Politics
Nobody is paying attention to food insecurity during the pandemic
A record number of Americans need food assistance, but is anyone paying attention?
With record unemployment and continued disruption to their daily lives, many Americans are experiencing food insecurity. Feeding America estimates that 1 in 6 Americans may go hungry during the pandemic.
Several major government programs address food insecurity, including Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), and Special Supplemental Nutrition for Women and Children (WIC). All of these programs received emergency funding in the Families First Coronavirus Response Act, and politicians such as Senator Chuck Schumer and a number of Members of Congress from Wisconsin have pressed for continued assistance in the next bill.
While the sharp increase in food insecurity during the coronavirus pandemic has received attention, food insecurity is typically not high on the agenda for many policymakers. To examine how often food insecurity is on the legislative agenda I examined bill introductions in the Ohio State Legislature from 2010 to 2019. During that period, 158 bills contained a phrase or keyword related to food insecurity. For comparison, Medicaid — another safety net program administered by the states — was mentioned in 687 bills during the same time period. Issues around housing (eviction, homelessness, and foreclosures), which has also been a topic of discussion during stimulus talks, were mentioned in 294 bills during the same time period.
The majority (102 out of 158) of those food insecurity bills mention it only in passing. Food insecurity is often mentioned as a reference to other pieces of legislation (e.g. “Food Security Act of 1985”). It is also common for food insecurity to be mentioned in relation to the tax code (“sales of food to persons using supplemental nutrition assistance program benefits to purchase the food” is not taxable), or in appropriations bills (e.g the federal school lunch program’s inclusion in education budgets).
Among the 52 bills that substantively address food insecurity, three provide long-term solutions by incentivizing food producers and distributors to conduct business in underserved areas and “food deserts.” These bills were introduced in 2010 and 2011; since that time there has been no other legislation on the topic.
An additional 30 bills reference substantive changes to SNAP (or “food stamps”). Some of these bills expanded SNAP benefits; for example, by expanding eligibility to striking workers or requesting waivers to federal time limits. Other bills are punitive in nature, such as disqualifying individuals with a drug offense.
Another fifteen bills reference the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Almost all of these bills propose expanding services, usually during times when students are not in school (e.g. summer or at day care centers). None of these substantive bills, however, were signed into law or even passed in the legislature.
Solutions fit for a pandemic?
The Ohio legislature’s focus on SNAP and NSLP aligns with how everyday Americans think about food insecurity. Google Trends shows that searches related to increased food stamps has risen by more than 2,000% in the past 90 days, while searches on free school lunches have increased more than 400%.
As the New York Times reports, SNAP has been a reliable form of aid and can respond quickly to changing economic conditions. SNAP enrollment increased during the Great Recession, peaking in 2013, and enrollment is on the rise again. Several states, including Delaware and Texas, have expanded their SNAP programs in light of the pandemic, either by increasing monthly benefit levels or waiving eligibility requirements. As states face budget cuts, Congress needs to expand SNAP benefits in order to prevent a food insecurity crisis.
According to the USDA, NSLP serves more than 30 million children a year; many students who receive free or reduced-price lunches through the NSLP also receive breakfast through the School Breakfast Program. That the United States relies so heavily on school-based programs to combat food insecurity is problematic during a time when many school systems are not opening for regular face-to-face instruction this fall.
In the meantime, the USDA has provided assistance through a piecemeal approach that includes waivers to serve children meals outside traditional meal times or in non-group settings. In the debate over whether/if schools should reopen continues, policymakers also need to consider how those choices will affect access to regular, nutritionally-balanced meals.
