The Challenge Of Feeding America’s Hungry
http://thedianerehmshow.org/shows/2012-12-05/challenge-feeding-america%E2%80%99s-hungry
Americans are relying on what we used to call food stamps in unprecedented numbers. According to figures released in September, more than 46 million Americans, about one in seven, are getting government assistance for food, but it’s estimated that millions more struggle with hunger. The nation’s food banks, supported by private dollars and donations, are straining to fill the gap. Federal funding for food stamps is not on the line in the current tax and spending negotiations, but some believe new limits on government food assistance programs are needed. Please join us to discuss hunger in America and what we can do about it.
Guests
Stephen Moore
member of the Wall Street Journal's editorial board.
Deborah Flateman
CEO, Maryland Food Bank.
Stacy Dean
vice president of food assistance policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.
Eric Olsen
senior vice president of government relations at Feeding America.
Comments
Please familiarize yourself with our Code of Conduct and Terms of Use before posting your comments.
At $1.50 per meal, few food stamp recipients are eating lobster dinners. if Mr. Moore is concerned about fraud, he should turn his attention to the Wall Street bankers he reveres. As for the American people "getting something back" for their money, we have the satisfaction of living in a society that is caring enough to feed the hungry. Mr. Moore talks of compassionate Americans, he should join them.
The speaker said that she would clarify the innacuracy about work requirements being lifted by the President. What is the accurate response?
Aaron Headly asks why the Wall Street Journal (Newscorp) must be represented in this discussion. I don't think many SNAP recipients read WSJ.
This shows that something is profoundly wrong at WAMU and DRShow. My assessment is that fascist mouthpiece Stephen Moore has been forced on Diane. He is a masher. If I were Diane he'd be at the top of my "do not call list" with Grover Norquist. If Diane can't assert herself to provide a better informative discussion anymore maybe retirement time has come.
The discussion of a work requirement for food assistance in this economy is appalling. My best friend's son, a young veteran with a 3-year-old daughter, has not been able to get a job for 7 months after coming home from Afghanistan. He is bright, educated, and skilled, yet he cannot get even a stocking job with Walmart. He is forced to live with his mother.
I live in an apartment, and, on my hallway of 8 apartments, I am the only one working (and I'm a self-supprorted missionary). I have watched my neighbors get jobs and then get laid off, be hired and then be called before even starting work and told not to come in (the job isn't happening).
Also, you can't go in to fill out a job application - they won't see you. You have to apply online (now that's really helpful to the employed, homeless and underfed). Companies don't even bother to respond to an application.
I remember when in the 80s there were job counsellors at the food stamp office (I was a social worker there) to coach people and help them find jobs.
I wonder if Stephen Moore thinks farm subsidies are entitlements for farmers. Many of whom say that have to have our tax money to survive.
I don't have any problem with people on food stamp right here in America. Myself i have never be on food stamp nor any member of my immediate family. But when you see how much money the U. S give to the rest of the world through the UN food program and other subsidies to countries like Egypt , Pakistan, Israel... there is no reason people should go to bed without eating in this country
Pancake Rankin wrote: "fascist"
a lot!
Diane,
I am a 31 year old woman and I have grown up surrounded by grocery stores that accept food stamps. To this day, I live in an area that is low to middle income, surrounded by apartments with families who depend on government resources. The grocery store 2 blocks away from my home accepts food stamps. I grew up witnessing the abuse of food stamps. I have seen women purchase Twinkies and Little Debbie products. I do not even purchase those items because I see them as a luxury. I have also worked for non-profits where we help low income families with government resources and I found out that they sell their food stamps because they did not need them. I saw a young woman purchase her food groceries with food stamps and then purchase bottles of wine and beer with her personal bank card.
There needs to be a change in the system. I do not work hard and live pay check to pay check to support this. Food stamps need to be a temporary help except if you are diabled, elderly and a child.
At the food pantry I volunteer, we are going to start cooking classes because just like you said, many have no cooking skills.
swshare: The President issued a ruling that work requirement decisions be devolved to states that wished it. I would expect they'd be stricter than his appointees. He abolished nothing but abandoned protection of some SNAP recipients. This shows how right wing lies become half the discussion in corporate media.
1. Steve Moore/WSJ advocated policies (no bank regulation, pro-derivative trading, Bush's unfunded Wars, Bush's tax cuts for rich) that crashed the economy and force more people on to Food Stamps. Now Moore whines about Food Stamp volume -- LoL
2. Notice how much of what comes out of Moore's mouth are right-wing talking points, but are not factually correct.
3. The reason Moore is channeling Voldemort and making a fool of himself is that he needs to faithfully spout the party line or Rupert will can him and then he'll have to go on Food Stamps.
4. Now that it's the Christmas season, Please get Moore to address the advantages of starving people so we decrease the "surplus population."
hernank: I hope someday you are able to afford the Twinkies and Little Debs you consider luxuries. Until then try to understand that most people on SNAP don't want to be there and are not cheaters.
Listeners should be aware that the vast majority of college faculty qualify for food stamps and that a significant number actually need to use them to survive even as they are working basically full-time hours. The Chronicle of Higher Ed and ABC News recently covered this:
http://chronicle.com/article/From-Graduate-School-to/131795/
http://abcnews.go.com/Business/growing-number-americans-phds-receiving-f...
This is the effect of colleges offering mainly temporary faculty appointments - usually semester to semester -- at poverty wages and no benefits. 75% of the faculty now have NO access to job security, due process and academic freedom and they and their students are suffering because of it even as college presidents are receiving CEO salaries and independent nonprofits have been pointing out the steeply declining proportion of spending on direct instruction and the detrimental effects on educational quality.
In response, our national nonprofit is working to push colleges to refocus on preserving the quality and integrity of teaching and learning. We also support faculty efforts to unionize, as so many have done in the Washington DC area (see Kojo's recent show on this topic: http://thekojonnamdishow.org/shows/2012-10-01/adjunct-professors-unite-l... )
The corporatization of higher education is happening at a steep price and to the detriment of students, faculty, and the public good.
Maria Maisto
President, New Faculty Majority
ED, NFM Foundation
As a news source, the Wall Street Journal is excellent. Their reporters and journalists do a comendable job of seeking out facts and presenting them objectively. Now compare that to the editorial board as evidenced by Mr. Moore. Go back and listen to his comments. They are presented without any effort whatsoever to include facts about the SNAP program, its effects and what the outcome would be of eliminating it (which he said he favors) other than the number of people receiving such assistance. Everything else he had to offer was anecdotal or opinion. As an individual who participated in high school and college debate, and who continues to judge these events, my decision is easy...he loses.
What world does Steve Moore live in, certainly NOT the U.S. I see today.
Federal food assistance averages between $4.00 - $6.00 per person, per day, which requires some real work to get "fat" on, especially with yearly food price inflation running @ 6%. (http://www.forecast-chart.com/inflation-food-price.html)
If a beneficiary chooses to eat pasta and canned tuna for weeks to "save up" food benefits for a "good meal" that includes seafood, why is that bad? And, how much more of a costly bureaucracy would be required to police 40-million shopper's food choices?
The increased cost of transportation, gutting of Public transit subsidies, and uncontrolled suburban sprawl has put a real barrier between where low-income people live, and where the low-skill, minimum-wage service jobs are available.
Many of the residents in my Cleveland neighborhood on the edge of Shaker Heights, are forced to walk or bike year-round just about everywhere they go (school, library, doctor, work) because they lack the income for an automobile and public transit cutbacks can easily add 3-hours of transit time daily for a minimum-wage, part-time job outside the "hood".
Most states load your SNAP benefits (food stamps) on an Electronic Benefits debit card that requires an individual PIN number, and is swiped just like any other electronic payment method. So giving someone else access to your benefits is like giving them access to your bank account.
I supported a family of 3 on 20k--no problem (in graduate school). I declined food stamps because I didn't want to force taxpayers to pay for me to be able to choose to have a crab legs. That wouldn't seem fair. (If I *really* wanted crab legs, I would have worked another job, or sold my bike.)
Also, food stamps may harm the poor. In my case, I give 15% of my income *after* taxes to charity. But since I also have to pay the government for THEM to give to charity (such as food stamps), the 15% I give *directly* to the poor adds up to less. One could argue, therefore, that the poor would get MORE, in the long run, if we could give more of our money to charity (rather than to the govt).
Ultimately, I'm against food stamps BECAUSE I'm for the poor.
I would disagree with that having worked with the poor for 25 years I have seen what poverty is. These are good people who are willing to work if given the opportunity. Many do work 80 hours a week at minimum wage and still cannot make ends meet. They still qualify for food stamps. I would not call that weak, dependent or intellectually immature. Quite the opposite.
It's funny how Mr. Moore obliterates his own arguments. He says that he saw somebody buying crab legs with food stamps, and not FIVE MINUTES later states that obesity is a big problem with people on food stamps.
So, Mr. Moore...we should only allow food stamps to be spent on peanut butter, jelly, bread and sodas? What about milk? Skim milk is healthier than sodas, but costs about twice what soda does. Vegetables are more expensive than processed foods. Should we just let them only buy the cheapest foods?
As for Tom Deacon's comments...Fox News' Andrea Tantaros recently suggested that there should be a "food stamp diet" to lose weight. Typical Republican hubris from both her and Mr. Moore...if it doesn't happen to THEM PERSONALLY, then it doesn't actually happen.
Pancake Rankin wrote: "most people on SNAP don't want to be there and are not cheaters"
Right, I will try remembering that when I stand in line behind some butt the size of a golf cart with a grocery cart filled with processed food and bottled water and their SNAP card in hand.
Maumee Muse_ Most cooking show hosts have few preparation skills and no nutritional knowledge. They exist to sell certain foods and kitchen tools, as well as promote frivolity. People tend to eat what they were served as kids growing up. Maybe if we fed children better it would all work out, and cooking shows would disappear from media. Don't let yourself settle for passive simplemindedness.
Poor Obese connection. I was one of four children in a poor family. Yes, sometimes we did get hotdogs, bologna or some other inexpensive meat or Velveeta cheese. Many meals were macaroni, pasta, Wonder bread, crackers with microscopic pieces of cheese or the fattiest ground beef one could buy. Bread with catsup could be a sandwich. Being fat is a result of eating poorly as a child. It establishes poor eating habits and it does not support a healthy growing child. I shudder when I think about those times, the 1960's. Mom went to the farmer's market and got moldy oranges out of the trash for us, and head lettuce refuse for salads. I spent my mid years learning to eat healthy and maintain my weight. Now I'm in my mid 60's can only secure a part time minimum wage job. What am I going to do? I found the conservative man so ignorant and cold heartedly snarky about what hunger is like and who is hungry that I shook with rage to think that his opinions could affect opinions on the subject.
THX 1138- Remove the mote, baby!
When you are in line look only at the tabloids.
Your type of truth reigns there.
Food stamps can feed the taproot of society. I relied heavily on food stamps and other government programs while I was a single mom putting myself though college to to Masters level. Now I make a good income and am unlikely to ever face unemployment again- in other words, I pay a lot of taxes, and I'm quite sure I have paid for what I took from the system many times over. Additionally, my children grew up believing that school is important. One son will soon be a nurse practitioner (and will be paying good money into the system for the rest of his working life) and the other is starting college in January with a goal of doing some sort of humanitarian work.
Before I went to school I was a waitress earning minimal income. By using the programs as a springboard my children and I are contributors, not takers.
msbrownr- Merry Christmas my friend. It is a wonder you have a part time income. Don't hesitate to seek help when you need it. There are advocates like me who understand you are not the cause. It's a structural problem imposed by powerful interests.
Absolutely agree with you...well, said.
I understand that. I just want there to be a stop of the abuse. I have always been an advocate of helping the needy. I have always worked for non-porfits and to this day work for a non-profit. I just want the fraud to stop. There are people who do need it and treat the system well. But, there are people who do cheat the system.
Throwing out the baby with the bath water so they say...
There will ALWAYS BE people who take advantage of these programs, the drug addicts who sell their food cards, the woman paying with food stamps while talking on her smart phone, etc. What is important is the big picture! All of the fear mongering from the insane right wingers has hijacked and manipulated reality in this country.
Hasn't Stephen Moore been heard enough??? After supporting an administration and "news" network that did, and continues to do nothing but spread lies and blame the poor for the state they are in, I think we already knew where he would stand on this subject. His presence on this panel was a mistake and offensive for so many reasons.
Obesity is a problem in low income areas (especially in urban cities), because it is cheaper to buy fast food than fruits and vegetables. Ever been dropped off on the south side of Chicago Stephen Moore? Ever lived in a neighborhood considered a FOOD DESERT? Have fun finding an affordable healthy meal, let alone feeding a family when you rely on public transport and the nearest real grocery store is miles out of your way.
There will always be people who take advantage and abuse the system, but for each of those individuals who do there are two dozen more who are hardworking and TRULY NEED these services for themselves and their families. We hear or see one negative instance of abuse and assume the entire programs is corrupt. Where is our empathy? I guess replaced by our ignorance and hatred.
I would personally LOVE LOVE LOVE to see people like Stephen Moore and those on the right make it for a week living in the conditions so many Americans currently are. Why don't you make the greedy corporations running the country actually PAY A FAIR WAGE to workers and stop writing themselves bonus checks every month. Then maybe you would see fewer people in need of food stamps and other social services. My blood is boiling
First, the desire to judge and further punish people who need temporary government assistance to feed themselves is hideous. What the US government spends on essential services support for children is dwarfed in comparison to what it spends on war and welfare in the form of tax breaks for corporations, but you choose to focus on trying to prevent a poor family from enjoying the occasional steak? You people are monsters.
Second, Stephen Moore's hyperbolic claim that President Obama "eviscerated" the work requirements from the federal welfare program has repeatedly been shown to be unequivocally false.
http://www.npr.org/blogs/itsallpolitics/2012/08/22/159791065/despite-fac...
There have been no changes to the existing federal rules. The change Mr. Moore is presumably talking about allows states to apply for a waiver from the federal rules. Although there is no specific work requirement for a program submitted for a waiver, qualifying for the waiver requires that the state prove that it has a more successful way to get welfare recipients working. In other words, states now have the option to WRITE THEIR OWN work requirement. (It seems unlikely that a program that did not include any work requirement at all could be shown to be more successful at getting welfare recipients off welfare and back to work, but if it somehow did, why would that be a problem if the end result was more people working and fewer people getting benefits?)
Mr. Moore also failed to mention that states have been able to apply for waivers at various times since the current federal welfare program was put into place in 1996. No state has ever received a waiver, and no state has applied for one since the July 2012 change (written, by the way, in response to requests from two GOP governors, Brian Sandoval and Gary Herbert).
Paul Forestal_ WSJ under Murdoch is deteriorating. But that is no surprise when the lucidity and morality of the rich is also fading away.
After looking at the Related shows and SIMILAR NPR STORIES sidebars, if this was supposed to be more informative about dealing with hunger, it only went halfway. The guy from the WSJ, Steve or Rush (?), was very unnecessary and sure used a lot of time to whine about the President. He stated that SNAP shouldn't exist, and then agreed to exemptions to the rules HE would impose. Couldn't you have found a thinking conservative, not an overpaid pundit who sucked up airtime? It was disappointing. I sent info about the show to my church's Outreach Committee - interested in hunger - and I am sorry I did. Why are some people so upset about helping people in need if THEY can't set the rules?