A Note from the Authors:
We’re Moving to Substack

Next month, the Food Policy Debrief will be coming to you live from Substack! The good news for our current subscribers: This will change virtually nothing for you, as your subscription will be automatically moved over to our new platform. No next steps are needed from you beautiful people, just don’t be alarmed by our new look and feel!

TL;DR

Yogurt accusations are flying, grocery stores are suing, and meat companies are rebranding—it’s giving drama
Three new bipartisan (yes, really!) bills that would support farmers and local food
An action alert, a request for feedback, and a new editorial series to help you advocate
How Richmand, VA groceries just got a whole lot more affordable
Now in season: An interview with Wholesome Wave Executive Director

This Month’s Standout Food Stories

👀 Policy Movement We’re Tracking

This month, Congress got to work introducing bipartisan legislation in support of farmers. Here are three standouts bills we were excited to see:

🚜The Strong Farms, Strong Futures Act: Introduced by Representatives Underwood (D-IL) and Nunn (R-IA), this bipartisan bill would direct the Natural Resources Conservation Service to establish region- and production-specific climate change mitigation bundles within the Conservation Stewardship Program. Or, in non-jargon, would create more funding incentives for farmers to expand their climate-resilient practices.

💪Strengthening Local Food Security Act of 2025: Introduced by Senators Reed (D-RI) and Justice (R-WV), this bipartisan bill would create a pathway for USDA to enter into agreements with states and tribal governments to purchase locally grown foods from small, mid-sized, beginning, veteran, or underserved fishers, farmers, and ranchers for distribution in school nutrition and community food assistance programs.

👩‍🌾Local Farmers Feeding our Communities Act of 2025: Introduced by 10+ bipartisan representatives (ok teamwork!) this bill would boost the purchasing and distribution of local food, helping build stronger connections between local producers and community food programs, expanding markets, and improving access to healthy food for those in need.

**How You Can Progress Food Policy This Month**

Congress has passed a recklessly dangerous bill. Use the CHN Action tool to write to your Representative to thank or spank based on their vote.

Have thoughts on what defines an “ultra-processed food”? The FDA and USDA want to hear from you by September 23rd. They are seeking input to create a uniform definition of ultra-processed foods to inform future research and policy.
Stay informed with “Growing Forward,” a new weekly editorial series from GFi and Food Tank, which aims to elevate the perspectives of leading voices across the food system sector and spotlight innovative approaches to the most pressing food and agriculture system challenges.

Social Impact Spotlight

Shedding light on companies leading by example and engaging in the food system in a meaningful way

**A new Kroger x Flashfood partnership is bringing affordable groceries to Virginia**

We know you’ve heard about rising grocery prices, but have you heard about one of the latest innovations to combat them? Meet the new collaboration between retailer Kroger and app Flashfood. Launched in 16 stores across the Richmond area, this pilot program will allow for customers to purchase fresh groceries in surplus or nearing their best-by date at a discount, leading to less food wasted and more shoppers’ money saved.

This partnership is a part of Kroger’s Zero Hunger, Zero Waste program, through which it strives to build healthier communities and improve access to affordable, fresh food for everyone. It makes sense, then, why it partnered with Flashfood, which has diverted over 140 million pounds of food from landfills and saved shoppers more than $355 million on groceries since its founding in 2016. P.S. If you’re reading this from the Richmond area, send us a picture if you see this collab in the wild!

Now in season:
An interview with Wholesome Wave Executive Director, Brent Ling

‘Tis the season (literally, last week was National Farmers Market Week) to head to your local farmers market for gorgeous tomatoes (perfect for Harriet the Spy style tomato sandwiches), luscious peaches, and plenty of golden corn. If this sounds like your average Saturday morning, you may already know that supporting farmers helps the local economy. But did you also know that your local farmers market might also be a hub helping to address food and nutrition security in your community?

It’s true: Over the last three decades, farmers markets have increasingly offered incentives for community members experiencing food insecurity to get healthy, local food. Some of these are funded through local governments and philanthropic dollars, but there are also several Federal funding streams that support this work, too, like the Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program, the WIC Farmers Market Nutrition Program, and the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program.*

Gus, for whom the above program was named for, was a giant in the food and nutrition space, as well as a champion for nutrition incentives and local producers throughout his storied career at USDA and beyond. To get personal for one second: He was also a friend and mentor to many (including one of the FPD writers), and he and his wife Susan knew how to throw one heck of a party. In addition to having a Federal program named after him, one of the many ways his legacy lives on is through the work being done at Wholesome Wave, which he co-founded with Chef Michel Nischan.

For almost 20 years, Wholesome Wave has been fighting for nutrition security, including through expanding produce prescriptions and incentives (for a refresher on these, check out our earlier issue), including at local farmers markets.

So this month, we’re interviewing the Interim Executive Director of Wholesome Wave, Brent Ling, to learn more about its work, what’s new in nutrition incentive policy, and how we can help support local economies while feeding our communities. As always, responses might be edited or shortened for clarity and brevity. Let’s get into it.

FPD: Brent, thanks so much for taking the time to chat with us this month. Tell our readers a little bit more about Wholesome Wave, your mission, and how you support incentive programs at places like farmers markets and beyond.

Wholesome Wave is a unique organization: We're a small shop with big ideas and very high ambitions to change the world for the better through food. Wholesome Wave is also radically collaborative with organizations and businesses that make our food and healthcare systems work on the ground every day. We have deep experience in both program implementation as well as policy analysis and advocacy. All the policies we work on have positive public health and economic impact as the two are so closely interrelated.

FPD: We’ve seen the Second Trump Administration pull back many efforts around local food and local food economies, including reducing or eliminating funding for local procurement by food banks and school nutrition programs, and more recently ending Regional Food Center Grants. Are there similar threats against GusNIP and related incentive programs, and if not, why?

There is no such thing as a permanent policy. Even the Constitution is reassessed and reinterpreted on a daily basis, so no program or policy is above scrutiny and can be counted on in perpetuity. The Farmers Market Nutrition Programs, the Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentives Programs, and the various Nutrition Supports delivered through the healthcare system have not yet been cut or eliminated, but that does not mean they won’t be. I’d suggest the primary reason these programs have not been cut yet is because they all have both positive public health and local economic impact factors that are undeniable. Perhaps most importantly, the buyers and sellers (i.e. the customers) in these programs speak very highly of them. The key for future success and growth is to continue to make them more efficient and adjust the budgeting so that the true-cost savings are realized at the decision point of whether or not to issue another round of services. This is why we’re seeing the health insurers (who are truly at risk of expensive healthcare services) not only make these investments, but also expand them with each new round of data that comes in.

When it comes to the programs listed in your question, it’s worth seriously considering the merits and policy analysis they’ve stated as important. Are they contributing to a root-cause solution? What percentage of the money is getting to the end-user? Are they subsidizing a special industry or profession that the market won’t yet support on its own? Do they merit the investment now that we are out of the COVID emergency? I’d argue that all of the above programs have the potential to meet this scrutiny standard, but not without improvements. The USDA has clearly articulated a priority for supporting domestic agriculture markets and it has several avenues of discretionary budgets to fund them. This presents an incredible opportunity. In the end, USDA’s interest is to ensure maximum economic impact for SNAP shoppers and farmers.

But USDA also believes in free market choices by sellers and buyers. As much as we might want to argue for subsidizing a domestic, local, or regenerative supply, the chef who is buying a thousand pounds of tomatoes today is still rightly concerned about finding the right balance of price and quality. The same goes for a SNAP shopper who is deciding which items to buy. The model and infrastructure for conventionally managed crops was heavily subsidized in the not-too-distant past, providing a cost advantage over a more local and regenerative system that can’t scale without similar support. The policies mentioned have the opportunity to tilt the scales in those decision points, but they need to be proven. Some larger corporate players are demonstrating a preference for some part of the existing system to change, which is why we’re seeing health insurers who are truly at risk of expensive healthcare services not only make these investments, but they also tend to expand them with each new round of data that comes in.

FPD: Wholesome Wave also leads the National Produce Prescription Collaborative, which “works to curb the inequitable and national burden of diet-related disease by integrating Produce Prescriptions as prevention & treatment for diet-related disease into standard clinical practice.” Given recent legislation impacting Medicaid, as well as movements like Make America Healthy Again, what are a few opportunities you see for advocates to advance this work?

As the old saying goes, we need to put our money where our mouth is. If produce prescriptions will expand over the next 5+ years, it will be because doctors and managed-care organizations will clearly articulate the many ways nutrition supports save immense costs. Just last quarter, JAMA and Health Affairs published undeniably robust support that our hypothesis is true. But like any peer-reviewed publication, the results need to be interpreted and presented in context to various audiences. The science is there, and while we have more detail to develop in the “lab”, the task at hand is now a communications exercise. To date, the question has been “what will it cost to give this to everyone who needs it?” The effective question to pose is “how much is it costing us to not offer this proven clinical intervention?” All while we’re perfectly fine spending thousands of dollars on important but expensive drugs and procedures? Those who can articulate an answer to that question with sufficient rigor will succeed.

FPD: Despite the “One Big Beautiful Bill Act” extending many Farm Bill programs last month, there are indications Congress still wants to get a Farm Bill done. What are some remaining opportunities for advocates to expand programs like GusNIP and other local nutrition security programs in a prospective Farm Bill?

We are convinced that both the Farmers Market Nutrition Program (FMNP) and Gus Schumacher Nutrition Incentive Program (GusNIP) have immense potential for improvements and enhanced investments.

The FMNPs for WIC and older adults should be authorized together. Veterans should be added as an eligible group. Congress should adjust the allocation model so that states get funding that is proportional to the population need, rather than the seemingly random allocation they get now. The funding should be increased so that states like Texas and Florida get their fair share of the investment, while states like Maine and Alabama don’t lose out due to this much needed reallocation. The program needs to modernize for digital Point of Sale systems and farmers who are selling online. And finally these funds should all be allocated through State Agriculture Agencies.

For GusNIP, the time has arrived to move to a produce-for-produce incentive that is integrated into the SNAP program, directly on the EBT card (FPD note: this refers to programs that automatically add incentives to SNAP/EBT cards, instead of having to opt in to an additional program where they receive a coupon or voucher. One great example is in Colorado). This requires immense technical shifts that will only become realized over a series of strategic steps. The restriction waivers that have been proposed by states offer a big opportunity here, and the USDA will need real flexibility and strong support from the incentive market actors to get this done. But we believe these stars are aligned. We’ve learned enough about implementation, and the restricted-purchase technology has advanced enough to get this done. GusNIP produce prescription research projects should also be authorized for another 5 years at 10% of the total funding with some no-cost amendments to the research criteria. Together these changes will lead to more health plans picking up the benefit and integrating it into their services at scale, as we have seen in North Carolina, New Mexico, and Washington – and will be seeing soon in Oklahoma and Michigan.

I believe both of these enhancements are bipartisan and their financial merits can stand up to an ROI assessment against other programs. And that is because of the 15+ years of great work executed so far by the program administrators.

FPD: Beyond individual advocacy and learning more, how can our readers help advance Wholesome Wave and the NPPC’s goals?

Thank you for this opportunity to share. As I mentioned above, Wholesome Wave is a unique organization and we rely on gifts and grants to execute our work. You can support this work by making a donation at www.WholesomeWave.org or www.NPPC.health.