[[link removed]]

PORTSIDE CULTURE

THE SECRET LIFE OF GOVERNMENT CHEESE  
[[link removed]]


 

Colleen Hamilton
May 23, 2025
Ambrook Research

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

_ The U.S. government encouraged producers to produce cheese and the
USDA began stockpiling the surplus. Some of the same companies that
benefited from USDA dairy surplus purchases now rent space in the very
caverns once used to house that surplus. _

The story of how the government came to store millions of pounds of
cheese begins with the Great Depression. ,
jeannetteferrary.photoshelter.com

 

Deep in Missouri caves, millions of pounds of cheese reveal how
federal dairy policies shaped our diets, food aid, and ideas of
government waste.

This is an op-ed. It does not represent the perspectives of Ambrook or
this publication.

More than one hundred feet beneath the ground in Springfield,
Missouri, there are expansive, dimly lit limestone caves. These caves
are not filled with either iridescent hanging stalactites nor
emerging, rocky stalagmites. Instead, the football-field-sized caverns
are stuffed to the brim with American made cheese: cheddar, Swiss,
provolone, and even a room dedicated to Wisconsin curds. The original
owner of these infamous cheese caves? The United States government.

For decades, it was official American policy to purchase and store
massive amounts of cheese in Missouri, Wisconsin, and Kansas. In the
intervening decades, a company called Springfield Underground has
taken over operations. While the USDA itself no longer actively
stockpiles cheese in the caves, their use for storing immense amounts
of dairy products continues, a quiet testament to the persistent
overproduction baked into federal dairy policy.

The story of how the government came to store millions of pounds of
cheese underground begins with the Great Depression. As prices for
agricultural products collapsed in the 1930s, dairy farmers across the
country faced financial ruin. Despite their pleas, distributors
refused to raise their prices, convinced Americans would not pay a
premium for a pantry staple. Infuriated, farmers took to the streets,
sabotaging milkmen on their delivery routes and pouring gallons of
milk on the ground to make their point.

They won: Franklin Delano Roosevelt offered subsidies to farmers who
agreed to reduce their production in order to raise milk prices. While
FDR’s policies planted the seeds of federal agricultural
intervention, they would pale in comparison to what came later.

Throughout World War II, the American government touted dairy
production as a vital contribution to the national war effort. They
shipped dried milk to soldiers overseas, and new research about
milk’s ability to build muscle mass made it the ideal beverage for
the nation’s virile self-image. “If you read the literature from
the 1940s, there’s an almost religious feel to the discussions of
dairies‘ powers,” said Andrew Novakovic, E.V. Baker Professor of
Agricultural Economics Emeritus at Cornell University. (A glowing
pamphlet from the era described cheese as ”a food no one should live
without.“) Soon, this belief became law. In 1946, Congress signed
the 1946 National School Lunch Act, which required every meal served
in schools to include milk.

But milk presented a logistical challenge. It was easily perishable,
costly to transport, and difficult to store. For many dairy farmers,
the precarity of their product necessitated a consistent, stable
consumer. To promote production, Congress passed the Agricultural Act
of 1949, which included the Milk Price Support Program (MPSP). The
program guaranteed a minimum price for milk and authorized the USDA to
buy the surplus when prices dipped below the support level. With the
government as a buyer of last resort, production among dairy farmers
soared. With their newfound certainty, they raced to churn out as much
milk and cheese as possible.

That trend intensified under President Jimmy Carter. A peanut farmer
from Georgia with deep ties to rural America, Carter viewed price
support as a lifeline for struggling farmers, many of whom were being
crushed by inflation and rising input costs in the 1970s. While
running for president, he promised to raise the price of support for
vulnerable dairy farmers and when elected, followed through. The
result was a dramatic oversupply of dairy. Since it spoils quickly,
the U.S. government encouraged producers to transform their milk into
cheese, and the USDA began stockpiling the surplus in warehouses
across the country, including deep underground in Springfield,
Missouri. At its peak, the government spent over $2 billion a year to
store the excess, much of it entombed beneath the Midwest.

When Ronald Reagan took office in 1981 promising to slash federal
spending, the cheese stockpile became a symbol of a bloated
government. In an infamous press conference, Reagan’s Secretary of
Agriculture, John R. Block, held up a five-pound brick of processed
cheese and declared, “We’ve got 60 million of these that the
government owns. It’s moldy, it’s deteriorating ... we can’t
find a market for it, we can’t sell it, and we’re looking to give
it away.” Some critics proposed dumping it in the ocean. Instead,
amid rising hunger and a recession, the Reagan administration created
a solution: Give it away. The USDA began distributing the surplus
through food banks, churches, and welfare offices. This marked the
beginning of what became known — often mockingly, sometimes
gratefully — as “government cheese.” (Not to be confused with
the new TV show of the same name.)

To many, the image of government cheese embodied the contradictions of
federal policy. A symbol of waste born from overproduction and
bureaucratic miscalculations yet also a lifeline for millions of
food-insecure Americans. The dense, salty cheese was emblematic of the
era’s social safety net: essential, flawed, and stigmatized. These
contradictions were used to justify sweeping changes. Under Reagan,
the federal government began scaling back and privatizing key food
assistance programs, leading to a major reduction in SNAP. The public
image of food aid shifted from a social right to a begrudging handout.

Today, the former government cheese caves are still operational, but
the Department of Agriculture is no longer their primary tenant. The
Springfield Underground complex has been transformed into a vast
industrial logistics hub, with over 3 million square feet of
temperature-controlled storage leased to corporations like Kraft
Heinz, PepsiCo, and Nestlé. Some of the same companies that benefited
from USDA dairy surplus purchases during the program’s heyday now
rent space in the very caverns once used to house that surplus. These
artificial caves maintain a steady 58 degrees year-round, making them
ideal for storing perishable goods including cheese, which is still
housed there, albeit now as private inventory.

While the U.S. government no longer actively stockpiles cheese, the
surplus problem hasn’t entirely disappeared. In 2022, the USDA
reported that commercial inventories of American cheese topped 1.5
billion pounds, the highest level since the 1980s. Though most of that
cheese is now stored above ground in refrigerated warehouses, the
symbolism of the caves persists and is often invoked during debates
over agricultural subsidies and food aid.

Dozens of viral TikTok videos continue to show the Springfield cheese
caves with a mix of befuddlement and pride. “This is where our taxes
go?!” writes one user; “God Bless America,” says another.
Despite privatization, the caves remain a subterranean monument to the
country’s ongoing struggle to balance food security, farm economics,
and public perception. Government cheese, once a symbol of abundance
and attempts to help small farmers, has continued to be a symbol of
government dysfunction — a stigma that persists to this day.

In President Trump’s “one big beautiful bill,” which passed the
U.S. House of Representatives last week, federal funding for SNAP
would decrease by more than $267 billion over 10 years. The impact of
that cut would be enormous: More than 40 million Americans rely on
SNAP, including one in five families with children. Like in the 1980s,
accusations of government waste have fueled calls to reduce the social
safety net. Once again, dairy is at the center of the story — but
this time, the industry could face a major loss.

According to Mother Jones, the dairy industry still receives nearly $1
billion a year in subsidies. Perhaps the largest, least visible
subsidy flows through federal food programs like SNAP, WIC, and school
lunches. A prime example: Every federally reimbursed school meal must
still include a carton of milk regardless of whether or not students
want it, need it, or can even digest it. Some students have even
protested and won lawsuits over the fact that they need a doctor’s
note to receive soy milk.

This creates an enormous, federally subsidized market for dairy. In
fact, recent bipartisan legislation proposed by the dairy lobby would
expand this requirement to include whole and two percent milk,
bringing more milk into American schools. “Dairy producers
understand that they are deeply intertwined with federal food aid
programs,“ said Novakovic. If the Republicans‘ proposed cuts go
through, the benefits could profoundly impact their bottom line.
”Many dairy producers who supported [the President] are surprised to
see the proposed cuts.“

Luis A. Ribera, professor and extension economist at Texas A&M,
agrees. “Every dairy producer I work with is aware of this
connection [with the federal government] and many are frustrated by
it,” he said. Most would prefer open international markets as a
release valve for their products, selling cheese in places like Canada
and Europe, where import restrictions remain tight. Their goal isn’t
to produce less dairy, despite the fact that fewer Americans are
drinking milk than ever before. Activists argue that instead of
subsidizing a fading industry, federal policy should pivot toward
emerging, climate-conscious alternatives like almond, soy, and oat
milks.

At a time when federal food aid is once again under attack and claims
of government waste abound, it’s no surprise that the cheese caves
have resurfaced in the public imagination as viral symbols of
confusion and government excess. While today’s debates may feel new,
the entanglement between the dairy industry and the American
government is anything but. With dairy exports declining and domestic
surpluses rising once more, it’s not unthinkable that the government
could once again return to the caves or finally shut off the milk
spigot once and for all.

If you enjoyed this post, please share it!

Share

Colleen Hamilton is a journalist covering food, climate, and culture.
Her writing has appeared in _The New York Times_, _Los Angeles
Times_, Eater, The Cut, Teen Vogue, Them, VICE, and The Food Section,
among many other publ

* cheese
[[link removed]]
* USDA
[[link removed]]
* dairy industry
[[link removed]]

*
[[link removed]]
*
[[link removed]]
*
*
[[link removed]]

 

 

 

INTERPRET THE WORLD AND CHANGE IT

 

 

Submit via web
[[link removed]]

Submit via email
Frequently asked questions
[[link removed]]
Manage subscription
[[link removed]]
Visit portside.org
[[link removed]]

Twitter [[link removed]]

Facebook [[link removed]]

 



########################################################################

[link removed]

To unsubscribe from the xxxxxx list, click the following link:
[link removed]