency in 2023, said the cuts would make it “fruitless” to continue his role. “I was looking forward to working to pursue the department’s agenda of improving the health of Americans by reducing diet-related chronic disease and risks from chemicals in food,” Jones wrote. News of the resignation was first reported on Feb. 17 by FoodFix.
The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services announced plans in mid-February to fire 5,200 probationary employees across its agencies, including the National Institutes of Health (NIH), the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) and the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC). The layoffs appeared to focus on employees in the agency’s departments for food, medical devices and tobacco products. It was not clear whether FDA employees who review drugs were exempted. However, Fierce Healthcare reported on Feb. 22 that hundreds of fired FDA probationary workers have received notices from the agency that their terminations were rescinded.
Following news of the DOGE’s layoffs at the FDA, including a number of staff firings at FDA’s office of Dietary Supplement Programs, the Council for Responsible Nutrition expressed concern about the FDA’s ability to effectively oversee dietary supplements and food safety. “As the FDA deputy commissioner steps down, it’s critical that the agency maintains adequate staffing and expertise to uphold consumer confidence in the food supply,” CRN said in a statement.
“While staffing changes can occur during any presidential transition, it is critical that the FDA maintains the resources, expertise and staffing levels necessary to ensure effective dietary supplement oversight that undergirds consumer confidence in the supplement market,” said Jeff Ventura, CRN’s VP of Communications.
USDA Pauses Two Major Organic Programs
At USDA, pauses and cuts in funding for organic transition and soil conservation programs are leaving farmers on the hook for millions of dollars they invested on the promise of reimbursement, while “accidental” firings of bird flu researchers at the agriculture agency have exacerbated the high price and limited availability of eggs. (According to USDA data, the price of eggs increased 38.2% since the beginning of 2025, with the cost of a dozen conventionally produced eggs exceeding of $8 in February 2025.)
Federal officials also are withholding funding for two major organic agriculture programs that make payments directly to farmers, jeopardizing millions of dollars in funding just ahead of the 2025 planting season, reported E&E News by Politico on February 6. “The pause on the $85 million Organic Market Development Grant program and the $100 million Transition to the Organic Partnership Program has jolted farmers, nonprofits and businesses struggling to make planting and hiring decisions. Even if the pause on funding is lifted, it could put farmers out of business,” wrote E&E News reporter Marcia Brown. According to Brown, USDA has yet to release funding for the programs, even though federal courts ordered an end to the across-the-board freeze.
In addition, USDA’s Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as the Food Stamp program, is under DOGE scrutiny, plus the House of Representatives budget plan seeks to cut up to $230 billion from SNAP. Such funding cuts would affect sales for natural and organic food producers, including for such staple healthy products as organic dairy and plant-based foods that are frequently purchased by SNAP recipients.
According to Georgie Lee Smith, who blogs under the moniker Farmer Georgie, the loss of scientists and researchers at USDA agencies including the Agricultural Research Service (ARS) and the Animal & Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) will have a long-term negative effect on the ability of U.S. agriculture to respond to issues and opportunities, and maintain its position as one of the world’s leading food producers.
Beginning in mid-February, “DOGE took aim at the United States Department of Agriculture, aka the USDA, firing ‘probationary’ employees in what has been described as a ‘blood bath’ of terminations. To be clear, probationary periods can run from one year to three, depending upon the job, and apply even to long-time USDA employees who have recently taken a job promotion. Translation — it’s a lot of folks, many with significant dollars invested into their training,” Smith wrote.
“The researchers and scientists at ARS are on the frontline of nutrition, food safety and quality, livestock and crop production, natural resources and sustainable agricultural systems. Along with our land grant university systems, ARS researchers are often the first area of investment into solving critical food and agricultural issues, whether that’s preventing food-borne illness outbreaks to breeding more climate-resilient crops and livestock to new ways to combat pests and diseases impacting food production,” she wrote. Smith also pointed to the risks associated with cutting staff at APHIS, USDA’s agency responsible for combatting the escalating avian flu crisis.
“Many farmers and ranchers are still holding onto hope that the funding freezes that have their grants and cost-share monies tied up are only a bump in the road. Perhaps these USDA terminations will be the same. But I’m afraid that is not the case,” Smith wrote on February 16. “Secretary (of Agriculture) Brooke Rollins issued a press release … that DOGE had terminated 78 USDA contracts totaling more than $132 million, with more than 1,000 contracts still under review. And DOGE tweeted they had eliminated an $8.2 million USDA contract to implement programs administered under Biden’s climate-smart initiative, which had funneled $3 billion in grant funds to agricultural producers, marketing organizations and forest landowners nationwide to support the adoption of climate-smart practices. Again, I can’t help but point out that the large majority of the climate-smart grants specifically supported the same ‘soil health/regenerative ag’ mantra that RFK Jr. is purporting. I feel like we just cut off our noses to spite our faces,” Smith commented.
Dismantling of USAID Impacts U.S. Farmers
For the U.S. agriculture economy, 40% of government food assistance comes from American farms through programs including the U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID), which purchased $2 billion in food from American farmers in 2024. As such, the dismantling of USAID, along with its Food for Peace program, has eliminated a valuable market for farmers. It also has resulted in nearly $500 million worth of donated food sitting unused or rotting on docks and in warehouses, according to a report issued on February 10 by the Inspector General of USAID.
“Should parts of USAID be reformed or revisited? Certainly. But shutting down the entire agency in less than two weeks is not the way to do it,” wrote Erin Sikorsky, Director of the Center for Climate and Security and former aide to Wisconsin Congressman Ron Kind, in the Feb. 17, 2025, edition of the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel.
“I know Wisconsinites are proud of the role our farm industry plays in supporting food security and preventing starvation worldwide. The Wisconsin Congressional delegation has consistently stood up for Wisconsin farmers, and they must do the same today by opposing this reckless destruction of these life-saving and economically important food aid programs. This action is a reversal of decades of bipartisan support for programs that provide global food aid and prevent starvation, precisely because such programs help American farmers, help those most in need, and prevent conflict and instability that threatens our national security,” Sikorsky wrote.
Steven Hoffman is Managing Director of Compass Natural, providing public relations, brand marketing, social media and strategic business development services to natural, organic, sustainable and hemp/CBD products businesses. Contact steve@compassnaturalmarketing.com.