The Right Opinion
Michelle Obama's $400 Million 'Food Desert' Scam
First Lady Michelle Obama has called on Congress to create a $400 million-per-year program to encourage the establishment of supermarkets in places she calls "food deserts."
The situation in these "food deserts," as Mrs. Obama describes it, is quite dire indeed. American children are growing fat because their parents cannot get to a supermarket -- to buy fruits and vegetables -- without undergoing the hardship of boarding a bus or riding a taxi.
As a consequence, food-desert-dwelling children are forced to eat fast food and junk procured at chain restaurants and convenience stores.
In a March 10 speech, the first lady painted a sad picture of their plight.
"Right now, 23.5 million Americans, including 6.5 million kids, live in what we call 'food deserts' -- these are areas without a supermarket," she explained. "And as a result these families wind up buying their groceries at the local gas station or convenience store, places that offer few, if any, healthy options."
She offered a solution.
"Let's move to ensure that all families have access to healthy, affordable foods in their community," she said. "(W)e've set an ambitious goal here: to eliminate food deserts in America within seven years.
"To do that," she said, "we're creating a Healthy Food Financing Initiative that's going to invest $400 million a year -- and leverage hundreds of millions more from the private sector -- to bring grocery stores to underserved areas and help places like convenience stores carry healthier options."
Pushing this $400 million food-desert-eradication plan became a standard part of Mrs. Obama's stump speech.
In February, she promoted it in a Philadelphia neighborhood she said had just emerged from a 10-year period without a supermarket -- thanks to subsidies from the enlightened state government of Pennsylvania.
"For 10 years, folks had to buy their groceries at places like convenience stores and gas stations, where usually they don't have a whole lot of fresh food, if any, to choose from," said Mrs. Obama. "So that means if a mom wanted to buy a head of lettuce to make a salad in this community, or have some fresh fruit for their kids' lunch, that means she would have to get on a bus, navigate public transportation with the big bags of groceries, probably more than one time a week, or, worse yet, pay for a taxicab ride to get some other supermarket in another community, just to feed her kids."
Congress left town for the November election without having approved any fiscal 2011 spending bill. So, as of yet, it is uncertain whether Mrs. Obama will get her $400 million-per-year to subsidize supermarkets in "food deserts." The agricultural bill that has been working its way through Congress includes only a $40 million earmark for the program.
But does it deserve a single penny?
In the 2008 farm bill, Congress mandated that the department conduct a $500,000 study of "food deserts." The study -- "Access to Affordable and Nutritious Food: Measuring and Understanding Food Deserts and Their Consequences" -- was published in June 2009.
The report demonstrates that Mrs. Obama's depiction of American "food deserts" is fatuous at best.
Lower-income Americans live closer to supermarkets than higher-income Americans.
"Overall, median distance to the nearest supermarket is 0.85 miles," said the Agriculture Department report. "Median distance for low-income individuals is about 0.1 of a mile less than for those with higher income, and a greater share of low-income individuals (61.8 percent) have high or medium access to supermarkets than those with higher income (56.1 percent)."
There are 23.5 million people who live in "low income" areas that are more than a mile from the nearest supermarket. But more than half of these people are not low-income, and almost everyone in these areas -- 93.3 percent -- drive their cars to the supermarket. On average, they spend 4.5 minutes more than the typical American traveling to the supermarket.
"Area-based measures of access show that 23.5 million people live in low-income areas (areas where more than 40 percent of the population has income at or below 200 percent of federal poverty thresholds) that are more than 1 mile from a supermarket or large grocery store," said the report. "However, not all of these 23.5 million people have low income.
"If estimates are restricted to consider only low-income people in low-income areas, then 11.5 million people, or 4.1 percent of the total U.S. population, live in low-income areas more than 1 mile from a supermarket or large grocery store," it says. "Data on time use and travel mode show that people living in low-income areas with limited access spend significantly more time (19.5 minutes) traveling to a grocery store than the national average (15 minutes).
"However," says the report, "93 percent of those who live in low-income areas with limited access traveled to the grocery store in a vehicle they or another household member drove."
Only 0.1 percent -- one-tenth of one percent -- of Americans living in low-income areas more than 1 mile from a supermarket took public transit to the store, the report said.
For them, Mrs. Obama would create a new $400 million entitlement.
COPYRIGHT 2010 CREATORS.COM

40 Comments
Brian
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 7:07 AM
We have a "food desert" in my town. It is the high crime area with very few businesses for obvious reasons. The ones that are there have bars on their windows. Kinda sux but if they would just quit robbing those businesses, maybe they wouldn't keep moving out. Just my take on the situation.
Claire Solt
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 7:13 AM
Ever since the riots of the 60's and seventies blacks I knew said they wanted shopping centers but just got abortion clinics.Bless Terry Jeffries, he should know that the socialist masters in NYC and Chicago RESIST AND OPPOSE bringing in grocery stores. Ironically, there is no need for subsidies, Wallmart will bring stores and jobs, if they can just get a permit. I have watched Republicans guide a revival of the business community in Riviera Beach FL. The first thing residents wanted was a grocery store and now they have three. People look prosperous to me.
hughglass
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 8:01 AM
This ignorant beast is a perfect fit for her hubby and the obama administration. The free market has had a solution to the "food desert" problem (if there is one) on the table for years. It's called Walmart. Walmart has been trying to put superstores in the inner cities for years. They are kept out by democrat pols (many of them blacks who represent these poor urban districts) and their retail union thugs! When they finally opened one in Chicago, literally thousands of folks lined up for a chance to get one the available "coolie wage, no medical insurance" jobs. The store, and the locals, are doing fine. Michelle's $400mm scam is just another stunt to get money from white taxpayers and transfer it to black democrat crooks. It will do nothing to help michelle's "beloved" poor urban blacks. Remember, michell's, oh so important job at the UC, $300,000 a year job (eliminated when dumbo became president) was simply to facilitate denying health care at the University of Chicago Hospital to poor blacks so the beds could go to paying customers and that Valarie Jarrett, M&O's #1 BF, made all of her money as a chicago slumlord, financed by Government programs. I wonder how long it will take Orkin to fumigate the WH after these disgusting scumbags are thrown out.
Don L
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 8:03 AM
I worked in one of those heart of the "ghetto" food deserts where up to 13 detectives worked feverioushly arresting the petty thieves who thought they had the right to steal food. Our orders were not to chase any thief -the local residents would hurt you if you tried. The place was burned down deliberately in the MLK riots and over the next days the newspapers were telling Michelle's Obama's identical sad tale that there was no food withing walking distance. My mother would have had a saying about this behavior that a three year old could easily understand. For this, we should cry? For this, we should be taxed? Slavery was of the body - the left has instituted slavery of the soul. Let them build and service their own deserts, it might just restore some of the digniity that the race pimps and victimology spreading politicians had taken away with willing support.
Jon Carry
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 8:16 AM
MIchelle Antoinette will push price control legislation that will result in higher prices in the 'burbs to subsidize the theft that plagues the stores in the inner city. It is a lose-lose idea than won't fix the problem, but it will make everyone worse off.
Charlie Gee
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 9:20 AM
To HughGlass AMEN TO THAT BROTHER
Andrea
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 9:25 AM
This woman is on a different planet than most of us. She is referring to the "inner cities" of course and who lives there? I live in a rural community and have no trouble or problems getting to a grocery store. Why don't they have grocery stores where Ms Odamya lives? This woman is a HUGE JOKE!
TJS
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 9:30 AM
There is no such thing as a food desert, but there is a political desert which (1) tolerates crime, driving out business and (2) does not tolerate Walmart. Gosh, I wonder why there's a problem?
gommygoomy
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 9:42 AM
The reason that there ARE Food Deserts, is because people that LOOK JUST LIKE HER, Shoplift these stores out of business. Can you hear me, Mrs. Hussein? I'm talking to you. These FOOD DESERT are there for the same reason that the JAILS are full of people who look JUST LIKE YOU.Coincidence?
jeff c
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 10:03 AM
This is a complex problem not easily solved by political answers. Many would have a valid argument that Wal-Marts would not be the solution. Empowering people with jobs and money to spend, empowering folks with small business creation, and spending more on crime prevention...solutions to issues of poverty and crime, IMHO, would be ground up, not top down...and will most likely not come from Republicans any more than the Democrats...and will definitely not come from those who refer to God's children as "ignorant beast"
Chef lala
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 11:12 AM
ALl for helping children eat heallthy BUT Would MRS O shop there. ???? 400 mil for 7 years =??? YIKES once again not a full deck here .stores robbed, burnt down, lives in danger What is wrong with getting n a bus on sat and going to your local closest store...
MJR
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 11:49 AM
I (we) live in a rural area, the closest grocery store is 7 miles away and there is no public transportation and yet we are able to get groceries, even fresh fruit. Maybe I can talk MO into giving us a couple of mill so I don't have to plan my trips to town. I know, a high speed rail with stops every 200 yds so I don't have to walk far, and the city folk can pay for it!
Brian
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 11:51 AM
Hasn't this same Mrs. Obama lamenting the obesity problem we have here in the US? I can recall a time in my early Navy days that I had to ride my bicycle to the grocery store to pick up a few items. Before I had the bicycle, I walked. Seems to me a nice 2 mile round-trip walk 2 or 3 times a week would be good exercise for just about anyone. Drag those kids from in front of the idiot box and have them help carry those grocery bags,too! Might do them some physical good as well!
John
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 12:05 PM
Who really benefits from all the small store owners - that traditionally lose out to a Walmart? Well - the consumer in some aspects such as with respect to variety - yes. With respect to prices - no. But who else benefits from the existance of all those small stores - Gangs and groups of thugs who extort "protection money" from them. It is easy to intimidate a small busines person who is by themselves - intimidation of Walmart - with all of it's megabucks is another matter. They could hire defense contractors back from Iraq to stop store pilferage. So who really does not want an intercity Walmart and Why?
Doktor Riktor Von Zhades
Wednesday, October 27, 2010 at 12:06 PM
1) 23.5 Million translates into .078% of the total population, if my math is correct, less than 10%.2) I thought the neocommies LOVED public transportation, so now they say it's a hardship for people to have to use it to buy some groceries?3) As noted in the article, a lot of those folks live less than a mile away, have they ever heard of shopping carts and actually WALKING to said store? A win, win; walking is good exercise, and a wonderful aid in weight loss. Plus they can shop for groceries. 4) Also mentioned above by a poster, Walmart and other large box-stores would GLADLY come in and build if they hadn't been so opposed by the neocommies. Once again the law of unintended consequences strikes.5) I live here in Western KY, and there is a small local public transportation company that makes regular stops at a strip mall that includes a Walmart and a krogers. I had availed myself of that public transport at times and had regularly seen people carrying bags of groceries on the bus with little difficulty. 6) Perhaps this is the first attempt by the neocommies to set up food distribution centers so that the GOVERNMENT can feed the peons....