MINNEAPOLIS – While Washington’s sequestration battle of elephants and donkeys continue fighting to the bitter end over cuts or no cuts, 50 million Americans, including 17 million children, will pay the price — suffering real hardship and hunger. Children like 8-year-old Abdulm — who regularly goes to bed without food — tells Mint Press what it’s like to live in hunger.
“Sometimes when I’m in class my belly just won’t stop growling, it’s bad,” he says shyly and embarrassed. “I can’t stop it and some of the class just laughs.”
Abdul is one of the millions of children on the USDA National School Lunch Program who receive both free breakfast and lunch at school. The federal program provides nutritionally balanced, low‐cost or free lunches to more than 31 million children each school day. But in Abdul case his free meal can be his only meal.
“Some days I take food from other kids’ plates and take it home with me. My mom doesn’t always have enough food for all of us. Sometimes I eat the food before I get home because my mom wants my baby brothers to eat first, and that can mean I will go to bed with nothing to eat,” Abdul said.
Abdul lives with his mother and four younger brothers in Brooklyn Park, Minn. They live in small cramped a one-bedroom apartment with no private space to do homework or even eat together. With the floors littered with sleeping bags and bags of charity clothes — it seems chaotic, but to Abdul, this is home.
“I sleep in the living room because I can’t get to sleep in the bedroom with my little brothers — they are too noisy. In the morning I’m the first one up along with my mom, but I usually don’t have breakfast with everyone. I go to school early to eat. I like it. Most of the time I’ll save food for my little brothers, and bring it home.”
Amy Lopez, Greater Twin Cities United Way community impact partnership manager, says Abdul’s situation is not so uncommon in the Twin Cities. “Providing free meals to children means that they get a balanced meal, but it also could be the only meal that they will get that day.”
She added, “The sequester cut will have a huge impact on children. During the summer vacations, these free food programs will be cut from the summer program, so for young children who rely on this one meal a day, will be going without. Forcing young people to look for alternatives that may not exist.”
If this happens, where will Abdul find his meals? “I don’t know,” he said. “There’s nowhere else.”
The uncertainty of what will be included in President Obama’s proposed temporary federal budget, which will set a budget for this year, may still affect the vulnerable and the lowest income families, forcing them to choose between paying for food, or paying for rent or medicines.
Feeding Minnesotans
Food insecurity has been growing in Minneapolis at an alarming rate. It’s estimated that more than 8,200 Minnesotans, who either go hungry or struggle to ration food, seek assistance from food shelves every day. And over the decade, food bank and food shelf centers have increased by 164 percent across the state.
“It is unacceptable that so many people across Minnesota are struggling and cannot afford enough food to provide for their families,” said Colleen Moriarty, executive director of Hunger Solutions Minnesota. “These numbers show us that we must make our state’s and nation’s safety nets stronger, not weaker. We can’t afford to leave these vulnerable people behind.”
Programs like Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), which provides food stamps and Meals on Wheels, are rapidly winding down as Minnesota and other states in the U.S. have no money to fund the programs — forcing the families with young children, the homeless and the elderly to find meals using various food banks and food shelves. But can the food banks handle the growing demand?
With food banks and food shelves in the Twin Cities reportedly receiving 3 million visits last year, it’s estimated that if the sequester cuts continue, it would double last year’s figures. With twice as many people using the food banks for a longer time, will the food banks find it hard to feed Minnesota’s growing hunger problem?
Rob Zeaske, chief executive officer of Second Harvest Heartland said, “The sequester will force more people into our services. More people will need assistance with groceries, for a longer period of time.”
Coping with the growing demands, Zeaske said: “We are working with many retailers like Sam’s Club, Target and others to provide us with fresh produce and canned foods. We work with growers, taking their fresh fruits and potatoes surplus, we work with retailers who may have the wrong packaging, or a dent in tins or in the case of a batch of Cheerios that were too dark in color and put them in our grocery bags for people in need.”
United Way, which works in partnership with food producers and retailers and food banks, is also concerned with increase of demands. “We have to be very resourceful to cope with the new demands. Over the years, supermarkets have less and less produce that they call waste, but usually means that the canned is dented, or fresh produce that been out on the shelves for a day. So now with more people needing food assistance we are having to widen our search for new retailers, growers and donations. It isn’t easy to always keep up with the demands,” Lopez said.
No food stamps means hunger
“It took me three days before I went to the food shelf. Pride can get in the way. You try to do everything by yourself, but you can’t. I had a young son to look after so I needed help,” said Laverne Cross, a 41-year-old single mother of a 4-year old boy, as she spoke for the first time at Neighborhood House food shelf.
“At these centers, they not only give you groceries, but you can get assistance to apply for food stamps and other welfare benefits, utility bills and help with child’s schooling and sports and summer programs. Without places like this, I don’t know how people would cope. There would be a lot of people and kids who will be hungry, or be homeless and if there were no food stamps. It would be bad.”
Laverne is currently employed but was receiving food stamps that ranged from $98 to $202 dollars per month, for her and her child. “It’s hard enough budgeting food for the month. The stamps don’t go far with today’s price of food, but if this was cut off a lot of people would have nothing to eat, that seems ridiculous to do this.”
All Americans would be harmed by budget slashing of the sequester, cutting food safety inspections, air traffic control, defense and health research. Yet the cuts would do even greater harm to the tens of millions of Americans already suffering from poverty, hunger and food insecurity.
According to the White House, 70,000 low-income children would be kicked off Head Start, the early childhood education program. Another 125,000 struggling families would lose rental assistance, placing them at risk of losing permanent housing. And 100,000 formerly homeless people, including veterans, would be removed from programs to prevent them from returning to the streets.
The cuts to nutrition assistance programs would be particularly counterproductive and heartless. President Obama pledged to end child hunger in America by 2015, but in reality this ongoing battle over the federal budget will only increase child hunger in 2013. Our lawmakers and leaders who support the $85 billion cuts insist they are reducing waste, fraud and abuse. By taking food from hungry working parents, seniors and children, we seem to creating more problems in the future.
“We are desperate people now, if we had no food stamps there would be more crime. We’ve got to eat so if I don’t have money to buy food, then I will steal. It’s a simple as that,” said Scott, homeless and living in People Serving People homeless shelter.
Political analysts are expecting an announcement by President Obama pushing forward a temporary solution to the sequester cuts, but people like Laverne are not expecting much change. She is currently raising money at a food drive and collecting donations she set up at work, so that she can give back and keep food shelves going, saying, “We should all have the basic right to have food.”