TEFAP Alliance Blog

Foodlinks America - June 8, 2007

In this issue:

• Farm Bill Progress Will Hinge on Funding Decisions
• Minimum Wage Increase Approved
• Proposed Legislation
• Resources
• Obesity Round-Up
• Reports from the Field
• Small Bites

Foodlinks America is published 24 times a year by California Emergency Foodlink in Sacramento, CA and distributed by Weinberg & Vauthier Consulting, 6412 CR 116, Burnet, TX 78611; Zy Weinberg and Barbara Vauthier, Editors; email: bvauthier@tefapalliance.org.

Foodlinks America is not copyrighted, so the information can be freely shared with colleagues and friends, though attribution for reprinted articles is appreciated. For archived issues of Foodlinks America, go to: www.tefapalliance.org. To request a free subscription to the newsletter or to submit story ideas, contact Barbara Vauthier at: bvauthier@tefapalliance.org.

Farm Bill Progress Will Hinge on Funding Decisions

Members of Congress are moving ahead with fashioning the 2007 Farm Bill – the wide-ranging legislation that authorizes food stamps, commodity distribution, and marketing assistance as well as broader food and agricultural policy concerns – but face one major obstacle: funding or rather lack of it.

“The Farm Bill is halfway there,” observed Representative Collin Peterson (D-MN), chair of the House Agriculture Committee, on June 4, 2007, in proclaiming that subcommittee efforts have been moving apace. “We have marked up five of the 10 titles. The Senate is quite a bit behind us,” said Peterson, in noting that the last two Farm Bills were not renewed until more than six months after they formally expired. Peterson is still stating publicly that he will have a Farm Bill completed and voted out of committee by the July 4 holiday recess.

The Senate may appear to be behind, as the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry has yet to conduct a Farm Bill mark-up. But that appraisal may be deceptive, as the Agriculture Committee will likely forego a subcommittee process and work out a bill at the full Committee level.

Moreover, although Chairman Peterson’s subcommittees have been meeting and making tentative programmatic decisions, they have not attached dollar figures to their actions. Fiscal matters will be decided in meetings of the full committee at the end of this month or in July. And that is the rub. Due to budget limitations and pay-as-you-go procedures instituted by the Democratic majority in this Congress, any program changes that cost money must be accompanied by offsets – reductions in other programs – or new revenues.

“We are short of money,” Peterson acknowledges, explaining that though the recently passed budget resolution gives the Farm Bill a $20 billion reserve account, it is not new money and must be found in existing programs. More than a dozen proposals (see Proposed Legislation for the latest entries) have been put forward to alter Farm-bill related programs, including increased food stamp benefits, augmented commodity donations to the hungry, and upgraded marketing efforts, and they all require additional funding for implementation. “We haven’t figured out how to pay for all of this,” commented Peterson. “We are trying to make everyone equally unhappy and maintain a safety net for farmers.”

Even those participating in the development of the Farm Bill legislation are skeptical about how much progress can really be made with funding so limited. Representative Jim Marshall (D-GA), a member of the Agriculture Committee, recently told a meeting of fruit and vegetable growers from his state, “It’s like Monopoly money. Programs will be authorized, but there won’t be any money for them.”

Minimum Wage Increase Approved

After more than 10 years of stagnant wages, America’s lowest paid workers will soon see a few more dollars in their pockets, thanks to an increase in the federal minimum wage enacted by Congress on May 24, 2007. The minimum wage increase was attached to an appropriations bill to fund the Iraq war, but without a timetable for troop withdrawal. The minimum wage was last increased to the current $5.15 an hour in 1997.

Under the bill, the wage will increase to $5.85 an hour 60 days after the legislation is signed by the President. Though the White House opposed the overall spending package, Administration officials indicated the President Bush will sign it. A year after the first increase, the minimum wage will rise to $6.55 an hour. It will jump to $7.25 an hour a year after that. The bill also includes $4.84 billion in tax breaks for small businesses.

The legislation will increase income for an estimated 13 million workers, including 5.6 million who currently earn less than $7.25 an hour and 7.4 million who earn slightly more, but are likely to see their wages scaled up. The effects will not be as dramatic in some areas, however. Due to the long period of inaction at the national level, more than half the states have already increased their minimum wage above $5.15 an hour. And seven states have minimum wage rates above the new federal target of $7.25 an hour.

Nonetheless, advocates for the poor were pleased. “America’s minimum wage workers have been waiting a long time for a raise,” said Representative George Miller (D-CA), chair of the House Education and Labor Committee. “The last time they saw an increase was nearly 10 years ago. Since that last increase, in 1997, the value of the minimum wage has dropped to its lowest level in over half a century.” Miller spoke of the increase in terms of food: “The poorest working families in this country will see a $4,400 increase in their annual income – enough to pay for 15 months of groceries for a family of three,” when the new minimum wage level is fully implemented, Miller noted.

Proposed Legislation

Among bills recently introduced in the 110th session of the U.S. Congress are the following:

House Resolution (H.R.) 2401: Introduced by Representative Joe Baca (D-CA) and 28 bipartisan co-sponsors, the Nutrition and Opportunities for the Undeserved and Rural Incentives to Secure the Heartland (NOURISH) Act, includes provisions to aid socially disadvantaged farmers and farmworkers, as well as proposed changes to Farmers’ Market Nutrition Programs (FMNPs), expansion of the school-based Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, significant changes in the Food Stamp Program, and increased funding for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP).

H.R. 2398: Introduced by Representative John Barrow (D-GA), the Creating Research Extension and Teaching Excellence for the 21st Century, or “CREATE 21” Act, would reauthorize and provide additional funding for essential agricultural research, extension, and education programs and establish the National Institutes of Food and Agriculture as an independent agency. The bill is a companion bill to S. 1094.

H.R. 2419: Introduced by Representative Collin Peterson (D-MN), this bill provides a skeletal outline for reauthorization of the Farm Bill, extending current agricultural programs, including the Food Stamp Program, the Senior FMNP, and TEFAP, through 2012.

Senate (S.) 1342: Introduced by Senator Tom Harkin (D-IA), the Healthy Lifestyles and Prevention America (HeLP America) Act would establish a Federal Task Force on Childhood Obesity, expand the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, regulate competitive foods and food advertising in schools, offer incentives for healthier communities and workplaces, and require nutrition labeling of restaurant foods.

S. 1424: Introduced by Senator Charles Schumer (D-NY) and three co-sponsors, the Farm, Nutrition, and Community Investment Act would address market and economic development programs, conservation, and nutrition and healthy diets. The latter section includes food stamp improvements, expansion of the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program, Community Food Projects growth, and farm-to-school support. The bill is a companion bill to H.R. 2144.

S. 1529: Introduced by Senators Tom Harkin (D-IA) and Richard Lugar (R-IN), the Food Stamp Fairness and Benefit Restoration Act would end benefit erosion, support working families with child care expenses, encourage retirement and education savings, make other changes in the Food Stamp Program, and increase funding for the purchase of commodities under TEFAP.

CORRECTION: In the last issue of Foodlinks America, dated May 25, 2007, legislation introduced by Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) was incorrectly listed as H.R. 2346. The correct bill number is H.R. 2364.

For bill summary and status information, along with the text of legislation, visit: http://thomas.loc.gov and enter the bill number.

Resources

Want to find out how hunger and food assistance program participation in your state compare to the rest of the country? Three new resources are out to help you obtain and evaluate that information.

· State of the States: A Profile of Food & Nutrition Programs across the Nation is compiled annually by the Food Research and Action Center (FRAC) in Washington, D.C. and provides a comprehensive snapshot of hunger, poverty, and the utilization of federal nutrition programs on a state-by-state basis. The 2007 edition is 138 pages and includes overviews of and state participation statistics on eight programs – Food Stamps, School Lunch, School Breakfast, Summer Food, the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), WIC, The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). There are charts with information for each state as well as data on national program trends.

The report may be viewed at: http://www.frac.org/Press_Release/06.04.07.html.

· For a detailed look at what is occurring in food stamps, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has released Trends in Food Stamp Program Participation Rates, 1999-2005, which looks at both national and state data for demographic and economic subgroups relative to participation in the Food Stamp Program.

The 111-page report may be found at: http://www.fns.usda.gov/oane/menu/Published/FSP/FILES/Participation/Trends1999-2005.pdf.

· National and state facts on domestic hunger and poverty from an emergency food assistance perspective are presented in The Almanac of Hunger and Poverty in America 2007, recently released by America’s Second Harvest, the national food bank network. Almanac entries include national information and statistics along with descriptions of nutrition assistance programs. State level reports provide statewide data and local demographic information by service area of the Second Harvest members in each state.

To learn more, see: http://www.secondharvest.org/learn_about_hunger/hunger_almanac_2007.html.

Obesity Round-Up

Dairy claims on weight loss halted: A national advertising campaign that associated drinking milk with losing weight has been stopped at the behest of a federal agency because research does not support the claim. The National Dairy Council, in conjunction with the U.S. Department of Agriculture, has been promoting consumption of dairy products to help keep people slim. The effort included the “Body by Milk” campaign, featuring celebrities such as baseball star Alex Rodriguez and singer Carrie Underwood.

However, the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM), a Washington, D.C. advocacy group that promotes a diet free of animal products, challenged the Dairy Council’s assertions in a petition to the Federal Trade Commission (FTC). In a May 3, 2007 letter from the FTC, the PCRM was informed that the Dairy Council had agreed to change the ads and marketing effort “until further research provides stronger, more conclusive evidence of an association between dairy consumption and weight loss.”

Obese employees more susceptible to injuries: New research findings support an association between body mass index and traumatic workplace injuries among manufacturing employees. Researchers from the Johns Hopkins School of Public Health in Baltimore reviewed the distribution and odds of occupational injury among more than 7,600 workers at eight plants of a U.S. aluminum manufacturing company and found that 29 percent of employees were injured at least once, but that 85 percent of the injured workers were overweight or obese.

The odds of injury in the highest obesity group as compared with the ideal body mass index group were more than twice as high. Injuries to the leg or knee were especially prevalent among members of this very obese group. Results were published in the May 2007 American Journal of Epidemiology and may be viewed at: http://aje.oxfordjournals.org/cgi/content/abstract/k……0&resourcetype=HWCIT.

Reports from the Field

The need for emergency food and food stamps is high in America’s heartland, as described in this May 29, 2007 article from The Kansas City Star:

Nada.

The young mom came to apply for food and child-care assistance. She spoke no English.

Line by line, bilingual caseworker Anna Lamberton reviewed the Spanish version of the woman’s 10-page application. Anyone disabled in the household? The woman shook her head. What about resources? Cash? A checking account? Savings? Livestock?

The young mom shook her head and smiled apologetically. “Nada,” she said. Nothing.

What she did have was a $1,000-a-month job as a cook and a two-year-old son, whom she brought with her to the Kansas Social and Rehabilitation Services office in Kansas City, Kansas.

After the mother left, Lamberton calculated that rent and child care took up nearly all the woman’s salary. Nothing was left for food. Nada.

*****

As Congress prepares to wrangle with reauthorizing the Farm Bill, which funds the Food Stamp Program, anti-hunger advocates are on high alert. Eager to generate public discussion during national Hunger Awareness Week, June 2-10, they worry about the more than 25 million Americans who use food stamps.

They also worry about those who do not.

About 80 percent of eligible Missourians get food stamps, one of the highest participation rates in the country. In Kansas, only slightly more than half the residents who are eligible use food stamps.

What keeps people away? Pride. Embarrassment. Misinformation. When they are hungry, people turn to last resorts – shelters, pantries, senior centers – all of which are served by Harvesters, the Kansas City area’s community food bank network.

Every week, Harvesters serves free food to 60,000 hungry people in the area. That is greater than the populations of Mission Hills, Leawood, and Prairie Village combined. “If we filled up Arrowhead Stadium with 60,000 (hungry) people, people would go, “Wow, we’ve got a problem here,” said Karen Haren, Harvesters’ director.

*****

Rose Fletcher makes about $400 a month at the St. James Place food pantry on Troost Avenue, where she processes the applications of people who come in for free groceries. Fletcher is 45, single, and takes care of two cousins – both 11-year-old boys. She gets $389 in food stamps each month, which breaks down to about $32 per person per week.

“We have soup kitchens around,” Fletcher said. “But you want your own food in your own house.

Fletcher worked as a certified nurse assistant before she nearly lost her left eye three years ago in a car crash. She can’t drive now, so she finds a ride to work every day. Fletcher prefers the freedom of shopping for her own groceries, but food stamps buy little freedom. At Happy Foods on 31st Street, her purchases often spring from frustrating choices.

Fletcher’s doctor has told her to lose weight to lower her blood pressure and cholesterol. She also is diabetic. Medicine to treat those conditions costs about $365 a month, which eats up nearly all her salary. Fletcher told her doctor she couldn’t afford to lose weight.

In the produce section at Happy Foods, Fletcher pointed to a $1.99 head of cauliflower. “How can I go on a diet?” she asked. “Tomatoes are $1.49 a pound.” Her cousins love grapes, but a prepackaged tray costs $3.17. Fletcher buys canned fruit cocktail instead.

Though she will pass on five-pound bags of hot dogs for $7.99 – “That’s ridiculous,” she said – Fletcher will by lots of chicken necks because they are meaty and cheap. She can get four or five meals out of a $3 package. “It’s not the best thing for your diet, but it stretches a meal,” she said.

*****

Outside of hunger-awareness campaigns, who considers the staggering number of hungry people? The hungriest among us are fed out of sight, anonymously.

Please take a number. And wait.

The clients at the Bishop Sullivan Center’s food pantry on Truman Road hear their numbers called one by one. “Number 7.” That’s an old man in jeans and a baseball cap. Number 21. That’s a middle-aged couple; the man wears a Chiefs T-shirt. Numbers 36 and 37 are two women wearing Islamic hijabs.

Most clients avoid eye contact when they walk in the lobby. They don’t smile. They sit and wait. Thirty minutes. Forty minutes. An hour.

On a busy day, it can take that long before the clients can go around the back of the building to get their free bags of groceries – two bags of dry foods, one bag of government commodities, and one bag of bread and meat for a family of four, for instance. No one smiles here.

“Why would they?” asked manager Geno Olmedo.

On this day, Olmedo packs canned vegetables, instant noodles, organic raisin bran, and burrito dinner kits for the families. Olmedo manages to pack more groceries into one bag than would seem possible. Over the years, he has mastered filling the bags so he can give his clients as much food as he can. A lucky few will find a grocery-store birthday cake or a pie tucked in their brown paper sacks.

Because recipients cannot use food stamps to buy paper products or personal-care items, Olmedo adds those things when he has them. Some days clients walk out with rolls of toilet paper sticking out of their sacks.

Olmedo says it’s a shame that people have to live like this, but there’s only so much he can do. The Bishop Sullivan Center can give groceries to 50 families a day, first come, first served. Clients know to get to the center around 1:30 p.m., when the two-and-a-half hour distribution process begins. It lasts as long as there is food.

When the food is gone, workers hang a red stop sign on the door. “Sorry!” it reads. “So many came in for food earlier that the pantry is closed for the rest of today.” The stop sign is on the door most days.

Small Bites

Having the blues here at home: Nearly 90 percent of the world’s blueberries are produced in North America.

Chickening out: Per capita consumption of chicken in the U.S. has increased from 28 pounds per year in 1960 to 87 pounds per year in 2005.

Working longer: American workers are delaying their retirement out of economic necessity. In the mid-1980s, 18 percent of people in their late 60s were still working. Today, that figure has gone up to 29 percent.

Where credit is due: Americans are using their credit cards more causing the average household credit card debt to climb from $4,301 in 1994 to $9,659 in 2006. The average American now has seven credit and debit cards.

Few people, big impact: Propelled by U.S. consumerism, Americans are the biggest polluters on the planet. Though the U.S. houses just five percent of the world’s population, we account for 22 percent of fossil fuel consumption and generate 50 percent of the globe’s solid waste.

Eating pollutes worse than driving: The average American produces 2.2 tons of carbon dioxide annually by driving and 2.8 tons by eating, mainly as a result of food waste, the purchase of imported foods that travel far, extensive meat consumption, and inefficient kitchen equipment.

mvauthier :: Jun.08.2007 :: Foodlinks America :: No Comments »:: Print This Post

Trackback this post | Feed on Comments to this post