Obesity is an epidemic in the United States that costs taxpayers billions of dollars. According to data from the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 39.8 percent of adults were obese in 2015-2016, and the medical costs of obesity were estimated to be $147 billion in 2008 dollars.
So why is the federal government subsidizing junk food?
Despite the prevalence of obesity, the federal government continues to spend a significant amount of money making unhealthy foods cheaper. A 2013 report from U.S. PIRG revealed that the government has spent $19.2 billion on junk food ingredients derived from corn and soy since 1995.
Although corn and soy are not unhealthy themselves, they are used to manufacture food additives without any nutritional value rather than eaten directly by humans. For example, corn syrup, high fructose corn syrup, and corn starch are all made from corn. Soy is used to make hydrogenated vegetable oil, which accounts for 65 percent of all edible oils consumed by Americans. Since 1995, 9.6 percent of the domestic corn produced were converted into sweeteners or thickeners. This translates to $8.1 billion in taxpayer dollars spent on corn-based sweeteners and starch that are used in junk food. On the contrary, the USDA data showed that among the 15.2 billion bushels of corn produced in the U.S. during the 2016-2017 market year, only 204.3 million (1.3 percent) bushels became cereals and other products directly eaten by human beings.
[Also read: White House preparing $12 billion in aid to farmers caught in Trump’s trade war]
Although the dietary guidelines recommend that fruits and vegetables should make up half of a meal plate, the apportionment of farm subsidies seems to be working against this goal. Junk food ingredients have received far more federal subsidies than fruits and vegetables have. Although 40 percent of farm subsidies have gone to corn and soybeans from 1995 to 2016, fruits and vegetables receive only 1 percent of farm subsidies. If junk food subsidies went directly to taxpayers, they would allow each taxpayer to purchase nearly 20 Twinkies every year. On the other hand, each taxpayer would only be able to buy half an apple per year with subsidies that go towards apples.
In contrast to major crops like corn and soybeans, fruits and vegetables are categorized as specialty crops by the Department of Agriculture. This has resulted in them receiving little or no subsidies through commodity programs, according to a 2014 report by the Congressional Research Service.
In fact, the current Farm Bill even prohibits farmers from planting fruits and vegetables for sale on lands eligible for commodity payment subsidies. A 2016 study by researchers at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and Emory University suggested that an individual’s higher consumption of foods derived from subsidized food commodities was linked to a higher chance of heart problems or diabetes.
Of course, restoring sanity to agricultural programs will not solve the obesity epidemic on its own. Nevertheless, the federal government should not be pursuing policies which further exacerbate the problem of obesity on the public dime. The 2018 Farm Bill should be used to better align U.S. food policy with dietary guidelines.
Shiyi Zhang is a senior at Patrick Henry College studying government.
