How Dairy and Formula Lobbying Derailed Paid Maternity Leave

How millions of dollars in lobbying may have shaped Congress’s decisions, leaving us without federal maternity programs or protection

When this viral TikTok video alleging Nestlé lobbies Congress against paid maternity leave landed on my for you page, I admittedly fell into a rabbit hole. Sure, Nestle makes a ton of money off of baby formula. More baby formula sales mean more profit, so naturally, it makes sense. We hear about big pharma and big tobacco, but what about big formula?

According to OpenSecrets, Nestlé has spent $52,099,018 on lobbying since 1998. How much of this was allegedly spent on lobbying against paid maternity leave is unknown, as this information is not public despite all the claims made on social media. However, with hours of digging, I found research proving lobbying in that political realm has happened.

What we know..

According to the Lancet, some commercial milk formula (CMF) lobby groups have cautioned against improved parental leave. The duration of paid maternity leave is correlated with breastfeeding, and a lack of paid leave forces many mothers to return to work.

The US is one of the few countries without a national breastfeeding protection law and the only high-income country without legislated paid maternity leave. The journal The Lancet published claims that between 2007 and 2018, the largest six U.S. CMF manufacturers spent $184.2 million on lobbying the government. Of that money, 55.1 million (30%) was declared CMF-related, and 43.8 million (79.4%) was spent by Abbott alone (another baby formula manufacturing company). The lobbying targeted Congress, the USFDA, the State Department, the US Trade and Representative, the White House, and the US Department of Agriculture. In 2014 *alone*, Nestlé spent an estimated $160,00 lobbying for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children.

2020 research in the International Breastfeeding Journal also found that Nestlé had engaged in various forms of corporate political activity, which may have influenced public health policy, research, and practice in ways favorable to the baby food industry.

A little history…

The International Council of Infant Food Industries was established under Nestlé’s leadership in 1975. Coincidentally, Nestlé faced a huge public relations crisis in the early 1970s because of its faulty baby formula. Dubbed the “bottled-baby syndrome,” (BMS) babies experienced a cycle of diarrhea, dehydration, and malnutrition, along with multiple reported deaths. In the 1960s, advocates aggressively promoted BMS, which led to the decline of breastfeeding worldwide and global scrutiny against Nestlé. However, the creation of the International Council of Infant Food Industries enabled third-party arguments against breastfeeding advocates. They created a council to clean up their PR crisis and advocate for baby formula.

That said, Nestlé isn’t the only mass producer of baby formula. Abbott, Mead Johnson (a subsidiary of Reckitt), Nestle, and Perrigo produce most of the baby formula sold in the US. If anything, Abbott has spent almost double of Nestlé in lobbying, spending $106,096,000 since 1998. They all collectively spend millions lobbying DC, but I’d argue that Nestle has the most brand recognition, leading to many social media posts and claims that they are the company lobbying against maternity leave.

Federal maternity leave was introduced into American politics in 1919. Since then, at least eight attempts to pass federally protected family leave have failed. It’s not just Republicans or Democrats blocking this initiative; both parties are guilty. According to a ProPublica investigation, the Biden administration even pushed back against the formula regulations adopted globally to protect public health.

In conclusion…

The full extent of Nestlé’s role in lobbying against paid maternity leave is unclear, but the patterns of corporate influence are undeniable. The millions spent by major baby formula manufacturers, like Nestlé, Abbott, and others, show a concerted effort to shape public policy to benefit their bottom line.

The connection between paid leave and breastfeeding rates is well-established, yet lobbying efforts prioritize profits over public health. The question remains: Will we continue to let corporate interests dictate policies that impact families' health and well-being, or will we take steps toward real, lasting change?