California plans to spend $20 million in taxpayer money to distribute 40 million diapers in the first year of a state program, a cost that works out to roughly 50 cents per diaper, more than three times what families pay at Costco, as Breitbart reported.
The math is not complicated. Divide $20 million by 40 million diapers and you get 50 cents each. Walk into a Costco in California and the same quality diapers sell for roughly 16 cents apiece. That gap, more than three-to-one, is what California taxpayers are being asked to cover.
The distribution is set to run through Baby2Baby, a nonprofit led by an executive who, according to Breitbart, sits on the board of California Partners Project, an organization co-founded by Gov. Gavin Newsom's wife, Jennifer Siebel Newsom. The Los Angeles Times reported the 40-million-diaper target for the program's first year.
Peter Basios, identified as the founder of an organic baby formula company, laid out his own cost breakdown in a post on X. Basios said he had direct experience in the diaper business and flagged the pricing gap in blunt terms.
"California is about to spend $20 million of taxpayer money to give 100,000 newborns 400 diapers each through Baby2Baby.... $20,000,000 ÷ 40,000,000 = $0.50 per diaper!!!!! Now walk into any Costco in California, and you can buy the same quality diapers for.12 to.15 cents each!"
Basios continued, putting the comparison in even starker relief.
"That's $48 to $60 for 400 diapers. So the state is paying 8, 10x more per diaper than a regular family buying in bulk."
His figures suggest a family buying 400 diapers at Costco's bulk price would spend somewhere between $48 and $60. Under the state program, those same 400 diapers carry a taxpayer cost of $200.
It is worth noting that Basios's claims have not been independently verified by a government audit or second source in the available reporting. But the core arithmetic, $20 million divided by 40 million diapers, speaks for itself.
Baby2Baby's role as the distribution partner raises its own questions. The organization's leadership overlaps with the board of California Partners Project, which Jennifer Siebel Newsom co-founded. That kind of entanglement between a governor's family nonprofit network and a taxpayer-funded program would normally invite intense scrutiny.
No state official has offered a public explanation, in the available reporting, for why the per-diaper cost runs so far above retail. Programs of this kind typically carry administrative overhead, logistics, staffing, outreach, but a markup of more than 200 percent over the retail shelf price demands a clear accounting. None has been provided.
The pattern of taxpayer money flowing through politically connected channels is not unique to California. A Michigan Democrat donor recently faced 16 felony charges over the alleged looting of a $20 million taxpayer-funded grant, the same dollar figure, coincidentally, that California is pouring into diapers.
Consider the alternative. At Costco's 16-cent-per-diaper price, $20 million would buy 125 million diapers, more than three times the 40 million the state program promises to deliver. Or the state could provide the same 40 million diapers for roughly $6.4 million and return the remaining $13.6 million to taxpayers.
Breitbart's analysis went further, noting that the state could simply issue 100,000 new mothers a coupon for 400 free diapers redeemable at any retailer. That model would let families choose the brand and size they actually need, cut out the nonprofit middleman, and slash the cost dramatically.
Amazon, Breitbart noted, could deliver diapers for roughly half the Costco price. The point is not that the state should become a bulk-diaper buyer. The point is that almost any market-based approach would stretch taxpayer dollars far further than the current arrangement.
When elected officials choose a more expensive path that routes money through politically connected nonprofits, the burden falls on them to explain why. So far, the Newsom administration has not done so.
California is hardly the only state where Democratic officials face questions about how public money gets spent and who benefits. The FBI recently raided a Virginia Democrat's office and cannabis business as part of a corruption probe, one more example of the gap between progressive rhetoric about public service and the reality of how some officeholders operate.
The diaper program also fits a familiar template: a government benefit branded as "free" that costs taxpayers far more than the private market would charge. The beneficiaries get a modest supply of diapers. The nonprofit intermediary gets a $20 million contract. And the families footing the bill through their taxes get no say in whether the arrangement makes financial sense.
Oversight of programs like this tends to be thin. Legislative committees rarely dig into per-unit costs of feel-good social spending. The press, especially in Sacramento, has shown limited appetite for questioning programs that serve sympathetic populations. That creates an environment where inflated costs go unchallenged, and where politically connected organizations can thrive.
The situation invites comparison to the broader dysfunction in Democratic governance that has prompted criticism even from within the party. Sen. Cory Booker recently said Democrats have "failed this moment" and called for new leadership, a rare public admission that the party's approach is not working.
Several basic facts remain unclear. What is the official name of the diaper program? Which state agency administers it? What budget line item authorized the $20 million? What portion goes to diaper procurement versus administrative costs, logistics, and Baby2Baby's overhead? Who is the Baby2Baby executive who sits on the California Partners Project board, and was that relationship disclosed in any procurement process?
None of these questions have been answered in the available public reporting. That silence is itself a problem. Taxpayers deserve to know whether they are funding diapers or funding a network.
Meanwhile, Democrats in other states have faced their own accountability crises. Minnesota Republicans escalated a subpoena fight over Rep. Ilhan Omar after Democrats moved to shield her from oversight, another case where the instinct to protect political allies trumped the public's right to transparency.
In an unrelated but telling case, Fox News reported that a day care worker in Massachusetts was arrested on child pornography charges in the same federal investigation that led to the arrest of former New Hampshire Democratic state representative Stacie Laughton, who faces charges for distributing child sexual abuse images. The case is a grim reminder that the institutions trusted with children and public welfare require relentless scrutiny, not blind faith.
Gov. Newsom has built a political brand around generous-sounding government programs. Free diapers poll well. They make for warm press releases. But the details tell a different story: a program that pays more than triple the retail price, routes taxpayer money through a nonprofit tied to the governor's wife, and has produced no public accounting of where the dollars actually go.
California families struggling with the cost of living, and the state has no shortage of them, might reasonably ask why their tax dollars can't buy diapers at the same price they pay at Costco. The answer, apparently, is that efficiency was never the point.
When government tells you something is free, check the receipt. Someone is always paying, and in California, someone is always getting paid.
