CQ, May 12, 2008: Sharper Pangs of Food Insecurity
By Aliya Sternstein, CQ Staff
The rest of the world is focused on food, while most Americans seem to take it for granted. Prompted by shortages and extraordinary price increases, developing countries are experiencing riots, and some are rationing staples such as rice and other grains or barring exports. Still, a close look at the growing clientele of local food banks and rising food stamp rolls shows that the United States isn۪t immune from this worsening global crisis.
Soaring grocery prices are contributing to a new kind of malnourishment in America. The face of hunger today is the elderly couple on a fixed income that skips dinner and the elementary schoolchild who misses breakfast. Instead of the skinny arms and bloated bellies seen across the globe, the United States has an obesity epidemic and a higher incidence of diabetes, partly because many people cannot afford to eat better. Healthful fruits, vegetables and low-fat products are often out of reach.
The cost of food bought for domestic home consumption rose faster in 2007 than at any time since 1990, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics. Eggs were 29 percent more expensive in December than a year earlier. Milk was up almost 20 percent. A chicken for stewing was almost 10 percent more expensive, and the price of tomatoes for the stew pot jumped twice as much as the hen. For some people, those sorts of prices mean choosing between eating and putting a roof over their heads.
“We have a problem with hunger that to me is every bit as significant as the global warming problem,” said Rep. Jim McGovern, a Massachusetts Democrat who is co-chairman of the bipartisan Congressional Hunger Center. “There is not a single community in the United States that is hunger-free.”
The share of U.S. households that have trouble putting enough food on the table has held roughly static between 10 percent and 12 percent for the past decade, government figures show. Yet as more Americans have faced economic hardship in recent months, food stamp offices and social service agencies report a rising demand for help.
Federal food assistance programs have come a long way toward eliminating severe malnutrition and even chronic hunger in this country, but they still aren۪t robust enough, say those fighting to increase resources. Eligibility requirements for assistance, including food stamps and free school lunches, are too narrow and the benefits are inadequate, as low as $10 a month for many needy senior citizens.
“Running out of food in the third or the fourth week of the month is a lot better than running out of food in the first week of the month by a long shot,” said James D. Weill, president of the Food Research and Action Center. “But we are an affluent enough country that we can afford to provide people the help they need to eliminate hunger and food insecurity.”
His organization aims to improve government nutrition policies and helps coordinate the work of anti-hunger organizations. It has actively worked to win enactment of a pending measure that would reauthorize federal farm subsidies for five years because the bill would also renew and expand food stamps and other nutrition assistance programs. Congressional negotiators sealed a deal on the new farm bill last week.
Beyond that, lawmakers and anti-hunger advocates are promoting changes in federal laws to bolster the amount of commodities handed over to food banks and increase the amount of fruits and vegetables included in the diets of impoverished Americans. But advocates say it will take a substantial increase in investment in those programs above the roughly $60 billion the federal government will spend this year plus easier access and a vigorous effort to shatter the stigma associated with food aid to begin to eradicate hunger in America.
Some advocates of smaller government, such as the libertarian Cato Institute, favor curtailing federal food aid and relying on states, cities and charitable groups to provide assistance. “I don۪t believe there is a role for the federal government in such food aid,” said Chris Edwards, director of tax policy for Cato. “I would start cutting the federal government by ending items like business subsidies, but food aid programs should be closed down as well.”
Yet that is a decidedly minority view, and federal food aid typically enjoys strong bipartisan support on Capitol Hill. For instance, only five lawmakers voted “no” four years ago when the House passed a broad, Republican-sponsored child nutrition measure, including a five-year reauthorization of the free and reduced-price school lunch program. Still, such apparently deep support belies the difficulty of increasing federal assistance in a time of rising budget deficits and intense fights between the Democratic Congress and President Bush over increases in domestic social spending.
Moreover, it۪s hard to know the severity of the problem, because no government agency tracks hunger on a regular basis. In its most recent study, from 2006, the Department of Agriculture found that just under 4 percent of households, including about 8 million adults and more than 3 million children, cut down on the size or frequency of meals, and ate less than they thought they should, because they didn۪t have enough money for food.
The department refers to this category of Americans as having “very low food security,” rather than “hungry,” choosing to avoid that term because it refers to a separate physiological condition. A much larger category of about 7 percent of households, including more than 9 million children, had “low food security” that year, which meant they occasionally didn۪t know where the next meal was coming from.
And the available evidence suggests that the level of need is rising rapidly. The roster of food stamp recipients jumped by about 1.1 million in the six months that ended in January, three times as large as the increase for the same period a year ago. Food stamp enrollment thus far this year has averaged about 28 million recipients each month.
People here may not be dying of malnutrition as they are in other countries, but “we۪re going to see an increase in hunger in the United States if we don۪t get serious about the crisis now,” McGovern said.
The Hunger Spectrum
Hunger in America is colorblind. And, like poverty generally, hunger can come on unexpectedly.
America۪s Second Harvest, a nationwide network of more than 200 food banks that operate with the help of federal commodity donations, says it served 25 million individuals in 2005. Roughly 4.5 million different people received emergency food assistance from the network in any given week.
The organization, which conducts a study of its operations every four years, reports that 40 percent of its patrons in 2005 were white, 38 percent were black and 17 percent were Hispanic. For many of those Americans, dinner may have lost out to needed prescription medicines one month, or their employers may have reduced their hours in another. The group said 42 percent of its clients reported having to pick between paying for food and paying for utilities, while 35 percent had to decide between paying for meals and paying their rent or mortgage.
Anti-hunger advocates say they don۪t expect those trends to change any time soon, given that the country had a serious hunger problem before the economy began slowing considerably at the end of last year. “I think we۪re in for a period of high food inflation that۪s going to last two, three years or more, and we۪re in a recession that۪s going to have a particularly adverse impact on the bottom working families who are already struggling to make do,” Weill said.
Many factors contribute to the rising cost of food and the resulting inadequate nutrition, researchers say. Those most concerned about high food prices cite a weakening U.S. dollar that increases the relative cost of commodities worldwide, the rising cost of oil and transportation, poor harvests, increased demand in emerging economies, changes in farming patterns to focus on biofuel production, and even speculation in futures markets where many commodity prices are established.
Many food banks nationwide are calling this “the worst situation they۪ve had in decades,” said Maura Daly, a vice president at America۪s Second Harvest. From anecdotal reports, the group estimates that it has seen a 20 percent increase in the number of people turning to its services in the past year. Although the surveys aren۪t strictly comparable, Second Harvest reported a 9 percent increase between 2001 and 2005 in its last study.
It۪s not just the poorest of the poor who find themselves occasionally without food. “Most people don۪t realize that the majority of food stamp recipients have an income,” said Rep. Jo Ann Emerson, a Missouri Republican who is co-chairwoman of the Congressional Hunger Center. The program is largely meant to be a supplement for working Americans, Emerson noted. And about 36 percent of Americans who patronized food banks in 2005 came from working households.
The expense to the nation of millions of hungry Americans is an estimated $90 billion a year or more when such costs as the need for additional health care and impaired worker productivity are included, according to a study done last year by professors at Harvard University, Brandeis University and Loyola University of Chicago.
The study, commissioned by the Sodexho Foundation, found that charities pay when hunger goes unchecked; the nation۪s competitiveness suffers when students don۪t eat enough to concentrate on coursework; and the health care system pays for mental and physical illnesses linked to inadequate nutrition.
“There are people who can۪t afford medicine and food, so they take medications on an empty stomach and end up in the hospital,” said McGovern, expressing frustration with the complications that arise when people can۪t afford to eat properly.
Success Story
Food stamps, the government۪s largest nutrition assistance program, have proved to be a major weapon in the fight against hunger, even if the share of American households that can۪t be sure of eating every day has been static for a decade.
“I really feel the food stamp program has had a profound impact on hunger and food insecurity in the United States,” said Craig Gundersen, a human development, family studies and economics professor at Iowa State University.
Food stamps are intended to give low-income families a chance to obtain at least a minimally adequate diet. Over time, the structure of the program has evolved from an outlet for surplus agricultural production, with food aid being a side benefit, to a major poverty policy. Today, it is the fourth-biggest need-based assistance program, according to the Congressional Research Service (CRS), after Medicaid, the shared state and federal health insurance for the poor; the earned-income tax credit, which delivers money to the working poor; and the Supplemental Security Income program, which pays stipends to the elderly, blind and disabled.
“When its benefits are added to other income, food stamps are estimated to move almost 10 percent of recipients out of poverty, and, for a typical low-income recipient family with children, food stamps can provide some 25 percent of their purchasing power,” the CRS said in a March report.
Agriculture Department surveys found that the diets of poor Americans improved markedly between 1965 and 1978, the years coinciding with the nationwide rollout of the food stamp program and the beginning of the Women, Infants and Children (WIC) feeding program, which supplements the diets of low-income pregnant and postpartum women and their young children.
Today, food stamps account for more than 60 percent of the USDA۪s nutrition expenditures, by far the largest share of the federal nutrition effort. The school lunch program accounts for 16 percent and WIC 10 percent.
And although it is difficult to distinguish the impact of nutrition programs from the effects of other assistance programs and economic factors, demand for non-government food assistance surged after the food stamp program was cut back at the urging of President Ronald Reagan in 1981 and participation in the program fell from 22.4 million to 18.6 million in 1988.
Most food banks in the nation were inaugurated in the early 1980s as a direct result of cuts in social spending, Daly said. “We grew from one food bank to 13 food banks in our first year of existence in 1979, and then progressively grew through the ۪80s,” she said.
Food stamps are “vastly more efficient” at assisting needy families than giving them surplus government food, said Robert L. Thompson, an agricultural policy professor at University of Illinois, Urbana-Champaign.
The program۪s advocates cite as one of its acute strengths its status as an entitlement that pays benefits to all eligible Americans who apply. That means as the economy worsens, government aid responds automatically. For example, after Hurricane Katrina, storm victims who lost their homes and refrigerators still had access to food.
Free and subsidized school lunches and summer nutrition programs have also helped alleviate hunger among children, researchers and government officials say.
“Our programs really rise to the occasion,” said Kate Houston, USDA deputy undersecretary for food, nutrition and consumer services. “I think we have a strong safety net in place that is resilient and able to expand and contract based on economic need.”
Despite budgetary constraints, the Bush administration has supported domestic nutrition programs at unprecedented levels, Houston said. In the eight fiscal years from 2001 to this year, nutrition spending increased 76 percent, to $60 billion, and USDA expects to spend $64 billion on all nutrition programs in fiscal 2009, Houston said. “The funding is keeping pace,” and the government is reaching those most in need, she said.
But some observers contend that there are weaknesses in the programs that become more apparent in times of hardship. Entitlement dollars don۪t stretch as far when prices are rising, they say. Although food stamps will benefit new enrollees as the economy weakens, Weill said, “it just doesn۪t help enough.”
Part of the challenge is that food stamps don۪t reach everyone who could benefit: Only 65 percent of eligible Americans participate. Advocates complain that many working Americans cannot get to an enrollment office during normal business hours. There is also a sharp stigma attached to applying for handouts, even if the coupons now come packaged in a discreet electronic debit card. Roughly four out of 10 hungry Americans don۪t apply, despite their eligibility, Gundersen said. In addition, eligibility requirements, which take into account household assets and income, exclude a quarter of the senior citizens who would qualify for the program based on their income alone, he said.
Moral Issue
Anti-hunger advocates on and off Capitol Hill who are urging that more money be spent on feeding programs are positioning their cause as both a moral and economic issue in the face of ever tighter budgets.
Many of their ideas aren۪t new, but the novelty is that some may be adopted. The new farm bill if it becomes law is expected to revolutionize federal food assistance by giving free fruits and vegetables to more school-age children, lavishing aid on food pantries and linking benefits to food prices.
Second Harvest۪s Daly credits the Bush administration with boosting food stamp spending, but she criticizes the White House for attempting to eliminate other smaller and more narrowly targeted nutrition programs, such as one that aids almost a half million low-income senior citizens. Daly said that if the farm bill agreement unveiled last week isn۪t enacted Bush hasn۪t ruled out a veto then food banks will be left “on the brink of catastrophe.”
Many advocates are also banking on a renewal of the school lunch program next year to ensure the next generation is better fed. Congress gave the program permanent status in 1946, deeming school lunches “a measure of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the nation۪s children.” But today, school authorities are struggling to offer children a balanced diet and keep a balanced budget.
Public health advocates lament that there are always difficulties finding scarce resources. “A problem has to build to be a real crisis before it gets addressed,” said Margo Wootan, nutrition policy director at the Center for Science in the Public Interest whose chief interest is curbing obesity. “I think it has to do with that there are so many competing priorities.” Obesity has raised enough red flags that Congress is likely to hone in on prevention when the child nutrition bill comes up for reauthorization, she predicted.
“My goal will be to expand the free school lunch program, improve its nutrition standards, and promote more locally grown fruits and vegetables,” said Rosa DeLauro, a Connecticut Democrat and chairwoman of the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee. This summer, in advance of next year۪s planned debate on the school lunch law, which was last renewed in 2004, the Senate Hunger Caucus plans staff-level briefings to touch on issues that are likely to arise.
Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, has already introduced a bill that would require the USDA to revise the definition of “food of minimal nutritional value.” The definition currently determines which items are prohibited for use in school lunch and breakfast programs. Under his proposal, which has four Republicans among its 30 cosponsors, the prohibition would be broadened to cover foods sold on campus outside lunch and breakfast.
Even within the limits of current laws, more could be done to sign up eligible Americans for food assistance, researchers say. The application process for food stamps is cumbersome, requiring extensive documentation and return trips for recertification, said Iowa State۪s Gundersen. He said the Agriculture Department should work more closely with state officials to make enrollment simpler.
He adds that the government should build upon its earlier efforts to ease the stigma surrounding food aid programs. Outreach campaigns could draw upon endorsements from former food stamp recipients who are now celebrities, Gundersen says. Last year, several lawmakers, including McGovern, ate only what they could buy with food stamps for one week to raise public awareness.
McGovern complains that lawmakers aren۪t held accountable when they vote against nutrition legislation. So he۪s writing legislation that would call for a White House Conference on Hunger and Nutrition. “We need to figure out a way to make it politically difficult to vote against anti-hunger initiatives,” he said.
And Emerson, who sits on the House Agriculture Appropriations Subcommittee and describes the food stamp program as efficient, acknowledges that there is room to improve it.
Provisions in the farm bill that would increase the minimum benefit and broaden eligibility will strengthen the safety net, she said. “These changes increase the budget of the program, but Congress does not think hunger should exist in America, and the American people agree with that statement,” she said.
The authors of last year۪s Sodexho-sponsored study noted that experts calculate that an increase in federal nutrition spending of roughly $10 billion to $12 billion “could end hunger as a serious national problem.”
That amount is roughly 20 percent more than the USDA spends now, but not as much as the study۪s estimate of the total national cost of malnutrition. “Virtually ending hunger in our nation would be far less costly than paying the current annual bill that lets so many people in our country suffer this preventable fate,” the study۪s authors wrote.
There are those people who take issue with the way anti-hunger programs operate and say money is being wasted. “The reason why the food manufacturers like food stamps is consumption. The last thing we need to do is increase consumption,” said Douglas J. Besharov, a social welfare studies scholar at the American Enterprise Institute. “I think low-income people should be helped, but when we help them we should help them and not hurt them.” He said the best food benefit for the poor is pure cash.
McGovern concedes that no budget is bottomless and he does want to see communities take a more active role in addressing hunger issues. He would like to see food pantries set up within hospital walls so that doctors can prescribe food for patients. And he would like to see grocers give two-for-one produce coupons to low-income shoppers.
“Hunger can and has to be eliminated,” McGovern said.
FOR FURTHER READING: Farm bill rewrite (HR 2419), p. 1262; cutbacks in WIC subsidies, 2007 CQ Weekly, p. 3694; developing government poverty guidelines, p. 1404; the surplus food donation bills are HR 4220 and S 2420; Harkin۪s nutritional value bill is S 771; the School Lunch Act is PL 108-265; the USDA۪s food security Web site is www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FoodSecurity/