In a surprising turn of events, the presidential candidates have been talking about food. Food can be a winning topic, but we need to hear much more.
Donald Trump (seemingly influenced by his new ally, Robert F. Kennedy Jr.), is talking about making “America Healthy Again.” How? “We’re going to get toxic chemicals out of our environment, and we’re going to get them out of our food supply,” the former president has said. “We’re going to get them out of our bodies.”
Perhaps Mr. Kennedy’s dangerous anti-vaccine campaign has also rubbed off on the former president, who has repeatedly promised to cut funding for schools that mandate vaccines.
But back to food. Mr. Trump’s comments no doubt have left Big Agriculture unhappy. Let’s face it, though, the likelihood of him fulfilling those promises is probably on par with his pledge to provide “universal access” to in vitro fertilization. Does Mr. Trump even know that the farm bill, so important to farmers and consumers alike, expired Sept. 30 after Congress couldn’t get its act together to renew it?
Even so, he’s taking an opportunity on a topic that Vice President Kamala Harris must seize. Yes, she’s talked about the cost of groceries, blaming corporate price gouging for high prices. But there is so much more she could say about food. If you want to talk about the climate, economic justice, public health, labor and a host of other issues, you can hardly do better than by beginning with food. It is a linchpin issue.
Of course, food prices are a concern. And yes, prices are influenced by the shrinking pool of corporations that control much of what is grown, raised and eaten. For example, four companies control some 80 percent of the beef processed in the United States and certainly a rational approach to addressing corporate concentration and democratizing meat production would be a popular move. (Nor is beef an isolated example. Concentration is true of seeds, pork, chickens and fertilizer, to name a few more examples.)
But there is so much more to talk about: moving toward more planet- and climate-friendly forms of agriculture and eating; better treatment of farm workers; fairness in land ownership; communities controlling the production and distribution of their food; and making more genuine, nutritious food available for all. These are among the most urgent issues facing the United States and the world. We should make the food system benefit eaters rather than fattening corporate coffers. Our health, economy and environment depend on it.
Progress on all these fronts is possible. But we need to talk about how and what kinds of food we grow, how we process it into what amounts to foodlike substances of little nutritional value and how access to the healthiest food is largely limited to those with the most money. Food can be the springboard to how we talk not only about improving planetary and personal health, but also about environmental and economic justice.
To lead on these issues, Ms. Harris should first follow the lead of her running mate, Tim Walz, and talk about a universal free and healthy school meal program, both to address hunger more broadly and to guarantee that our children are given the best shot at learning. By contrast, Project 2025 — the hefty tome of policy recommendations assembled for Mr. Trump by right-wing allies should he win the election — would “reject efforts” to provide universal free school meals.
In the long run, a genuine move toward providing universal access to healthy food would mean supporting farmers who want to move away from growing corn and soybeans (two of the crops behind junk food), the industrial production of animals and corn-based ethanol.
The vice president could also call for requiring more transparency in food production and marketing and for strengthening the Food and Drug Administration. The agency could be a more aggressive guardian against the use of carcinogens and other dangerous ingredients in our food supply (as the vice president’s home state, California, has already done in enacting a law to ban from public school foods six additives linked to ill health effects in children) and require simpler, more accurate labeling so shoppers can tell at a glance which foods are beneficial and which are threatening.
Ms. Harris might even promise to demand a farm bill that provides a stronger safety net for small farmers and provides more assistance to those who produce the best, safest and healthiest food. She could strongly counter Mr. Trump’s insane immigration proposals by pointing out that immigrants form the majority of our farm work force and that deporting those workers could contribute to price inflation for groceries. She should continue to insist that farmworkers (indeed, all hourly workers), are treated fairly.
She might underline that many corporate factory farms, especially those producing animals, are not doing enough to reduce pollutants and carbon emissions, that there are ways for farmers to reduce pesticide use and damage to the environment and that those moves would be supported by her administration.
Food is a critical issue that ties us all together. We still have hungry people in this country and people without access to affordable and nutritious food. Tens of millions suffer from the devastating health consequences of their diets. At the same time, we have a food industry that contributes mightily to climate change and environmental destruction.
We have, in short, a system of production for one of the most important elements of life that needs fixing. The candidates should pledge to do just that, especially the one candidate we can believe.
Mark Bittman is a former Opinion columnist for The New York Times and lecturer on health policy food at Columbia University’s Mailman School of Public Health. His books include “How to Cook Everything” and “Animal, Vegetable, Junk.” He is the editor in chief of The Bittman Project. This article originally appeared in The New York Times.
