What $1.38 can buy

When a child doesn’t know where her next meal is coming from, it can be difficult to focus on such relatively abstract concepts as math, English and history.

As the economy improves for most of us, it is hard to believe we’re in this position. But this year, for the first time ever, more than half of all the children attending public schools in the U.S. come from low-income families – and more than one in six are in danger of going hungry.

{mosads}Congress is now debating the federal budget for the next fiscal year. One of the programs targeted for cuts is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP for short. SNAP has been proven to be wondrously successful when it comes to feeding not just children, but seniors, veterans, people with disabilities and others in need.

And yet the program has its detractors – members of Congress who exploit stereotypes of SNAP recipients as people who are “gaming” the system or who are somehow undeserving of benefits. Consider this comment, made at a convening hearing of the House Agriculture Committee, by Rep. David Rouzer (R-N.C.), who recounted stories from constituents angry that they had to work for their groceries while “those who have not contributed quite as much to society….[are] getting everything.”

The current average SNAP benefit is $125 per person, per month, the lowest it has been in five years. Let’s do the math. If a person is to eat three meals a day, that means SNAP is helping them out to the tune of about $1.38 per meal.

If $1.38 is Rouzer’s definition of “everything,” one wonders what his definition of nothing would be.

Another stereotype, promulgated by new House Agriculture Committee Chairman Mike Conaway (R) of Texas, is that the “largesse” offered under SNAP somehow discourages recipients from achieving financial independence. Parse carefully this quote:

“We can all agree that no one ought to go hungry in America, and SNAP is essential in protecting the most vulnerable citizens during tough times,” Conaway said. “For many it is a vital lifeline to keeping food on the table. What we don’t want is for this program to hold people back from achieving their potential. I believe there is a role for SNAP, but we need to have a complete and clear understanding of its mission and purpose.”

But that comment drew fire from Rep. Jim McGovern (D-Mass.), who has organized a “hunger caucus” in the House and is emerging as one of the legislative body’s leading experts on the issue.

“I want to ask my colleagues to remember just how poor you must be to qualify for SNAP,” McGovern countered. “Approximately 92 percent of SNAP benefits go to households with monthly incomes below the poverty line, and 57 percent go to households with incomes below half the poverty line. For a family of three, the poverty line is about $1,650 per month. That’s not a lot of money. SNAP eligibility requirements are tough, even if you are poor. And, the program has one of the lowest error rates of any federal program. The bottom line is that SNAP works.”

Anti-hunger advocates argue that in a nation of plenty, there is no reason why even one child should be at risk of hunger. But even if some in Congress can’t get their arms around the moral implications of childhood hunger, they should be able to understand the issue’s economic implications.

Hungry children can’t learn. Children who can’t learn aren’t going to be graduating from high school and going to college. People who don’t attend at least some college or trade school by and large aren’t going to be a part of the skilled workforce our nation needs in order to compete in the global economy.

And, rather than becoming productive, contributing taxpayers, hunger later in life leads to a downward spiral that includes un- or under-employment, health problems, financial insecurity, and passing the cycle along to the next generation that will follow.

It’s amazing, really, how a simple $1.38 per meal could help ward off such an unhappy outcome.

Elliot is communications director for Fair Share, a national field organizing group, fighting to end childhood hunger as part of its mission to build an America where everyone pays their fair share, does their fair share and gets their fair share; and where everyone plays by the same rules.