Kerby Anderson
For more than a decade, policymakers have been discussing the problem of “food deserts.” I started writing about this issue three years ago because there are zip codes in low-income neighborhoods without a grocery store that can provide fresh and nutritious food options. Dr. Merrill Matthews recently wrote about this issue and was on my radio program to discuss it.
He reminded us that major food chains like Walmart, Kroger, and Whole Foods have announced they will be leaving some major urban areas. Of course, we have also seen that other retail outlets that don’t sell food (like Walgreens, Macy’s, Nike, and Old Navy) are also leaving those same crime-ridden areas.
The explanation is simple. These have become bastions of progressivism. Crime is on the increase because shoplifters and other criminals aren’t punished. Record levels of unchecked theft and crime make these stores unprofitable.
Let me add my perspective to his observation. Food deserts are a real problem, and wokeness and especially critical race theory make the program worse. In a recent speech, I gave in the Dallas area, I started with the economic fact that it takes $12 million to plant a grocery store in this area. And the risks are high given the limited profit margins. In two cities in which I have lived, the local grocery store went broke and closed.
When a food chain announces it will locate a grocery store, there are the inevitable charges of racism: white grocery chains will put local black convenience stores out of business. Once it is built, the food chain must hire law enforcement to stop shoplifting and smash-and-grab. Again, you hear the charges of racism. If only a few people are hired from the community, once again, you hear the charges of racism.
Food deserts are a real problem, but I suggest that the current political, economic, and cultural issues aren’t making it easy to solve the problem.

Kerby Anderson
Major financial firms use ESG factors in their investment decisions, and the Biden administration has promoted ESG investment rules. According to major media reports, attempts to remove these requirements have failed. But the latest legislative scorecard shows that the anti-ESG movement is succeeding.
ESG stands for environmental, social, and corporate governance factors which have been used to push a leftwing agenda without asking Congress to implement what some have even called a “woke ideological agenda.”
Two years ago, the Texas legislature passed a law that bars the state from doing business with financial companies that favor renewable-energy firms over fossil fuels based on environmental reasons rather than financial reasons. Legislatures in other states have followed suit. More than two dozen states introduced anti-ESG bills. So far, eleven states have passed laws and implemented regulations.
The CEO of the State Financial Officers Foundation observed, “We’ve come in the last year and a half from nothing to having a quarter of the states passing stuff and half of the states engaging.”
You wouldn’t know this by reading articles in the mainstream press. A Washington Post article reported that the “conservative battle against woke banks is backfiring.” An article in another publication said the anti-ESG movement is full of hype but has “few big wins” in statehouses.
Now that Governor Ron DeSantis is running for the presidency, his Florida anti-ESG bill will probably get more attention. It prohibits the use of ESG criteria in investment decisions, government contracts, and local bonds. It also bars financial firms from discriminating against customers based on their religious, political, or social beliefs.
All of this suggests that the issue of ESG will become an important issue in the 2024 elections both at the national level and at the state level.