  |
 |
| |
|
|
|
 Marie Cocco: The USDA’s Awkward TimingPosted on Nov 22, 2006By Marie Cocco WASHINGTON—It hasn’t the zesty political punch of that Reagan-era effort to turn ketchup into a vegetable. But really, could there be a more unfortunate time for the Agriculture Department to banish the word “hunger” from its description of people who are, well, hungry? Just a week before most of America sits down for that excessive meal we call the Thanksgiving feast (second- and third-day snacking while watching football is optional) came a new definition for the millions among us who are more likely to turn up at a food pantry than at a well-set dining table. They are now to be known as people with “very low food security.’’ They were previously known as “food insecure, with hunger.’’ Those who had some, but not much, more to eat were known as “food insecure, without hunger.’’ Now they’re just suffering from “low food security.’’ The linguistic legerdemain doesn’t change the method the USDA uses to count Americans—it says there are about 35.1 million—who are uncertain of having enough food or simply don’t have enough money to buy it. The number of people without sufficient resources to get food has been climbing for five years, but leveled off in the latest survey, the department says. But the worst-off households fared worse, with the number of people described as having “very low food security’’ climbing from 10.7 million to 10.8 million. These are households in which “the food intake of some household members was reduced and their normal eating patterns were disrupted’’ because they couldn’t buy food. In a word, they went hungry. The switch of bureaucratic jargon came about after the White House budget office questioned why the agriculture researchers actually called hungry people “hungry.’’ The USDA bucked the question to the National Academies of Science, where it was determined that using the word “hunger’’ wasn’t entirely accurate, since the agriculture researchers can count people who say they don’t have enough food—but can’t necessarily describe the symptoms they experience while doing without. Statistics just can’t capture what it feels like to have a hollow pit in the stomach, to lose weight or get sick because of malnutrition. The new wording doesn’t seem malicious. But it does raise a meaningful question: Why are more than 35 million Americans going without food, or without enough of it? About half of people who turned to a charitable food pantry last year already were living in households that received federal food stamps, the USDA’s annual survey says. An even greater proportion—66 percent of those who turned to pantries—received at least some form of federal food assistance, including school lunches and the feeding program for women, infants and children. “It’s a 10-year story,’’ says Jim Weill, president of the Food Research and Action Center. The 1996 welfare overhaul threw millions of legal immigrants and able-bodied adults without children out of the food stamp program. Though Congress restored eligibility little by little, it neglected to alter the program in ways that would stretch food-assistance dollars far enough to keep up with the economic changes buffeting low-income people. Food stamp allotments assume that a family spends at least some of its own money on food. But depressed and stagnant wages for unskilled workers, coupled with astronomical rents, now leave them without the cash the government assumes they’ll have to feed themselves. The average food stamp benefit allows $1 per person, per meal, according to Dottie Rosenbaum, a food assistance expert at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities. “They don’t have ... other income to purchase food,’’ Rosenbaum says. “Their food stamps may run out two weeks into the month.’’ And when was the last time you made homemade chickpea dip? The market basket of items the government uses to determine how much it costs a food stamp recipient to make “thrifty’’ foods relies heavily on the purchase of raw ingredients such as beans, which are then to be miraculously transformed into meals made from scratch. It’s a feat few middle-class families can accomplish these days. For most food stamp recipients—the disabled, the elderly and low-wage workers with long and sometimes unpredictable hours—it’s mission impossible. So the public-relations gaffe the USDA made just as the holiday season was beginning could turn out to be more of a blessing than a bungle. Congress is due to reauthorize the food stamp program next year—a task that would usually draw little attention. Now we know the problem isn’t really what we call those who are hungry. It’s finding a better way to feed them. Marie Cocco’s e-mail address is mariecocco@washpost.com. SHARE THIS TRUTHDIG ARTICLE:
|
|
Bush the Infallible
Email
Print
Share
del.icio.us
Digg
Facebook
Fark
Furl
Ma.gnolia
Mixx
MySpace
NewsVine
NewsTrust
Reddit
SphereIt
StumbleUpon
TwitThis
YahooBuzz
Jump to Comments
By cheap cigarettes, May 23 at 4:21 am #
WTF? If a man is hunger then call him hunger! Don’t need to invent some new definitions!
Report thisOMG! I even can’t call a stupid -STUPID! Only A MAN WITH A LOW PERCEPTION!
I’m not contra tolerance, I’m just for horse sense.
By rabblerowzer, November 28, 2006 at 6:02 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Compassionate Conservative is an oxymoron.
The most striking thing about Conservatives is their profound lack of Compassion.
Linking the two words is like applying a Band-Aid to someone recently decapitated.
Report thisBy long bond, November 27, 2006 at 11:06 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Uncle Benny......might want to BUMP up those rates on the long bond to “stop” the inflation.
keep starving the middle class why don’t yeah?
sincerely
Report thisconcerned mother
By Republicans "raped" the middle class, literally!, November 26, 2006 at 12:47 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Prior to the elections, and for the past 9 months I spent alot of “TIME” at the grocery store and or organization XXXX. You see YOU never know what YOU will find at the grocery store! Thank GOD, for grocery MOMS by the xxxx.
I noticed many “families” fighting over what they were going to buy for the current food week.
I actually witnessed an old couple fighting over the contents of a “SOUP” meal. It was apparent that they could NOT afford meat.
Sadly, there is NOW more families actually “starving and children going to bed HUNGRY” in the USA, than ever in our history.
The price of commodities have gone from 180 to 375. See a picture here of the COMMODITIES INDEX “CRB”:
http://charts3.barchart.com/chart.asp?vol=Y&jav=ad v&grid=Y&org=stk&sym;=$CRB&data=H& code=BSTK&evnt=adv
Wars and commodities are MARRIED to each other. When the USA goes to War so does the commodities, therefore soaring into a BULL MARKET! And YOU and I PAY MORE and PAY MORE and PAY MORE for every little or big item that we BUY.
And some red Republican House and Senate
“ c r o o k s “ INVEST in the Commodities Market Indices while this is accuring. Republican Congress Members are making BILLION$ of dollar$ off of YOU and I and SOLDIERS BLOOD!
This has all been brought to YOU by the red Republicans “who care NOTHING” about starving the middle class at all.
As for Mr. Clinton helping other countries over the last 5 years, I take issue with same. As he should be placing ALL efforts here on American soil. We have many fellow Americans at present that are “starving”. Look at YOUR own neighbors Mr. Clinton FIRST, before YOU venture outside the USA soil. It only takes a “ heart of gold “ to truely care!
Maybe NOW, George will “LISTEN” to the American people!
Go Big, we DID THAT already! Completed!
Go Long, we DID THAT already! Completed!
and next..........
Go HOME? <we are waiting>
If George will NOT Listen, then everyone
“ send - in “ 1 Tutor ASAP!
Most Sincerely,
Concerned Mother
PS: Have a lovely day, gone to the grocery store. <smile>
Report thisBy Shadeaux, November 26, 2006 at 7:27 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
My family is on food stamps, and I can definitely relate to some of the comments made. Given the preference, I would love to be able to make “chick pea dip” for my family-just can’t afford to.My husband is diabetic, and my daughter has been diagnosed as pre-diabetic.I have a chronic health problem,as well.Yet, we’re stuck having to buy whatever crap is on sale each week,just to try and make the food stamps stretch.We can rarely afford much fresh produce,lean meats,and fish.Instead, we’re stuck with a lot of noodles,meals heavily stretched with rice,or just whatever happens to be cheap.I fear for my family and what will ultimately wind up happening when my husbands uncontrolled diabetes(we were taken off of medicaid because he makes a little bit more than the $800 per month limit they have here)finally results in the loss of his legs, or heaven forbid, his life.And my daughter faces a future she shouldn’t have to.If only we could provide her with proper, nutritious meals, her condition could easily be reversed, and spare her the life of a full-blown diabetic.
Report thisIt makes no sense that this country can spend so much on corporate welfare, and so little on it’s struggling citizens.We’re not lazy,shiftless people with no desire to work.On the contrary, my husband works as much as his health will allow,and I’m disabled(yet cannot seem to be able to prove it to the government for SSI).
And, yes, I smoke, and we occassionally buy a lottery ticket,but the money that’s spent on that still isn’t enough to do much for our monthly food budget.The lottery, we play maybe once a month, in a futile effort to maybe be the lucky one someday,and get out of the circumstances we live under.We know it will never happen, but it at least gives us a moment to dream of a better life,even if it never actually happens.
By PatriotM, November 25, 2006 at 3:26 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Re-labeling the hungry in America as “food insecure” is just another manner of making the poor and starving more invisible. It sounds less threatening, no big deal, right?
Report thisWhen you want to keep eroding the moral values of a society, you do it by making the horrific things you are doing sound like little, unimportant things.
These are fellow human beings, Americans, real people with lives and names, who are going hungry, not by choice, but because the rest of us are letting it happen.
Until all of us who have food on our plate 3 times a day stand up and demand a change, the number of hungry will continue to grow.
If I, who the government classifies as living at poverty level, can contribute to the local food pantry and write my congressman, then everyone reading this can take the time to do the same, and start making a real difference instead of just talking about it.
By George Reichel, November 25, 2006 at 3:15 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Orwellian Neocon speak
Report thisInteresting that Orwell was predicting the takeover of media by a leftie gov’t, wasn’t he?
It is pure intentional propaganda.
In time the huge blue wave (see the Nov 7 U S electionworldwide movement that is working now will , I hope, include the media.
gr
least85
By Big Time Patriot, November 25, 2006 at 12:44 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
Yes, there has been some fraud using food stamps, but it would take thousands and thousands of people defrauding welfare to steal as much from the Treasury as one U.S. corporation who is “headquartered” in the Caymens. Food stamps are about the best way possible to dedicate money for actual “food” for those actually “with high food insecurity”. The fact that such programs are cut or allowed to slide through inflationary pressure into a non-functional state is just a crime against the citizens of the United States.
Report thisBy Cookie, November 25, 2006 at 11:55 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Not putting the tahini, olive oil, lemon juice and spices in the recipe is why they call it “chickpea dip” instead of hummus. Government doesn’t care if it tastes like crap: they’re poor, for pete’s sake! And why on earth would they need blenders when they can put the stuff in a wooden bowl and beat on it with a stick? I mean, come on, if you’re going to have third world problems, you have to expect third world solutions.
I think Bukko hit the nail on the head. These fools took 1984 to be an operating manual, rather than a cautionary tale.
Report thisBy rabblerowzer, November 24, 2006 at 5:28 pm #
(Unregistered commenter)
I spoke to a conservative about this hunger issue the other day.
His main concern was that the poor often spend money intended for food on things they dont need, and on things which are harmful to them. He cited cigarettes, alcohol, drugs and lottery tickets. Thats why he opposes welfare.
Ill grant that those are legitimate concerns, but I doubt its the real reason for his aversion for helping the poor. He uses a self-righteous but morally defensible position to cleverly attack a superior moral position, which is our obligation to help the poor.
Thats why I hate conservative ideology. They use human frailty as an excuse to ignore Christian values. Jesus didnt differentiate between the deserving and undeserving poor, only conservatives claim the righteous to do that.
Report thisBy Bukko in Australia, November 24, 2006 at 5:34 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
First off, I did up some home-made chickpea dip just last week. It’s called hummus. But it damn sure didn’t cost $1 a meal, not when you count the cost of the tahini, olive oil, lemons and spices, plus the amortized cost of the blender I used to puree it.
But what’s creepy about this is how these right-wing bastards are ruining the word “security.” It’s their latest weasel. In Orwellian fashion, they’ve taken a word and made it mean the OPPOSITE of what it is. “Low food SECURITY.” In other words, INSECURE! Like “job security” meaning the likelihood you can be fired at any second, and “Homeland Security” meaning you can just go drown in New Orleans.
Remember that one of the themes of “1984” was how the Ingsoc Party was debasing the very language people spoke, so as to limit how they thought. If the word “security” means “insecurity,” then there is no such thing as security. And if there is no security, then it doesn’t matter that you lost your job and your house and are starving, because you had no expectation of that anyway. Might as well pick up a gun and go to fight the war Big Brother says we need to fight for oil, or food, or to kill those people in the Blue State that are traitors to The Party…
Report thisBy KISS, November 23, 2006 at 8:44 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Another black eye for the National Academies of Science. How can they stub their toes when their credibility is on the line in so many areas? I remember the greatness of food stamps, we never used them, but friends and neighbors did, for those that did not have money to buy groceries. At the time there was banter over the wrongness of feeding the poor. Now the president has joined that callous bunch of non-caring selfish bastards. Food challenged my ass, these are the close to starving and undernourished human beings we call our brothers and sisters. Another accomplishment by the christian nation we call Amerika.
Report thisBy PurpleGirl, November 23, 2006 at 8:40 am #
(Unregistered commenter)
Another thing to consider is what happens to people with medical problems when they cannot properly feed themselves. Think of someone with diabetes, who could avoid the devastating secondary effects if they could eat nutritous foods. But those fresh foods are expensive and it takes planning and shopping with great care to eat properly. Now try that on food stamps…
Report this