What consumers really need

Came across an article this weekend on the new Smart Choices program. According to the article, the program is "designed to help shoppers easily identify smarter food and beverage choices."

Really?

Several nutrition experts weighed in on the Smart Choices program. One, Walter C. Willett of the Harvard School of Public Health, pointed out that the program's criteria are "seriously flawed." He went on to say, "It's a blatant failure of this system."

The response from Smart Choices? Dr. Eileen Kennedy, president of the Smart Choices Board and a dean at Tufts University, defended the criteria, saying the program is based on government dietary guidelines.

So what's the argument about? Items that pass the Smart Choice program include Froot Loops, Fudgsicles and mayo. Yum.

Definitely some red flags here. First, Michael Johnson, the executive director for the Center for Science in the Public Interest, quit the panel last year because he believed its decisions were too influenced by food industry interests. Second, Dr. Kennedy defended the Froot Loops choice by pointing out that the label will help parents struggling with the Froot Loops vs. Donut decision. If a harried parent had to think about it, they would say to themselves, "I'm in a hurry to feed my kids breakfast. Should I give them Froot Loops or a donut? Well, the Smart Choices label will help me with this one. Obviously Froot Loops is the better decision." But really, wouldn't that mean shooting oneself in the foot with a nail gun is better than shooting oneself in the foot with a real gun?

Another member of the Smart Choices board, Dr. Celeste Clark, points out that Froot Loops have added nutrients, making it a healthy choice. The sugar content in the cereal makes it taste better. So consumers will be motivated to eat the "nutrient-dense" cereal because the sugar makes it taste good. Following this logic, they'll be getting more nutrients than they normally would. Froot Loops is 41 percent sugar. Oh, and did I mention that Dr. Clark is the senior vice president of global nutrition for Kellogg's? And that participating food manufacturers, including Kraft, ConAgra, General Mills, and Tyson Foods, pay $100K per year to be part of the program?

I'm hoping the Food and Drug Administration comes in more heavily on this one. Because what consumers need is an unbiased approach to labeling. And an education that neither Froot Loops nor a donut is a smart choice.

Currently reading

I was so excited this weekend when I picked up All You Can Eat by Joel Berg. Just found it this weekend at Longfellow Books. Which is a great IndieBound place, by the way. Check it out if you're in Portland. Except my question would be: what the heck are you doing in Portland?

So I started reading it yesterday, and oh my goodness. I'm fascinated by food policy and hunger in America. Maybe it's because I'm convinced hunger is preventable. Maybe it's because I once found myself at a food bank, asking for help. Maybe it's because I've seen poverty on two continents, and something about American poverty is disturbingly surreal. In no other country have I seen hunger and poverty blamed on personal responsibility. From the intro:

To admit the existence of hunger in America is to confess that we have failed in meeting the most sensitive and painful of human needs. To admit the existence of widespread hunger is to cast doubt of the efficacy of our whole system. If we can't solve the problem of hunger in our society, one wonders if we can resolve any of the great social issues before the nation. ~ Senator George McGovern

This book is fantastic. I'll follow up as I get further in.

A food stamp life

I read about social programs almost every day -- food stamps in particular. I'm fascinated by food policy, in case you couldn't tell. The average monthly food stamp benefit for a family was $295 in April. Our nation's unemployment rate is close to 10 percent, and 34.4 million people (one in nine) are on food stamps. That's up six million people from the same period last year.

According to the food stamp FAQ section of the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) Web site, a family with two people is allotted food stamp benefits of $367 per month -- assuming you meet the income level requirements. The average monthly benefit in FY 2008 was $101 per person and $227 per household.

Here's some info on food stamp benefits (from the FNS Web site):

• Benefits can only be used for food and for plants and seeds to grow food for your household
• Benefits cannot be used for any nonfood item, such as pet foods; soaps, paper products, and household supplies; grooming items, toothpaste, and cosmetics; alcoholic beverages and tobacco; vitamins and medicines; any food that will be eaten in the store; and hot foods

Here's some info on food stamp recipients (also from the FNS Web site):

• 49 percent of all participants are children (18 or younger) and 61 percent live in single-parent households
• 52 percent of food stamp households include children
• 9 percent of all participants are elderly (60 or older)
• 76 percent of all benefits go to households with children, 16 percent to households with disabled persons and 9 percent to households with elderly persons
• 33 percent of households with children were headed by a single parent, the overwhelming majority of which were headed by women
• The average household size is 2.3 persons
• The average gross monthly income per food stamp household is $673
• 43 percent of participants are white; 33 percent are African-American, non-Hispanic; 19 percent are Hispanic

One statistic from this list leaps out at me: the average gross monthly income per food stamp household is $673. Which means that an overwhelming percentage goes to the food budget.

Here's what I'm thinking about all this. I'm going to attempt to stick to a food stamp budget for one month. I know it's been done before. But I'm going to give it a try. I'll spend on food what would be allotted to me in food stamp benefits; according to the FNS, it's $4.07 per meal.

I have many advantages compared to the average food stamp recipient, so I'm still figuring out how to take this into consideration. First, I live in a fairly urban city, where nutritious options are within close proximity to my home. I've learned that it's quite expensive to be poor. Most recipients live in food deserts, where physical and financial access to nutritious foods is limited. Second, I have a car that's in great shape. Most recipients rely on public transportation, so when you're working one or more jobs, having to wait on a bus to get to a grocery store is unrealistic. Which is why a lot of food stamp benefits are spent at convenience stores -- there's one on every corner in a food desert. And if you haven't checked out the price of milk at a convenience store lately...well, you really should just check it out. Third, I only work on 40 hour/week job. Many of the working poor are doing just that -- working, often more than one job.

I expect this to be a challenge. I'll be making a concerted effort to think about what I'm purchasing and will avoid discretionary spending (like eating out). And I'm curious to see how healthfully my family will be able to eat on the allotted amount, since we eat primarily organic and locally-grown.

I'll let you know how it goes!

Supporting the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act

The USDA's Food and Nutrition Service recently turned 40.

A primer on some key FNS programs:

• Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (formerly the Food Stamp Program): food stamps are now offered through an Electronic Benefit Transfer card, similar to a debit card. Meant to supplement a food budget, SNAP aims to help low-income families and individuals purchase more nutritious foods.
• Women, Infants and Children: through WIC, States receive Federal grants for supplemental foods and nutrition education for low-income women, infants and children.
• National School Lunch Program: operating in both public and nonprofit private schools, the NSLP provides students with reduced-price of free lunches.
• Summer Food Service Program: picking up during the summer when kids are out of school, the SFSP is distributed through organizations with summer feeding and activity programs.
• Commodity Supplemental Food Program: through CSFP, State distributing agencies receive food and funds to assist low-income pregnant and breast-feeding women, infants, children, and the elderly.
• The Emergency Food Assistance Program: helps supplement the diets of low-income Americans, including elderly people, by providing them with emergency food and nutrition assistance at no cost. Under TEFAP, the USDA makes commodity foods available to State Distributing agencies.

Why support these programs?
Every five years, lawmakers reauthorize the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act, which includes several of the programs listed above. We're coming up on five years this year, so the legislation is getting notice by national feeding programs and the press.

Coinciding with the legislation is the recent release of Child Food Insecurity in the United States: 2005-2007. This report, conducted by Feeding America (the nation's food bank network) and the USDA, includes the first ever state-by-state analysis of childhood hunger. A few highlights from the report:

• In the United States, more than 12 million children under the age of 18 are food insecure; they don't know when or where they will have their next meal
• One in six children under the age of five is food insecure
• Hungry children have greater odds of being hospitalized, and the average pediatric hospitalization costs approximately $12,000. Results of chronic undernutrition contribute to high health care costs.
• Children whose families are food insecure are more likely to be at risk of overweight or obesity
• The ultimate indirect cost incurred by a society from food insecurity is the loss or reduction of human capital in the overall workforce

What does this mean for us?
A few words from a Feeding America press release, New Report Focuses on Economic Toll of Childhood Hunger:

"This is the first report to show the direct, tax-payer burden inflicted by child hunger -- along with a clear link to long-term impacts, such as life-time earnings and the ripple effects through our economy," said Vicki Escarra, president and CEO of Feeding America. "It calls into question whether ongoing economic recovery can be sustained if child hunger is not eliminated; we can only achieve a prosperous future for all Americans if we ensure, right now, that all children have access to enough nutritious food for active, healthy lives"

"Child hunger is robbing us of the best of America's imagination and ingenuity," said the report's author, John Cook, Ph.D., of the Boston Medical Center and Boston University School of Medicine, a nationally-recognized expert on child hunger. "Sustainable economic recovery depends on freeing children of the burden of hunger and malnutrition and supporting their optimal growth and development."

"The impact of child hunger is more far reaching than one might anticipate. Child food insecurity creates billions of dollars in costs to our society. Child hunger affects a child's health, education and job readiness," said Cook. "Our best universities are graduating more students from other countries and fewer from the U.S. because we are failing to prepare our children to learn and develop their best skills, creativity and abilities."

So what can you do?
Get involved. Get other people involved.

• Sign the pledge at Change.org
• Drum up support from your legislator, friends, family, etc, by joining Feeding America's Hunger Action Center
• Send a letter to your legislator letting him/her know the act is important to you

What a choice.

This editorial from The Boston Globe describes how the government may be contributing to a culture of poverty.

It details the situation in Massachusetts, where 43 percent of the state is considered asset poor. Basically, they’re three months away from poverty. They’re people like me – and probably people like you. At this point, losing a job would be devastating, so they’re relying on government programs to stretch their food budget and pay for medical bills.

So how does the government contribute to the problem here? At first glance it would seem that they’re only helping fill in the financial gap. But government policies provide disincentives to building assets. There’s a break off point where a person can make too high of an income – even though realistically it’s not enough to live on.

So what’s a person to do? Stay below the wage threshold in order to benefit from government subsidies or barely climb above it and find themselves without a safety net?

“These people are working hard at difficult jobs; they shouldn’t have to choose between reaching for a better life and losing support programs that make working possible.”

Supporting farmers' markets that accept food stamps

Why this is important: some economists say that every $1 spent in food stamp benefits (now called the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program) results in twice that in economic activity. And it allows those who could otherwise not afford healthy food enjoy some nutritious options.

Katie Zezima recently wrote in The New York Times that at the end of FY 2008, 34 percent more farmers markets were accepting food stamps -- 753 across the U.S. Now that food stamps are processed like debit cards, states and the federal government are partnering more with nonprofits to make food stamp terminals available at farmers' markets. Admittedly, this is no cheap task. Each terminal costs around $1,100 not counting ongoing associated fees.

But several states are finding the costs worth it, including Colorado, Montana, Iowa, New Jersey, and Maine. These states (and many others) can no longer say that food stamps are used solely by low-income residents – food stamp usage has surged, and those using them include an increasing number of people in the middle class.

Making a case for healthy food options is easy. And food stamp acceptance at farmers’ markets is a step in the right direction.

Read more about the case for food stamps here.

Why I care about hunger advocacy.

Found on Postsecret.

Looking for more reading material?

Check out the Buzz Bin's List of Change. It's an informative list of change and cause bloggers, compiled by Livingston Communications.

The methodology on this is quite unique -- it includes ranking code (so it's not subjective) and the blogs included are from bloggers who submitted their URLs.

Summer watching and reading

Over here at Just Feed One, we love documentaries. Especially ones about food. Which is why the update on the GOOD Web site about what's coming to theaters soon is exciting news. Check out the list here.

And if you're more the bookworm type, check out The Food of a Younger Land. Just started reading it last night -- fascinating. Check out an interview with the author, Mark Kurlansky, also courtesy of GOOD.

Is current spending on social programs adequate?

Steven Greenhouse, in a New York Times article writes about government programs during the Reagan years, the Clinton presidency, and the current administration. Although published last year, the article is especially apt given the increase in unemployment.

In the article, he quotes Jared Bernstein of the Economic Policy institute

“The E.I.T.C. is a fantastic wage subsidy program that’s been hugely effective in reducing poverty, but when jobs disappear, the E.I.T.C. doesn’t help you. When people lose their jobs, they often stop receiving E.I.T.C., and I fear that the program becomes less countercyclical and more pro-cyclical, meaning it reinforces recessionary forces."

Bernstein, an economist who has met with Barack Obama’s top economic advisors, makes a compelling argument. While the E.I.T.C. has “clearly been successful in vertical equity terms,” since more than 90% of the program’s benefits go directly to those who need it, the problem today is not limited only to people with low incomes. The problem is expanding to include the increasing number of those who are unemployed, since the E.I.T.C. only benefits those who are working.

Economists are divided on how to help those most in need during a recession. While many liberal economists argue that decreases to the E.I.T.C. and similar social programs prolongs the recession, conservatives say that current spending on social programs is adequate. One analyst for the conservative Heritage Foundation points out: “Antipoverty spending is at its highest level in American history. It’s topped 3 percent of gross domestic product."

But is this spending helping those who are losing out to E.I.T.C. benefits now that they are no longer employed?