{"id":149152,"date":"2022-12-08T12:11:18","date_gmt":"2022-12-08T16:11:18","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=149152"},"modified":"2022-12-08T12:19:02","modified_gmt":"2022-12-08T16:19:02","slug":"black-market-in-broad-daylight","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/stateofthenation.co\/?p=149152","title":{"rendered":"

Black Market in Broad Daylight<\/b><\/h2>"},"content":{"rendered":"

By Lauren Smith
\nCovertAction Magazine<\/p>\n

\"A
[Source:\u00a0vertassets.blob.core.windows.net<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

U.S. school kids, hospital patients, and prison inmates share food poisoning, while food liquidators boast they turn \u201ctrash into treasure.\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n

[This article is the second part of a series on human rights abuse by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Prisons (BOP) and the Miami Federal Detention Center (Miami FDC).\u00a0Part One<\/a>\u00a0was on its deadly lack of health care services. Part Two is about its torturous and corrupt food service industry. In violation of international human rights, the U.S. prison system fails to provide inmates with \u201cwholesome and adequate food,\u201d as specified in the\u00a0United Nations\u2019 Human Rights and Prisons<\/a>:\u00a0A<\/a>\u00a0Pocketbook of International Human Rights Standards for Prison Officials<\/a>.\u2014Editors]<\/em><\/p>\n

Operating in the shadows is easy in the United States secondary food market, as few question what happens to food that exceeds its expiration date in leading supermarket chains across the nation. Well, truth be told, expired food gets reprocessed, repackaged, relabeled, and resold to institutions, discount retailers and restaurants.<\/p>\n

With scant regulations in place for repurposed food, and institutional purchasing specifications silent, food liquidators underbid their competitors and win contracts nearly every time. In the secondary food market, you get what you pay for, and never has the saying \u201cgarbage in, garbage out\u201d been more appropriate.<\/p>\n

No matter how much hot sauce or gravy is added as camouflage, spoiled food products are unfit for human consumption and cause foodborne illness. Here, what you don\u2019t know can kill you.<\/p>\n

In its most recent public report posted on its website, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC)\u00a0estimate<\/a>\u00a0that, each year, roughly 1 in 6 Americans (or 48 million people) get sick, 128,000 are hospitalized, and 3,000 die of foodborne diseases. However, \u201crecent\u201d is a misnomer here as the CDC\u2019s report is shamelessly outdated by more than ten years. It was issued in January\u00a02011<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Considering that food poisoning is an embarrassing indicator that reveals in its gory horror the systemic corruption of what turns out to be an unregulated food market, it is highly probable that there was undercounting back in 2011\u2014especially in institutional settings. And it is more than likely that things are even worse in 2022.<\/p>\n

When oversight agency reports are no longer published, it is clearly because industry statistics and agency performance metrics do not look good. Cover-ups at the federal level are routinely done by appointing incompetent or industry-compromised agency heads, and by defunding key reporting departments, and reducing analytic staff positions and field inspectors.<\/p>\n

Despite oversight agency neglect, both\u00a0schools<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0prisons<\/a>\u00a0have been independently studied for foodborne illness outbreaks. While these reports\/articles are also outdated, their shallow analysis remains current. The accepted prevailing narrative blames foodborne illness outbreaks on\u00a0food handlers<\/a>\u00a0that failed to follow U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) protocols for cleanliness and neglected to maintain the proper temperatures for food storage and service.<\/p>\n

While not to detract from standards set by the USDA, there are no reports that expose the lethal dangers of the secondary food market. Moreover, unlike the primary food market, these repackaging facilities are not inspected, despite their erroneous claims of USDA or FDA certifications.<\/p>\n

A media spokesperson for the U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) explained that \u201cthe FDA doesn\u2019t oversee meat and poultry, only dairy products.\u201d And that \u201cexpiration dates are not regulated, only food safety.\u201d<\/p>\n

This is a double-edged sword. On the one hand, food that is spoiled, contaminated, or toxic but within its expiration date is unquestionably unfit for human consumption. On the other hand, expiration dates are necessary as packaging, coloring and processing conceal food quality from consumers, as well as purchasing agents and food handlers.<\/p>\n

When a food product\u2019s expiration date is concealed by repackaging and relabeling, all food safety bets are off. The reselling of expired food is a black market in broad daylight.<\/p>\n

\"Text
[Source:\u00a0daily.slickdeals.net<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Most individuals interviewed at the BOP for this article were not familiar with the existence of the secondary food market. Interviews included procurement personnel, a dietitian, an attorney, a policy analyst, and two media representatives. Only the National Food Service Administrator (NFSA) understood that, when bid specifications are silent on this fundamental go\/no go criterion, food vendors selling fresh primary market products cannot compete fairly against secondary market expired food liquidators.<\/p>\n

Undeniably, recycled food has a lower price point than fresh food. Thus, secondary food liquidators can dominate the market by selling inferior products.<\/p>\n

Within this context,\u00a0rigged specifications<\/a>\u00a0may be considered a form of procurement fraud. Publicizing bid tabulations for the lowest three bidders would level the playing field.<\/p>\n

Value and Shelf Life<\/strong><\/h2>\n

However, in procurement, value and shelf life need to be decision-making factors, as well as the acquisition cost. For example, if cafeteria meals make school children, hospitalized patients, and prison inmates sick and perishable food products are being thrown out prematurely\u2014because their shelf life was already compromised prior to delivery\u2014the initial cost savings is immaterial.<\/p>\n

Further, any acquisition cost savings realized in purchasing food from the secondary market is dwarfed by incidences of foodborne illnesses. Symptoms of food poisoning require costly medical attention, result in higher staff absences and increased overtime for alternate staff, and increase cleaning costs to manage uncontrolled bodily fluids.<\/p>\n

Additionally, foodborne illnesses bring psychological stress to all involved\u2014especially when there is a significant outbreak. According to the CDC, a foodborne illness outbreak in prison affects, on average, 60 inmates.<\/p>\n

One complaint shared in nearly all prison riots is the quality and quantity of subsistence food. Riots are dangerous to inmates and correction officers, expensive to taxpayers, and can significantly damage facilities. In Texas, inmates set a\u00a0jail ablaze<\/a>\u00a0in 2009, and in Michigan, a\u00a02017 riot<\/a>\u00a0cost taxpayers nearly one million dollars.<\/p>\n

\"\"
Smoke rises from the Reeves County Detention Center in Pecos, Texas. (2009)<\/a>\u00a0[Source:\u00a0dailymail.co.uk<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

When asked why BOP\u2019s national bid documents do not specify that food is purchased fresh from the primary food market, BOP\u2019s NSFA explained that \u201cthis requirement is left up to each facility\u2019s discretion.\u201d<\/p>\n

However, research showed that BOP headquarters sets bid specification standards, and these standards are replicated downstream. Local procurement staff do not reinvent base specifications.<\/p>\n

After reviewing multiple national BOP and Miami FDC bid solicitations on\u00a0SAM.gov<\/a>\u00a0and\u00a0Unison Marketplace<\/a>, it was confirmed that \u201cNew Food\u201d specifications are utterly absent. Specifications set by headquarters and replicated at the local level only require that kitchen equipment be \u201cNew\u201d as detailed below:<\/p>\n

\u201cNew Equipment ONLY; NO remanufactured or \u2018gray market\u2019 items. All items must be covered by the manufacturer\u2019s warranty.\u201d<\/p>\n

Based on this research, institutional specifications could require:<\/p>\n

New Food ONLY; NO repackaged or reconditioned \u201csecondary market\u201d food items.<\/p>\n

The specification that \u201cManufacturer\u2019s letters will NOT be accepted in lieu of labeling\u201d sounds good at face value. However, what is the point of a label if its only purpose is to hide the fact that expired food was reconditioned and repackaged?<\/p>\n

Reporting \u201cProblems with Food\u201d<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Presently, consumers can report \u201ca problem with food\u201d at \u201crestaurants,\u201d or they can report a rotten \u201cegg,\u201d etc., on the FoodSafety.gov\u00a0website<\/a>\u00a0or on the U.S. Food Safety and Inspection Service (FSIS) webpage. However,\u00a0evidence is required<\/a>, such as the original container or packaging. This information is not readily available in institutional settings as most subsistence meals are devoid of their original packaging. It appears, by design, there is intentionally no place to report unsafe institutional food.<\/p>\n

Recommendations are made on the\u00a0FoodSafety.gov<\/a>\u00a0website to contact local health departments to report foodborne illnesses. However, in the case of federal prisons, no oversight authority inspects its kitchens.<\/p>\n

A cornered representative from BOP\u2019s press office reluctantly admitted their kitchens are only inspected by BOP personnel but countered this unsavory news with the fact that there is a \u201cfood safety manual<\/a>.\u201d Unfortunately, the manual, like BOP\u2019s procurement process, is full of holes but more about that later.<\/p>\n

\"prison
[Source:\u00a0thecrimereport.org<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Problems with Administrators, Oversight Authorities, and Elected Officials<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Personal negligence and corruption are revealed when elected officials refuse to ask agency administrators hard questions or demand reports that enable meaningful analysis. Reports from agencies that provide services such BOP, as well as oversight authorities such as the FDA, USDA, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), and the CDC are essential for a functional government that is answerable to its constituents (taxpayers and not just lobbyists).<\/p>\n

The revolving door between industry and regulatory authority personnel is well documented, as is the negative impact on democracy that\u00a0industry lobbyists hold over elected officials<\/a>. And let\u2019s not forget how donations by \u201ccharitable\u201d organizations are used not only to achieve tax evasion but to\u00a0push agendas that serve their principals\u2019 profitable business ventures<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Not only has this trifecta of foul play led to agency capture and the outright abandonment of taxpayer rights and consumer protections, but it violates international human rights law. The United Nations\u2019\u00a0Pocketbook of International Human Rights Standards for Prison Officials<\/a>\u00a0requires \u201cwholesome and adequate food\u201d be provided to the incarcerated.<\/p>\n

\"\"

[Source: issuu.com<\/a>]<\/p><\/div>\n

Lack of Indicators that Measure Performance in Institutions and Oversight Authorities<\/strong><\/h2>\n

If they exist, indicators that reveal operational issues, measure performance, and provide a cost\/benefit analysis in institutions and their oversight authorities are often concealed and require Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) requests. FOIA requests take months, if not years, to produce and often require lengthy litigation due to agency obstructionist claims that releasing \u201csensitive\u201d information somehow compromises industry trade secrets, privacy laws, etc.<\/p>\n

In BOP, a simple request for a line-item budget and an analysis comparing various prison allocations and expenditures was claimed to compromise its security. It shouldn\u2019t; they don\u2019t. Budget figures given in aggregate that do not drill down to specific medical and food costs are intentionally impossible to analyze, as shown\u00a0here<\/a>\u00a0in the DOJ\u2019s 2023 budget. It only lists \u201cInmate Care and Programs,\u201d totaling just $3 billion, or 37.5%, from a nearly $8 billion budget.<\/p>\n

According to a representative from BOP\u2019s research\/policy area, \u201cline-item budgets and comparative facility analytics can be misinterpreted and are rightly protected by FOIA.\u201d So FOIA, in effect, protects the public from learning the truth about high costs, failed programs, mismanagement, and malfeasance. So, are white-collar criminals running the prisons? More about this later.<\/p>\n

CDC Reports<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Often symptoms of food poisoning such as\u00a0vomiting, diarrhea, abdominal pain\u2014and flu-like symptoms such as fever, headache, and body-ache<\/a>\u2014are dismissingly attributed to stomach viruses or influenza by institutional administrators. However, when food poisoning cannot be concealed due to a large number of students or inmates affected, it may be reported to the CDC. Allegedly, the CDC maintains an active Foodborne Outbreak Surveillance System; but it has not issued a report since\u00a02017<\/a>.<\/p>\n

Its 2017 report indicates that only eight outbreaks of foodborne illness occurred in schools and on average 31 students were affected, with the total number of cases at 253. Additionally, it revealed that only twelve cases of foodborne illness occurred in jails\/prisons and on average 60 inmates were affected, for a total of 724 cases.<\/p>\n

As foodborne illness is more easily reported when it occurs in restaurants, as explained in the section titled\u00a0Problems with Food<\/em>, it is dominant in the CDC\u2019s analysis. But on average, a restaurant outbreak only affects ten patrons (which is still terrible in its own right). Also, restaurant patrons are not captive customers. They can elect not to return to a restaurant, whereas students, hospital patients and inmates are dependent on institutional cafeteria food for sustenance.<\/p>\n

Secondary Food Market<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Yes, there are many ways to contract food poisoning in any kitchen by unclean conditions and the food handlers\u2019 failure to observe USDA\/FDA protocols, but the probability of illness is increased exponentially when food products are delivered already expired.<\/p>\n

Also, repackaging temperature changes, more staff and equipment handling, and re-exposure to air additionally compromise the already marginal shelf life of these highly perishable food products. Modifications that hide the identity of expired poultry, beef, pork and fish, such as grinding these products into hot dogs, beef patties, sausages, chicken nuggets and fish sticks are gross\u2014as is turning expired milk and\u00a0eggs<\/a>\u00a0into dehydrated\/powdered products. It is disgusting to know that these food products are routinely sold to institutions and restaurants nationally.<\/p>\n

According to the USDA media representatives, the USDA\u2019s\u00a0FSIS<\/a>\u00a0does not inspect secondary food processing facilities. Therefore, repackaging facilities that advertise they have FDA and USDA certifications misrepresent themselves. However, most secondary food market liquidators do not have websites or list principals. This omission allows LLCs to form and dissolve easily when their contractual performance issues become so severe that their principals are debarred from bidding on government contracts.<\/p>\n

Green Eggs and Ham\/Cat in the Hat<\/strong><\/h2>\n

One major subsistence food service provider with Miami FDC is named\u00a0Wholesome Food Products, LLC<\/a>. It has no website and lists no principals. In what is believed to be a tribute to Dr. Seuss, it is comprised of two mysterious LLCs named, Thing1. LLC and Thing2. LLC.<\/p>\n

\"A
Photo from\u00a0Cat in the Hat<\/em>, Dr. Seuss<\/a>\u00a0[Source:\u00a0seuss.fandom.com<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n
\"Graphical
[Source:\u00a0corporationwiki.com<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

Consider that there is no limit to the secondary market\u2019s reselling capabilities. Expired food products travel a conga line until the liquidator finds a buyer so desperate, inept, or corrupt that it will purchase anything. For example, food rejected by restaurants and discount stores can be sold to schools. Food rejected by schools can be sold to hospitals and prisons. Finally, when prisons reject the delivery, it is sold to the military. Consider that every delivery and site inspection affects temperature and deducts time from expired products\u2019 shelf life. Unquestionably, both factors further reduce product safety.<\/p>\n

A former sailor stationed aboard the aircraft carrier\u00a0Kitty Hawk\u00a0<\/em>in the Persian Gulf during Operation Enduring Freedom reported that a food delivery contained beef stamped with REJECTED DOC (Department of Corrections). Still, the kitchen staff was ordered to cook and serve it because there was \u201ca ship full of sailors and not enough food to last them until the next delivery.\u201d<\/p>\n

In prisons, food handlers who complain about serving meals that are not fit for human consumption are disciplined, relocated or\u00a0fired<\/a>.<\/p>\n

\u201cThey had about 100 bags of rotten potatoes,\u201d Pine said. \u201cYou could smell them,\u201d and \u201cthey had black and green mold all over them.\u201d<\/p>\n

\u201cThey told me I was trying to start a riot,\u201d Pine said. \u201cI said: \u2018No, you\u2019re serving rotten potatoes. That\u2019s going to get to the yard.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"
[Source:\u00a0growerexperts.com<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

BOP\u2019s Food Safety Manual<\/strong><\/h2>\n

The BOP\u2019s\u00a0Food Safety Manual<\/a>\u00a0does not follow USDA basic protocols which are based on fresh food procured from the primary food market and processed by facilities under FSIS inspections.<\/p>\n

As discussed in the section titled Secondary Food Market, repurposed and reprocessed foods are not inspected by the USDA\/FSIS and have a shorter shelf life. This results in the inevitable serving of spoiled food and beverages\u2014even when its manual\u2019s recommended storage time duration and temperatures are precisely followed.<\/p>\n

BOP\u2019s manual instructs staff that food storage must be limited to a maximum of \u201c5 days or the manufacturers\u2019 use by date.\u201d Since the food is not in the manufacturers\u2019 packaging, this \u201cuse by date\u201d requirement is merely window dressing. Five days for fresh food is too long, according to the USDA for poultry and seafood, which specifies one to two days of storage before cooking or freezing and refrigeration for three to four days after cooking for all foods.<\/p>\n

The below-listed paragraph is from the BOP Food Safety Manual, Chapter 10, page 47:<\/p>\n

FOOD SAFETY LIMITATION OF GROWTH OF ORGANISMS OF PUBLIC HEALTH CONCERN<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cRefrigerated, ready-to-eat, potentially hazardous food prepared and packaged by a USDA-inspected food processing plant [they don\u2019t exist according to USDA and FSIS media spokespersons in the secondary food market], and not offered for immediate service when the original container is opened, or unused portions of these items from any meal, are clearly marked to indicate the date by which the food must be consumed or discarded. The date is based on a 5-day maximum when stored at 41 [degrees], not exceed a manufacturer\u2019s use-by date.\u201d [With frequent rehandling over five days, it is a no-brainer that a 41-degree temperature cannot be maintained.]<\/p>\n

The below-listed paragraph is from the USDA\u2019s website:<\/p>\n

USDA KNOWLEDGE ARTICLE<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cRefrigeration slows but does not prevent bacterial growth. Therefore, it\u2019s important to use food in a timely fashion before it spoils or becomes dangerous. For raw ground meats, poultry, seafood, and variety meats (liver, tongue, chitterlings, etc.), refrigerate them only 1 to 2 days before either cooking or freezing. Beef, veal, lamb, and pork roasts, steaks and chops may be kept 3 to 5 days. After cooking, meat, poultry, and seafood can be safely stored in the refrigerator 3 to 4 days.\u201d<\/p>\n

The BOP manual instructs staff that their Budget Projection Report should ensure the \u201ccontracting specialist purchases supplies at wholesale and other favorable prices and conditions.\u201d Quality and shelf life are not considered when setting up a food order.<\/p>\n

Another issue with the manual is its failure to require that temperature logs be kept. This omission is suspiciously bad since temperature taking is the only way it directs potentially hazardous food to be checked. Additionally, logs more easily enable problem food liquidators to be disqualified from bidding.<\/p>\n

The below-shown paragraph is from the BOP Food Safety Manual, Chapter 7, pages 35 and 36:<\/p>\n

FOOD RECEIVING REQUIREMENTS<\/strong><\/a><\/p>\n

\u201cTemperature of potentially hazardous food is checked when it is received. Items impractical for probe temperature monitoring (eggs, milk, etc.) are determined to be in compliance by monitoring the temperature of the transport container. Immediate notification is made to the FSA, AFSA, or designee to determine disposition of any item not within the limits described below. Due to the immediate notification and disposition requirements, logs documenting receiving temperatures are not required.\u201d<\/p>\n

Oddly, there is no requirement in the BOP manual for a written report to \u201cthe FSA, AFSA, or designee.\u201d Tracking what happens to rejected prison food is essential to thwart an even more sinister black market comprised of rejected food (one step down from expired food)\u2014as evidenced by the\u00a0Kitty Hawk<\/em>\u00a0aircraft carrier receiving beef marked REJECTED by the DOC.<\/p>\n

Corruption in Prison Food Procurement<\/strong><\/h2>\n

While most of the articles involving corruption in Miami FDC involve assault,\u00a0rape<\/a>\u00a0and the\u00a0smuggling of contraband<\/a>, state-run and privately run facilities describe the mechanics of crime in food procurement. Bid specifications that eliminate primary market competition combined with manuals that allow expired and spoiled food items to be accepted by food handlers and that do not track rejected food create an environment ripe for kickbacks,\u00a0bribes<\/a>, and hush money.<\/p>\n

However, prosecutions might be more embarrassing for BOP than simple staff dismissals. Moreover, keeping negative information from the public might have a higher value to the U.S. Department of Justice (DOJ)\u2014as its Attorney General is answerable to the president\u2014than preventing and\/or prosecuting white-collar criminals.<\/p>\n

Consider that the following headline is not good publicity for the facility\u2019s warden:\u00a0Oregon DOC Food Manager Takes Over $1 Million in Bribes, Feeds Prisoners \u201cDistressed\u201d Food.<\/em><\/p>\n

According to\u00a0Prisonlegalnews.org<\/a>, \u201cbetween mid-2000 and December 2006, the Food Service Administrator (FSA) \u2018supplemented\u2019 his $79,000 annual salary with at least $1,132,000 in bribes and kickbacks from brokers who sold dubious quality food to the ODOC.<\/p>\n

Under the FSA\u2019s watch, daily food costs in Oregon\u2019s prison system dropped from $3.95 per prisoner ($1.32 per meal) in 1997 to $2.38 ($0.79 per meal) in 2006\u2014a 40 percent reduction.\u201d<\/p>\n

Wardens are evaluated on the cost to shelter inmates, and up-front savings are a more highly valued indicator than\u00a0foodborne illnesses<\/a>, which can mostly be swept under the rug or blamed on viruses.<\/p>\n

According to the\u00a0CDC<\/a>, \u201cIncarcerated people are more likely to have foodborne illness that is related to an outbreak than non-incarcerated people.\u201d<\/p>\n

DOJ\u2019s Inspector General released a\u00a0report<\/a>\u00a0dated October 2022 that identifies BOP issues. Granted, violent attacks and contraband make bigger headlines, its silence on\u00a0white-collar crime<\/a>\u00a0involving procurement, foodborne illness, and the secondary food market is deafening, especially when considering the\u00a0crime ring in Oregon<\/a>, uncovered by FBI and IRS raids, led to California and Maryland food brokers\u00a0pleading guilty to bribery and tax fraud<\/a>. They faced 13 years in prison and a $500,000 fine.<\/p>\n

Misusing Health Protocols to Obscure Operational Issues and Inmate Conditions<\/strong><\/h2>\n

According to its webpage, Miami FDC has\u00a01,082<\/a>\u00a0inmates and remains under\u00a0COVID level III<\/a>\u00a0protocols, which\u00a0suspends all visitations<\/a>. Out of 122 institutions, only three facilities are level III at the time of this writing.<\/p>\n

However, its seriously outdated\u00a0report<\/a>\u00a0from September 29, 2021, only lists two inmates in medical isolation. Thus, family members, elected officials and the press cannot physically monitor its operations and inmates\u2019 health for no apparent or documented reason. Corruption grows in secrecy. What is Warden\u00a0Eugene K. Carlton<\/a>\u00a0hiding?<\/p>\n

A 2021 Associated Press (AP)\u00a0investigation<\/a>\u00a0revealed that the nearly $8 billion annually budgeted to the federal Bureau of Prisons is a hotbed of abuse, graft and corruption. BOP accordingly seems to have turned a blind eye to employees accused of misconduct and, in some cases, the agency failed to suspend officers arrested for crimes.<\/p>\n

\n
\"\"
[Source:\u00a0prisonpolicy.org<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n<\/div>\n

\u201cThe main concern with the Bureau of Prisons is that wardens at each institution decide if there\u2019s going to be any disciplinary investigation or not,\u201d said Susan Canales, vice president of the union at FCI Dublin. \u201cBasically, you\u2019re putting the fox in charge of the henhouse.\u201d<\/em><\/p>\n

Cost to Taxpayers<\/strong><\/h2>\n

According to a 2017 report done by\u00a0prisonpolicy.org<\/a>, the mass incarceration system costs the government and families of justice-involved people at least $182 billion every year.<\/p>\n

Cost to Feed Inmates\/Per Capita Budget (COIF)<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Reportedly, Miami FDC\u2019s Food Service Department has a per capita budget. But since this document combines food items with equipment and cleaning products, it makes isolating food costs difficult. This budget is also not available without FOIA. The DOJ\u2019s\u00a02021<\/a>\u00a0report has no useful indicators for comparing food cost or illness by facility.<\/p>\n

Prisonpolicy.org\u00a0research<\/a>\u00a0indicates that, in 2003, Florida prisoners\u2019 daily food cost was $2.32. This is a nominal fraction of the annual Cost of Incarceration Fee (COIF).<\/p>\n

\"\"
[Source:\u00a0prisonpolicy.org<\/a>]<\/figcaption><\/figure>\n

According to a\u00a0report<\/a>\u00a0in the\u00a0Federal Register<\/em>\u00a0that is based on FY 2020 data, the average annual COIF for a federal inmate in a federal facility in FY 2020 was $39,158 ($107.28 per day).<\/p>\n

Commissary<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Despite a nearly $40,000 annual cost to taxpayers, inmates at Miami FDC spend up to\u00a0$360.00<\/a>\u00a0per month ($4,320 per year) on items such as sodas, ice cream, food, clothing, electronics, and shoes at the commissary. Commissary vendors rake in\u00a0$1.6 billion a year<\/a>, according to a 2016 study done by the Prison Policy Initiative. Are subsistence foods compromised to promote the use of this lucrative market?<\/p>\n

Claims by Liquidators<\/strong><\/h2>\n

Advertising claims by liquidators are unappetizing and may be criminal.<\/p>\n

Lewisco<\/strong>\u00a0Holdings<\/strong><\/h2>\n

\u201cWhen food reaches its expiration date, it becomes worthless, right? Not so fast, says Lewisco Holdings. As buyers of expired food inventory,\u00a0we can take your trash and make it treasure<\/a>. Liquidation is the process of buying unusable goods, clearing them out of the primary market, and moving them into secondary lines of distribution. Lewisco Holdings operates in the realm of expired food inventory. We purchase these goods and then distribute them to discrete buyers throughout the continental U.S.<\/p>\n

As liquidators, Lewisco Holdings does not sell to restaurants, convenience stores, primary supermarkets, or full-line distributors. These entities are our clients\u2019 customers, and we respect the boundary. We also pledge to work with confidentiality\u2014not advertising, not selling to buyers outside the geographic boundaries, and not selling to any buyer who doesn\u2019t also respect these rules.<\/p>\n

Examples of our typical buyer include:<\/strong><\/h2>\n