Want to help reduce child hunger? Here's one way

Everybody's got to eat 

It’s no secret that hunger affects kids’ health and makes it harder for them to learn and thrive in school. In recent years, there has been growing awareness that millions of children in the U.S. rely on school breakfasts and lunches—and increasingly after-school snacks and meals—for a significant part of their nutrition. 

This has led many to ask about what happens to those children when school is not in session. This is an especially crucial question in a time of pandemics, extreme weather events, and other disasters. 

Even a polarized Congress has recognized the importance of this issue. Recently, Congress enacted a permanent program to help low-income kids get the food they need when schools are out for summer. The Summer Electronic Benefits Transfer (EBT) program, which will take effect this year, is modeled on the Pandemic EBT cards issued during the COVID public health emergency.  

The new program will provide pre-loaded cards worth $120 in grocery-buying benefits to low-income families with school-age children. As many as 30 million children could benefit, according to the Food Research and Action Council (FRAC). With the help of other programs—such as SNAP Stretch, which doubles or even triples the purchasing power of EBT cards at farmers’ markets—Summer EBT can dramatically improve child nutrition. That means more kids will have access to the food they need year-round, which will pay off in the long term for their health and well-being.   

There are economic benefits to the program, as well. Summer EBT could provide a boost to local businesses, farmers, and economies worth at least $3.6 billion from the EBT cards alone. In addition, the USDA estimates that every dollar of EBT benefits spent generates a multiplier effect of 1.54.  

How you can help  

The Summer EBT program is based on a federal-state partnership, with states having to share administrative costs. Recognizing the value of this program, most states—whether led by Democratic or Republican administrations—have chosen to implement it.  

Unfortunately, as of this writing, 14 states have chosen not to participate in 2024. That leaves more than 10 million children without this critical benefit. Those states are: 

Alabama 

Alaska 

Florida 

Georgia 

Idaho 

Iowa 

Louisiana 

Mississippi 

Oklahoma 

South Carolina 

South Dakota 

Vermont (they plan to next year, but a nice nudge woudn't hurt)

Wyoming 

Do you live in one of these states--or know people who do? You can help by joining AFSC’s campaign to persuade leaders in your state to implement Summer EBT.  

AFSC, with our over 100 years of experience in working for food security, is partnering with national and state allies to ensure that all eligible children can benefit from this program. We will share ideas, talking points, media toolkits, data, materials, and other tools to support you in working to achieve this goal. 

Together, we can ensure more kids have the food they need while school is out.

If you’re interested in working toward a No Hunger Summer, please contact us at nohungersummer@afsc.org. 

Why work requirements don't work

The recent proposal to increase work reporting requirements for people receiving SNAP food assistance under the Limit, Save, and Grow Act is redundant and harmful for several reasons:

*work requirements already exist for SNAP. According to the USDA, these “include registering for work, participating in SNAP Employment and Training (E&T) or workfare if assigned by your state SNAP agency, taking a suitable job if offered, and not voluntarily quitting a job or reducing your work hours below 30 a week without a good reason.” States also have the option to impose additional requirements on able-bodies adults without dependents aged 18-49, although evidence suggests that these have failed to increase workforce participation.

*the term “work requirements” in the context of changing eligibility programs such as SNAP and Medicaid is misleading. A more accurate term would be reporting requirements which involve more layers of paperwork, bureaucracy, and surveillance in exchange for often meager benefits. These reporting requirements impose burdens people receiving food assistance and the businesses, organizations, and/or agencies for which they work and simply result in few people receiving needed assistance.

*work reporting requirements don’t promote work. For example, the New York Times reported that when West Virginia piloted the program in counties with the most favorable labor market conditions, the state Department of Health and Human Resources found that “Our best data does not indicate that the program has had a significant impact on employment figures.” Rather, people lost food aid and local businesses lost out. Similarly, when Arkansas added similar reporting requirements for Medicaid, workforce participation didn’t increase—but the number of uninsured people did.

*work reporting requirements for food assistance hit the most vulnerable people hardest, including homeless people or those with unstable housing—a population that includes many veterans, domestic violence survivors, rural residents, people with disabilities, noncustodial adults supporting children, people in recovery from Substance Use Disorder, and others.

*the “Limit, Save, and Grow Act” would double down on vulnerable populations by imposing reporting requirements on older adults up to age 55. According to AARP, over 9.5 million Americans over age 50 rely on SNAP, a group that faces age discrimination in hiring and employment practices.

*SNAP benefits help local businesses and economies—and loss of benefits costs both. The Food Research and Action Council reports that each dollar in federal SNAP benefits generates $1.79 in economic activity.

*reducing SNAP benefits for millions of Americans would only place greater demands on already stretched food pantries, soup kitchens, and charities which are often staffed by volunteers and seniors.

All of which is to say this is not cool.

Punching down

 Things are about to get rough for West Virginia families facing food insecurity, defined by the USDA as “the limited or uncertain availability of nutritionally adequate and safe foods or limited or uncertain ability to acquire acceptable foods in socially acceptable ways.”

Some hits are coming from federal changes in COVID programs and some from state legislation. But the unkindest cut of all could come from a mean-spirited bill recently introduced in the legislature if it crosses the finish line.

All of these involve the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps, which provides basic food aid to around 167,000 households here.

As of March 1, pandemic-related emergency allotment increases for SNAP will cease. The average household here will receive a monthly reduction of $195 in benefits. The individual will see a reduction of $102, a net loss of $33 million in income to state businesses.

Then there’s this: when the federal Public Health Emergency ends in May, the suspension of work reporting requirements will end for able-bodied adults without dependents will end.

This means that a law passed in 2018 will go back into effect on July 1, imposing reporting requirements and hurdles for non-custodial low-income adults. As many as 24,000 could be pushed off if they can’t satisfy reporting requirements for work activities.

The 2018 bill was touted to promote workforce participation. In fact, it doubled down on a failed 2016 policy piloted in nine counties. A later DHHR report found that “Our best data does not indicate that [limiting benefits] has had a significant impact on employment figures.” People were just cut off and local businesses lost out.

Those are bad enough, but potentially much worse is House Bill 3484. It would add so many reporting, documenting and other bureaucratic restrictions for so many people as to make it unworkable both for people receiving help with food and for the beleaguered state agency that would have to administer the bill if it passes.

At a recent legislative committee meeting, a state agency representative testified that implementing the proposed legislation would actually cost state taxpayers millions of dollars while the additional requirements would reduce number of low-income people receiving food assistance. And that research has indicated that additional requirements reduce food assistance without increasing employment.

A representative of retail businesses testified that the loss of federal SNAP dollars would hurt local business and jobs, especially in rural counties.

Caitlin Cook, director of advocacy and public policy at Mountaineer Food Bank, which serves 48 of 55 counties, pointed out that the state food charity system is already overstretched and couldn’t make up for the loss of federal food aid. According to Cook, “For every one meal the food bank provides, SNAP provides nine, while simultaneously putting additional money into our local communities.”

Despite all the expert testimony, the bill passed out of committee and was reported to the floor of the House. At this writing its fate is unclear.

Aside from hungry people and local businesses, HB 3484 would also mean a loss for West Virginia farmers and farmers’ markets, which now offer SNAP Stretch, a program that allows people to double their purchasing power for fresh and locally grown food.

The bill goes against the grain of actions taken by political leaders in recent times. In 2021, for example, House Speaker Roger Hanshaw, R-Clay, announced the creation of a Food Insecurity Workgroup “dedicated to utilizing every tool at West Virginia’s disposal to help reduce hunger throughout the state.”

The group met regularly to hear from experts in the field and made positive recommendations about increasing CARES Act funding to combat hunger. In December 2021, Governor Justice agreed, providing $7.25 million for food insecurity partners across the state. Reportedly, Speaker Hanshaw may reactivate the group.

Meanwhile, Gov. Jim Justice in his 2023 state of the state speech said that “We need to try with all in us to say, by God we’re not going to have hungry people in West Virginia today.”

The governor released a proclamation declaring Jan. 26 to be Hunger Free West Virginia Day, acknowledging that 217,690 people here, including 63,070 children are food insecure; one in six children experiences hunger regularly; and that many seniors have to chose between lifesaving medications and a healthy diet.

It had strong language, such as “it is essential to provide appropriate, healthy nutrition to all residents of West Virginia suffering from food insecurity;” “Charitable programs are unable to fully support those facing hunger. A combination of charity and government assistance programs is necessary to help bridge the meal gap;” and “food is a human right.”

The senate also weighed in last month with a resolution that stated “The West Virginia Senate recognizes food insecurity is prevalent in our communities, with 1-in-7 West Virginians not knowing where their next meal will come from…”

Things are challenging enough in West Virginia already, whether we’re talking low-income adults, kids, and seniors or people in local businesses, farmers, agencies, and charities. We don’t need a bad law to make a tough situation worse.

It’s sad but some people seem to derive gratification from harming people with less power than themselves, especially if they don’t think their targets can retaliate. Poor people are a convenient target for those who enjoy this kind of thing.

That’s what this is. That’s all this is.

(This ran as an op-ed in the Charleston Gazette-Mail.)

More not all bad

 I've been making it a practice lately to notice good things that happen, especially in a year when there have been so many disappointments, when truly historic opportunities to make big  and positive changes slip away.

So here's my latest:

The US Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced an easing of income eligibility requirements for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children program (WIC) food assistance. The program can assist women who are pregnant, postpartum and breastfeeding and cover kids up to five years of age. This means more and better nutrition in a period critical to the health of mothers, infants and young children.

Under the new policy, states have the option of raising WIC eligibility to to 185 percent of the federal policy level. While all bets are off about most things West Virginian these days, I was glad to learn that WV decided to go for the more generous level of benefits. 

The WIC announcement is just one example of many federal efforts, often related to the pandemic, to promote food security. These range from increased SNAP benefits to expanded school meals to pandemic electronic benefits cards to kids when they are out of school. Read more on that here. Unfortunately, some of these are temporary unless further action is taken, which means staying on the case.

Some really good news for kids and families

 I’m a big fan of getting quick results ... the good kind, anyway. It doesn’t happen very often and is even rarer when it comes to solving big social problems.

But it’s happening right now for millions of American families, in terms of increasing food security and reducing economic hardships.

Here’s the background: During the COVID-19 pandemic, the Census Bureau developed the Household Pulse Survey, which is designed to quickly and accurately collect information on how American households are doing and distribute it in as close to real time as possible “to inform federal and state response and recovery planning.”

One very recent survey measured the impact of the newly expanded and refundable child tax credit, which went into effect July 15 and reached about 35 million families with a monthly credit of up to $300 for kids age 5 and under and $250 for those age 6-17. The tax credit has the potential to dramatically reduce child poverty and the long-lasting damage that causes for as long as the program lasts.

The results after just one installment have been startling. The census survey found that food insecurity, defined as “sometimes or often not having enough to eat,” in households with children dropped by nearly 24%. Specifically, before tax credit benefits went out, about 11% of households with kids experienced food insecurity. After the first round, that number dropped to 8.4%, a reduction of almost one-fourth.

Households without children didn’t see any improvement in this area, so we can safely attribute the change to the child tax credit.

(As a math-challenged person, I sometimes find the difference between percentages and percentage points to be confusing, and I’ve stumbled over it more than once, but a percentage point is just the number for arithmetic difference between two percentages, while a percentage expresses that difference as a fraction of 100.)

The survey also asked families how hard it was to meet basic household expenses. Not surprisingly, households with children were more likely than those without them to report that making ends meet was “somewhat difficult” to “very difficult” before and after the child tax credit went into effect. But after just one round, the number of families with children experiencing hardships declined by 8% while it increased for adult-only households by nearly 5%, an effect not as large as that for food security but still statistically significant.

Where was the money spent? Pretty much where you’d expect: About 57% of households spent at least part of the money on educational expenses, including books, supplies, tutoring, tuition, transportation and after-school activities; 47% spent some on food; 28% spent it on internet, telephones and utilities; 25% bought clothes; and 17% of households with a child under age 5 spent the money on child care.

Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, director of the Institute for Policy Research at Northwestern University, had this to say about the early results: “It looks like families are using this to pay for basic needs that their kids have. These are things we know many families are struggling with. This extra payment is going to reduce the number of families at risk.”

Not all the money was spent right away, however. Nearly a third of parents saved most of it — and that’s a good thing, too. Many financial experts stress the importance of personal savings for many purposes, including a cushion for emergencies, major purchases such as homes or vehicles, financial security and higher education.

About 40% spent most of the credit paying down household debt, which has nearly doubled to about $15 trillion over the past 20 years. Home mortgages make up the lion’s share of debt, but there’s also plenty from student loans, car payments, credit cards and such. Paying debt down or off is a huge stress reliever and has been called the key to financial success.

That’s a pretty impressive record for a 1-month-old program. If it’s extended beyond 2021, a measure now under consideration in the U.S. Senate, this could be a life changer and lifesaver for millions of Americans.

And our two senators will have a lot to say about that.

(This ran as an op-ed in the Charleston Gazette-Mail.)

Going big on hunger?

 This is really weird, but for the second time in a week or so, the WV legislature, which one of my favorite delegates refers to as "the bad idea factory," did something good. I mean real good.

First a little background: at least since 2013, with the passage of the WV Feed to Achieve Act, a lot of my friends and comrades, now known as the WV Food for All Coalition, have worked on hunger and  food security issues, from school meals to SNAP benefits to responding to food needs during the pandemic.

For the last several years, some of us have urged the passage of what has been know as the Summer Feeding for All Act, which would have required school boards to come up with food plans when school is not is session, whether for summer vacations or other disasters.

It was particularly ironic in 2020 to watch the bill die in the waning days of the legislative session just as the first wave of a global pandemic hit that would result in the end of in-person classes for months...and then to watch as schools scrambled to do what they could to make sure kids didn't miss out on food while at home. 

Maybe our theory was correct.

Anyhow, a lot of us who work on these issues were pleasantly surprised to learn that House Speaker Roger Hanshaw announced the formation of a bipartisan working group "dedicated to utilizing every tool at West Virginia’s disposal to help reduce hunger throughout the state."

Here's the rest of the news release:

Delegate Larry Pack, R-Kanawha, and Delegate Chad Lovejoy, D-Cabell, will lead the bipartisan workgroup, which will focus on improving food insecurity, which Feeding America estimates affects one in seven West Virginians as well as one in five West Virginia children.

“We have plenty of evidence that shows us how deeply connected hunger is to other issues, such as overall health, mental health, academic achievement and economic prosperity,” Pack said. “We are committed to putting in the time and energy to truly understand not only what specific roadblocks are out there hurting our West Virginia families, but also what solutions we can implement in the near future.”

Pack and Lovejoy both pushed this year to establish the Summer Feeding for All initiative, and while that did not happen during the regular legislative session, Lovejoy said this new workgroup is a big step forward.

“This is an exciting announcement recognizing that food insecurity is a priority in West Virginia policymaking,” Lovejoy said. “I’m grateful to our Speaker, who has actively participated in the bipartisan House Hunger Caucus since its inception, and now organizes a formal group of committed representatives to tackle this problem head-on.”

Other members of the workgroup are Delegates:

Brent Boggs, D-Braxton      

Ed Evans, D-McDowell

Joshua Higginbotham, R-Putnam

John Paul Hott, R-Grant

Riley Keaton, R-Roane

Kayla Kessinger, R-Fayette

Danielle Walker, D-Monongalia

Evan Worrell, R-Cabell

Kayla Young, D-Kanawha

Lisa Zukoff, D-Marshall

 This is a big advance and a major victory for WV's food fighters. You can bet that some of us have some ideas we can't wait to share. Meanwhile, thanks to the legislative champions, advocates and impacted people who have worked for years to raise this issue.

Another hungry summer?

Here's a great article on the challenge of feeding kids over the summer by Amelia Knisely of Mountain State Spotlight. My friends at the WV Food For All Coalition have worked for years to pass a bill addressing out of school food programs. Ironically, in 2020 the bill died just as the pandemic was setting in...which kinda demonstrated the need for it.

As awful as the 2021 legislative session was, a resolution to study the issue passed the senate. It remains to be seen how they'll follow up on it, but it took a lot of work to get things that far.

Still, a lot of people all over the state are working hard on the issue. There's also some federal good news. Trump-era SNAP restrictions have been removed and the American Rescue Plan extends free school lunches and P-EBT cards for kids eligible for free and reduced lunch or for all students in counties that have implemented the Community Eligibility Provision. Last year, P-EBT cards were sent to over 220,000 WV families, which meant millions of dollars pumped into local economies.

I'm hoping we can make some of the temporary provisions, like free school meals for all, P-EBT cards, SNAP boosts and enhanced tax credits like the Earned Income Tax Credit and Child Tax Credit permanent. 

And it looks like West Virginia's senators will have a lot to say about that.

Feeding kids, boosting local economies

 I've spent a chunk of the last seven or eight years working intermittently on child nutrition issues, which has a certain amount of irony. After all, the organization I work for, the American Friends Service Committee, first came to West Virginia in 1922, in large part to work on child nutrition issues. 

How sad is it that it's still an issue year 99 years later?

It's an unfortunate truth that today  a lot of kids rely heavily on schools for meeting their nutrition needs, up to and including volunteer weekend backpack programs. 

I first got involved in 2013 when the state legislature passed the Feed to Achieve Act, which was intended to eventually provide free breakfast and lunch for all public school students. One way that would work was by encouraging more counties to implement the federal Community Eligibility Provision (CEP), which allows them to provide free meals to all students in schools where 40 percent or more are certified as being low income. Basically, it eliminates the application process for free and reduced meals.

It's a winner all round. More kids eat (mostly) healthy meals, which can help with learning, discipline, tardiness and attendance. Schools cut paperwork and often save money. Any stigma for being on free or reduced meals is gone. And working parents get a break. 

Most counties jumped on board as soon as the program became available and others followed suit through the years. Some took some nudging, sometimes for years. But now, 54 out of 55 counties have implemented the program to a degree and 43 have done so on a countywide basis. Often, a county would try it at a few schools and then expand it after seeing the benefits. And the WV Office of Child Nutrition has done a great job in helping to make all this happen.

Enter COVID-19. Last spring, the USDA provided pandemic electronic benefit cards (P-EBTs) worth $313.50 per child to all students to help cover out of school food costs. In schools with CEP, all kids get the benefits; in those without, only those on free or reduced lunch qualify. Many benefitted but some missed out.

This is where child nutrition translates into direct economic impact. That round of P-EBTs brought around $72 million to local economies in the midst of a pandemic-induced recession. The USDA estimates that each dollar spent on EBT food assistance has a multiplier effect of  $1.5, which would increase the economic boost to $108 million.

The USDA recently announced a second round of P-EBT cards to be issued next month. The benefit will amount to $6.82 per day for days out of school in the 2020-2021 school year. That means somebody's going to have to do some arithmetic and the amount may vary from child to child depending on how the number of in-school days. It's been estimated that this will bring $200 million to the state, which with the multiplier means $300 million in much needed economic activity.

That's good news, or at least a silver lining to the pandemic. Still, more needs to be done to encourage the expansion of CEP. And we need to revisit legislation that died the last two years that would require counties to come up with out of school food plans for emergencies and summer vacations. Last year, the bill died just as the pandemic began to hit. One would hope that the need for such legislation would be self evident this year.

Ending the SNAP ban

When Congress passed welfare reform legislation in 1996, one little-discussed provision had far reaching and negative consequences. It imposed a lifetime ban on SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly food stamp) assistance for people with drug felonies.

For whatever reason, people with other felony convictions, including armed robbery, sexual offenses or murder, were not subject to the ban.

People who have had drug convictions have many obstacles to re-entry and recovery. Felony convictions and a record of incarceration have been shown to have negative effects on employment, earnings, assets and other life chances.

Having access to basic food assistance should not be one of them. In fact, such stressors can contribute to relapse and recidivism.

There is a solution. States have the option to opt out of the lifetime ban. In fact, the vast majority—including some of the most conservative states—have modified or eliminated the ban. Only three states—West Virginia, South Carolina, and Mississippi—have kept the original ban intact.

It’s no secret that West Virginia is ground zero for opioid addiction. Many people impacted by this have felony drug convictions.

It’s difficult to calculate the number of West Virginians in this situation, but records from the WV Department of Health and Human Resources indicate that in 2016 alone, over 2,100 applied for and were denied SNAP benefits for this reason.

This number does not reflect those who applied in other years or those who knew they weren’t eligible to start with. It’s likely that tens of thousands of West Virginians, including parents and caregivers, would benefit by changing the policy.

People who have recently been released from incarceration are particularly vulnerable not only to relapse but to overdose fatalities. In 2016, an analysis of opioid fatalities found that 56 percent of those who died from overdoses had been incarcerated. Further, “Of male decedents that were incarcerated within 12 months of death, 28% died within a month after release, compared to 21% of females. Nearly half, (46%) of individuals with only some high school education died within 30 days of their release.”

To state the obvious, when people have served their time for drug convictions, they often have little or no assets. Jobs are hard to find. Family and community connections may have eroded over time. Relapse is a possibility, especially if there seems to be no hope. And they still need to eat.

It’s pretty simple, as things now stand, every loses, including those directly impacted, family and community members, local charities and local business. Everyone wins when those who need it most can receive basic food assistance.

(This ran as an op-ed in the Huntington WV Herald-Dispatch.)

A disaster averted

In case you missed it, Congress actually got something right this week. For real. After an epic months-long back and forth between the House and Senate, a compromise was reached that leaves the SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program basically intact.

The version initially considered by the House include requirements and restrictions that would have cut off many low income Americans. As Robert Greenstein of the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities wrote back in May,

It would have reversed years of progress under Presidents of both parties by making SNAP less effective in reducing food insecurity and supporting families. It would have taken food assistance away from more than 1 million households including 2 million people and would have harmed children, people with serious health conditions, older workers, veterans, caregivers, and parents.

Fortunately, and thanks to a lot of work by a lot of people across the country, that didn't happen. Here's Greenstein on the latest version.  The latest and apparently final version of the bill reflects a rare bipartisan approach.

(For WV folks, this happened no thanks to our House delegation but with the support of Senators Manchin and Capito.)

 

So feeding kids is bad?

If you want to sample just a little of the meanness in the air today, check out this letter that appeared in the Parkersburg WV newspaper opposing providing breakfast and lunch to all students in Wood County: 

Well, how many times have you heard the cliche that there is no such thing as a free lunch? It certainly applies here. So someone is going to give the Wood County School system all the food to feed Wood County students breakfast and lunch? It would be nice for this newspaper to acknowledge who this kind person or company is.

On second thought, I’ll go out on a limb and say that the taxpayers of the state and nation are footing this program (CEP). Just a minor detail that is probably not important.
The CEP (Community Eligibility Provision) is a program for free and reduced priced meals in high poverty areas. If at least 40 percent of a school’s students are directly certified for free meal benefits, the entire school qualifies for the option.

The article also quotes the new superintendent William Hosaflook as follows. “I am proud that Wood County Schools will be participating in the CEP program to help meet a critical need for many students in our county.”

Mr. Hosaflook, I am extremely disappointed and somewhat embarrassed that Wood County qualifies for such a program. At what point do we say enough is enough that the nanny state has to feed our children. Once an “entitlement” has started, it is very, very difficult to take it away.

 Where do you even start with this? God forbid we improve child nutrition, reduce stigma and discipline problems, and enhance school performance with good nutrition.

Whenever I hear someone like that suggest that feeding kids is socialistic, I'm tempted to point out that the whole public education thing kind of is too. But I don't want to give them any ideas.

A friend of mine replied to the letter on social media with the following snark/irony:

You guys think the free meal thing is bad? It turns out, those kids are getting an education for free too! I say "free" but I think we all know who pays for that. Us hard working tax payers, that's who. Why don't these dead beat parents just send their kids to private school? And we even cover the cost of the roads to take these entitled crumb-snatchers to their gilded "free" schools, and their parents to jobs and stores and such!

Look in to it! It goes so much deeper. Libraries, health departments (why can't people research the sanitation of their local restaurants or stop communicable diseases on a community level on their own?), fire departments and even police services all funded by tax dollars and provided to everyone. I mean, what kind of society do we want to live in, people?

I really like the "crumb-snatchers" part. And the fact that the opposition lost.

It took a while, but all public school kids in Wood County can eat for free.

Loaves and fishes

Welch, WV in the days when mines were booming. Or is that Manhattan?

McDowell County is one of the poorest in West Virginia--and the nation. Before the coming of the coal industry, the population was tiny, with around 1500 people in 1860. When the mines were cranking, the population ballooned, growing to nearly 100,000 by 1950. As mining employment declined, it contracted hugely. I'd guess it's now below 20,000. High poverty rates also mean high un- and under-employment. It's also a food desert.

This Charleston Gazette-Mail article by Caity Coyne is a great summary of the struggles of people there to meet their basic food needs and of local charities like Five Loaves and Two Fishes to help that happen.  Those struggles are likely to get harder in the wake of HB 4001, in which Gov. Jim Justice and the Republican legislative majority restricted SNAP benefits, throwing thousands of low income West Virginians under the metaphorical bus.  Possible federal changes to food assistance under the Farm Bill could make things even worse.

Looks like food justice fighters are going to be busy.

The article also shows the importance of good local newspapers that do in-depth investigative reporting. We're going to need a lot of that.

More snark on SNAP

Thanks to a good friend and reader of this blog, it has come to my attention that I left out something important in yesterday's post, which is copied below in italics.

In it, I contrasted the cost of a good meal for one at the Greenbrier resort, owned by WV's governor and wealthiest person, with the average amount daily SNAP benefits.

The occasion for the post came after the governor failed to veto a mean-spirited SNAP bill that will result in thousands of low income West Virginians losing food assistance, take millions of dollars out of the state's economy and stress already stretched charities. During Holy Week, which is kind of tacky.

Anyhow, in the post I did the math--always a dangerous thing--and found out that the cost of a big meal for one person would cover SNAP benefits for an adult for 39 days.

My friend pointed out that I neglected the tip, a major faux pas on my part since I'm all about not stiffing working people. At 20 percent, that would come to $31.40. When you add that to the total, it comes to $188.40, which adds another eight days to the total.

It may or may not be a coincidence that the number of 47 days is exactly one day longer than the penitential season of Lent (if you count the Sundays), which ends on Easter Sunday. Traditionally, Lent was observed with fasting.

Living on $4 in food assistance a day, those lucky ducks on SNAP get to observe Lent every day.

No, I'm not over it.

Here's yesterday's post minus the links:

Contrasting SNAP benefits with a meal at the Greenbrier

I'm wondering whether anyone else sees the irony or something when the richest person in the state, who also happens to be governor, refuses to veto a bill that will take away food assistance from thousands of West Virginians with very low incomes during Holy Week?

The governor, by the way, owns the Greenbrier resort, at which many of you may not have stayed or eaten (I know I haven't). I poked around the interwebs and found the following menu options for dinner for one there:

Red wine, mid-range,           $48
First Course bisque                 $9
Second course risotto             $15
Entree lamb shank                 $49
Chocolate souffle dessert       $14
Dessert wine                           $17
Cappuchino                              $5


That comes to $157.

 Hmmm....SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) benefits for low income people amount to around $4 per day.

That means that for the cost of one big feed for one person at the Greenbrier is equivalent to what someone on SNAP gets to live on for slightly over 39 days. 

I don't want to sound like a hatchet man, but put that in your tackle box and smoke it.

"Let all who are hungry come and eat"

Time is running out for WV Governor Jim Justice to veto HB 4001, a mean-spirited bill that would take away food from thousands of poor West Virginians, stress local charities, and take millions of dollars from our economy.

Lots has been said and written about this, but the one that moves me the most is this op-ed by Charleston Rabbi Victor Urecki in the Charleston Gazette-Mail. He reminds us that at the sacred Seder meal celebrating Passover, the original freedom holiday, it's customary to pray, "“Let all who are hungry come and eat. Let all who are needy come and celebrate with us.”

The whole thing is well worth reading, but here's just a bit that moved me.

At every Passover Seder, my revered teacher of blessed memory taught me that, at the beginning of the meal, we break one matzah and take the larger piece and wrap it for the end of the meal; we eat only the smaller piece as the meal begins. This is done to remind ourselves of the needs of the poor. He taught me that those who do not know where their next meal will come from never eat a full “loaf”; they worry that, tomorrow, they may not have bread to eat.

People in poverty are always insecure without a safety net. I will cherish that lesson as a moral obligation to act. We who live with abundance should never forget what it is like to be worried about food and translate that custom into a call for action to end hunger in our communities.

...
May the doors of compassion be open in our state, and may we declare: May all who are hungry come and eat.

I hope his words move Governor Justice as well.

May all who are hungry come and eat.

Short notice, but last chance to stop a bad bill.

Labor struggles like #55united remind us of the need for solidarity with working class and low income people. Today (Thursday) at 1 in the WV Senate Health and Human Resources Committee, HB 4001 is up for final consideration.

It's a mean spirited bill that would take food away from thousands of vulnerable West Virginians, take millions out of local economies and strain already overburdened charities .You can read more about why it’s bad here.

If you can, please consider contacting committee members and especially chairs before `1 this afternoon and urge them to table the bill. Twitter handles for Chairman Tom Takubo and Vice-Chair Mike Maroney are @DrTomTakubo and @DrMikeMaroney. Takubo's office phone is (304) 357-7990.

Thanks!

WV's Hunger Games and how you can help win them

In addition to alienating school teachers and public employees, it looks like WV Governor Jim Justice is supporting a plan to take away SNAP (food stamp) benefits from low income West Virginians and take millions of dollars out of the state's economy.

(Some state employees, by the way, qualify for SNAP.)

 Or at least, he hasn't opposed the plans of the WV Department of Health and Human Resources to do the same.  This Think Progress piece pretty much nails it.

A bill to do more of the same, HB 4001, is likely to be taken up by the Judiciary Committee of the WV House of Delegates next week.

There will be a public hearing on the bill this coming Monday (Feb. 12) at (groan) 8:30 am. If you can make it out, please come and make some noise.

You can also help a lot by calling the office of Chairman John Shott and asking him not to take up the bill. His  number is (304)-340-3252. His email is John.Shott@wvhouse.gov.  You can reach other members of the Judiciary Committee here.

You can reach the governor's office at 304-558-2000 or email him from this site.

A kick in the assets

There are a lot of bad bills making their way through the WV legislature, but one that particularly gets under my skin is aimed at making life harder for people who need to rely on SNAP (formerly food stamps) for food assistance.

Senate Bill 60, linked above, isn't as bad as it used to be, thanks to amendments by rational legislators. But it's still pretty bad.

Let's start with the math. At a committee meeting last week, it came out that the proposed legislation would cost around a million per year in state tax dollars to pay private corporations to profit at public expense in "verifying" eligibility for benefits--in order to remove $5 million in federal dollars from the WV economy. That's money spent at local stores and farmers markets supporting local jobs.

One more time: we'd be paying corporations to take away money from WV. Really.

In chess, this would be like sacrificing a rook to take a pawn.

Even worse is a mean spirited asset limit which would knock people off the rolls and make it harder for low income families to get back on their feet. Most states, 34 in all, including not just West Virginia but some of the most politically conservative southern states, have eliminated the asset limit because it's expensive to implement, useless and just plain mean.

As the folks at the WV Center on Budget and Policy note,

The reason most states have removed their asset test from SNAP is that they recognized that it was counter-productive and punishes families for saving money for emergencies or for their children’s future while they are temporarily enrolled in SNAP.  By removing the asset test or limit, it simplifies the application process, reduces errors associated with assets and vehicle information.

Asset limits would hit older adults particularly hard, potentially wiping out retirement savings. But it could also eat away family savings for emergency or for college education...so that people could get the equivalent of $4 a day for food.

Like unemployment insurance, SNAP benefits are counter-cyclical, which means they kick in more when times are bad, helping to keep families and communities going. Most people receiving SNAP only do so for a limited time. Here's more from my policy wonk friends:

Because SNAP works as a temporary stopgap – with 58 percent of new receipts leaving the program within a year – it is vital for them to retain their savings as they get back on their feet. Studies have also shown that asset limits (and more stringent vehicles asset tests) have no impact on the length of stay in SNAP.

A study by the Urban Institute found that states with relaxed asset limits make it easier for low income people to bounce back and participate in the mainstream economy (such as having bank accounts):

Taken together, relaxed asset limits increase households’ financial security and stability by increasing savings and reducing benefit fluctuations, and they can decrease administrative program costs when fewer people cycle on and off the program. The findings suggest that states with SNAP asset limits can improve family financial well-being by relaxing them and that reinstating federal SNAP asset limits will harm family financial stability.

Finally, I hope that decision makers take a minute to check out this great letter to the editor in today's Gazette-Mail by the Rev. Kay Albright, outreach coordinator at Manna Meal, which serves two hot meals a day to anyone who shows up at St. John's Episcopal Church in Charleston.

Here are some of my favorite parts:

I have sat in committee meetings, met with various legislators, and called even more of them regarding SNAP benefits. I believe it is easy to sit in the capitol complex and make decisions about issues that do not affect you. Poverty is something our legislators may not have experienced.... 

Come and eat. Talk to those most affected by your decisions regarding SNAP before you make them. Come and see it is about food, a basic human need. We do not need to create more bureaucracy for those in West Virginia who are in the grip of poverty.

SB 60 is on second reading in the senate and is likely to be up for amendments tomorrow (Monday).

If you haven't already, please consider contacting your legislator. You can find out who and how here.

Wayne's World for Wonks

A little while back, a friend suggested that we as in AFSC and our allies start doing regular webinar type thingies on issues in play in the legislature for people who can't get to Charleston. Or for people who could get there but would rather not.

To that end, co-worker Lida Shepherd and I have started experimenting with Facebook Live. Here is our latest effort, modestly titled SNAP Smackdown. It's about some of the bad legislation regarding food assistance making its way through the legislature.

We went for a "Wayne's World for Policy Wonks" vibe, with some Saturday Night Live-inspired visual stunts at the end. Major props to Melissa McCarthy!

In case of extreme boredom, take a look or listen.

We're planning another one in a week to deal with some really bad tax proposals and are already looking for more cheap visual stunts. I'm thinking eggs, snapping turtles, toy bats to start with...

It's working

The last couple years in El Cabrero's beloved state of West Virginia, believe it or not, have been pretty successful in terms of progressive public policies. We've expanded Medicaid coverage and early childhood education, raised the minimum wage, and created a Future Fund. One other success was the passage last year of the Feed to Achieve Act, which is aimed at improving child nutrition in West Virginia. From today's Gazette, here's some evidence that it's already starting to work.

This is an issue near and dear to me. My employer, the American Friends Service Committee, first came to WV in 1922 to work on child nutrition--specifically, to help feed the children of unemployed coal miners. It's kind of sad that we're still working on child nutrition over 90 years later--but I'm hopeful we're gonna get it this time!

A champion for children

El Cabrero's Spousal Unit is a Spanish teacher. At one point, she was talking to students in WV's poorest county about the custom of a midday siesta or lunch/nap, a custom in many Spanish-speaking countries. She asked them whether they'd prefer to have a siesta or a regular school lunch period as is the custom here.

You might think the idea of a long break away from school would be the top choice, but it wasn't. The kids said they liked it the way it was done at their school, "because everybody gets to eat."

Whatever their other hardships, those children were fortunate enough to live in a county where the school system made feeding all children regardless of ability to pay a top priority.

It is sad but true that even in the 21st century, many children in West Virginia (and elsewhere of course) don't have basic food security, which is defined as existing "when all people at all times have access to sufficient, safe, nutritious food to maintain a healthy and active life."

Obesity, by the way, an all too frequent occurrence here, doesn't disprove food insecurity. It often accompanies it. Cheap processed foods high in calories and fat and low in nutritional value often form the diet of the poor, especially of those living in "food deserts."

Here's something else to think about. During all the days when school was cancelled due to weather, many kids do without nutritious meals.

Still, WV has taken some strides in fighting this problem. In 2013, the legislature passed the Feed to Achieve Act, which ultimately aims to ensure that all schoolchildren in the state enjoy at least two free nutritious meals a day. That hasn't happened yet, although a great deal of progress has been made.

A big reason for that progress is that WV is blessed to have a real champion for children running the state Office of Child Nutrition. His name is Rick Goff and I'm proud to consider him to be a friend. He was profiled in this recent article in the Charleston Gazette.

Goff's counsel was heavily relied upon as state Senator John Unger and others crafted the Feed to Achieve Act. He is on fire to make sure that we end the "hunger games" in this state. And with people like him in the fight, we just might get there.