Study: Tens of thousands have too little food
URBANA -- A new national hunger study says 79,000 people in East Central Illinois don't have enough to eat -- and more than half of them may not qualify for federal food assistance.
About 15.5 percent of the 508,000 people in the 14-county region served by the Eastern Illinois Foodbank are classified as "food insecure," unable to get enough food on a regular basis, according to a study released Thursday by Feeding America, a national hunger-relief organization.
The study, called "Map the Meal Gap," provides numbers for the first time about food insecurity for each county and congressional district. Previously, that data was only available on a state-by-state basis from the U.S. Department of Agriculture, officials said.
"There's a great deal of variety in food insecurity rates across the country," and this study shows a similar diversity within states, said Craig Gundersen, associate professor in the University of Illinois in the Department of Agricultural and Consumer Economics, who led the data analysis for Feeding America.
"It's especially relevant for food banks, because they serve a wide array of different types of counties, some really struggling with food insecurity and some with lower rates," said Gundersen, director of the National Soybean Research Lab and a specialist on food security, poverty and health.
In East Central Illinois, for example, food insecurity rates range from a low of 11.1 percent in Piatt County to 17.8 percent in Vermilion County. Champaign County's rate is 16 percent.
Figures also show 54 percent of the families classified as food insecure in this region are not eligible for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly known as food stamps. SNAP benefits are limited to those with incomes up to 130 percent of the federal poverty level.
"That's a pretty sizable number," said Cheryl Precious, spokeswoman for the Eastern Illinois Foodbank, arguing that SNAP's income limits need to be raised. "It needs to reach more people."
The data show the vital role that nonprofit emergency food programs play in reaching families who aren't eligible for government help, officials said.
For the study, researchers first examined the relationship between food insecurity data collected by USDA and other statewide economic measures such as poverty, unemployment and median income. They applied those findings to similar measures at the county level to develop food insecurity rates for each county.
The USDA gathers data on food insecurity by asking people a series of questions, such as how often they've skipped a meal in the last six months, how many times they've missed a meal so someone else could eat, or how many times they've had to choose between paying for food or paying for utilities, Precious said.
The data, to be released annually by Feeding America, will help food banks identify specific communities and strategies to combat hunger more effectively, said James Hires, executive director of the Eastern Illinois Foodbank.
"This is the first time we've been able to see, in just our region, not only what the levels of food insecurity are but also the impact that we're making on food insecurity and federal programs are making on food insecurity," Precious said.
The study also estimates that hungry families in East Central Illinois are going without 13.2 million meals a year, part of a national "meal gap" of more than 8.4 billion.
In eastern Illinois, the study says, a typical household spends approximately $2.39 per person per meal. According to USDA data, people in the food bank's 14-county area who are struggling with hunger estimate they need about $52 more per person per month, a regional total of $31.5 million, to address shortages in their food budget. On a national level, "Map the Meal Gap" estimates this shortfall at $21.3 billion annually.
Gundersen said food prices directly affect food insecurity for families, and "if they rise at all in the coming year that could have enormous implications."
The Eastern Illinois Foodbank estimates that its network of food pantries, soup kitchens and other agencies serves 100,000 individuals each year, more than the 79,190 people classified as food insecure in the new study.
Precious said some of the food bank's clients are families facing a recent job loss or other short-term crisis who turn to food pantries or government nutrition programs temporarily to keep their families fed. They don't see themselves as "food insecure" because they haven't had to skip any meals yet, but without government or nonprofit programs they'd be in trouble, she said.
"Map the Meal Gap" provides data for each county in the United States in an interactive map format that includes numbers on food insecurity and the percentage who don't qualify for federal nutrition programs.
Vicki Escarra, president and CEO of Feeding America, said in a webcast Thursday that the data will better measure the impact of programs to combat hunger, which she called a "solvable problem." She argued against cuts to federal anti-poverty programs, saying the budget shouldn't be balanced on the backs of those who can least afford it.
The study was funded by the Howard G. Buffett Foundation and the Nielsen Co.
A summary of the findings, the map and the full report are available on Feeding America's website, http://www.feedingamerica.org.
MoreDoes anyone know anyone starving? Does anyone know of cases of malnutrition? How many people die in Illinois each day from hunger? Certainly, there are probably some people hungry and malnourished, but as a whole, this is an epidemic only found by academics.
Meanwhile, the Chicago Tribune reported on June 29, 2010, the following: "llinois' men, meanwhile, tip the scales over its women, with 27.8 percent of men in the state qualifying as obese vs. 25.5 percent of women." Source: http://articles.chicagotribune.com/2010-06-29/news/chi-100629illinois-ob...
Stop the presses . . . I know some people obese can be food insecure, but the term is ill defined, haphazardly used, and seen as often as the Yeti.
Received a text today that said GE, General Electric had no taxes to pay the government for 2010. That would suggest tax dollars spent on Unemployment, Snap and WIC are both less costly and a means of limited income as a temporary path to sustaining the unemployed, Obama pledges to consider changing corporate tax law. Two plus years into his term and they just now notice how no or little taxes corporations are paying and making money to keep america unemployed by way of the elected law makers/legislatures. What political parties put this scenario in play? And Wisconsin Walker and several other states move to bust union died for rights egregiously remembered today marking the anniversary of a textile fire in New York City, (Triangle Factory Fire), killing 128 non-union women workers burned alive or jumping to their deaths to escape corporate greed induced slavery. Nothing has changed. It is the same stuff and a different day. Welcome to America. Its time to wake up.
I don't really know how this rant about GE and unions applies to the topic of hunger, but one could liberally connect just about anything. Also, whenever I hear corporate greed, the term makes me cringe. I thought businesses were in the business to make as much money as possible. When a person goes to buy a car, they try to get the lowest cost possible. Same thing with buying food at the grocery store. One usually goes to the store with the lowest price. I guess that, too, could be called individual greed. I call it smart. Since businesses cannot print money, they either make money to cover their expenses and have profit or they go out of business. Many people want to draw the line between profit and greed when they have never run a business, had to make business decisions, and try to remain competitive.
You surprise me saying these can only be liberally connected. Its the reality of business. Business that can be made profitable, less profitable, use new technologies or opt to use more manual labor creating more jobs. Within this line of latitude exist the lobbyist which fund the campaigns and gifts of the law making legislatures demonstrating who currently has the power to influence politicians to their view as obviously the legislatures have no moral code, guidance or ethics when drawing a line of protocol for Americans.
What is done in corporate america trickles down to the common citizen/working person. You address the issue of SNAP, Unemployment and WIC as do you know anyone starving? Yes, many americans looking for work. Starving for paychecks, opportunity to prosper, health insurance, life insurance, etc. You say starving and I see much more than just obese, food insecure and isolated cases, I see all which applies when considering what people need though in this article it is selectively and intentionally avoided by discussing only food rather than all which applies to basic necessities which includes prosperity, health insurance, law makers, their influence on quality of life or lack of, morality and so on. Take the blinders off and see the whole picture.
Ah...the old 'people aren't hungry cuz they're fat' argument. It's one of those things that logically makes sense, but it's easily debunked if you just think about it. Junk food is cheap. That's the short answer. It costs less up front to buy a five dollar pizza than a well balanced meal. It costs us more as a society in terms of obesity and diabetes, but people don't think that long term (or they simply can't afford to).
Easily debunked? You state an entirely different problem and ignore the hunger part. Instead of addressing hunger, you are talking about picking foods that are unhealthy. How or what does this have to do with hunger? Nothing. Now, if you had talked about malnutrition, possibly you could have a point (but you chose not to). Again, eating junk food and then becoming obese or diabetic is not hunger.
Talking about debunking, there is something to your argument after all. The point about junk food being so much cheaper is easily debunked. Right now one can buy a can of peas ($0.59), a pound of boneless chicken tenders ($2.49), a tad under a half pound of tomatoes ($0.92), and a can of pineapple ($1.00) from Meijer [according to their weekly circular, which is also on-line; please note: the Champaign Meijer was used for this calculation and is easily verifiable] for a grand total, minus tax [which presumably is the same as your example], of $5.00. Buying a loaf of wheat bread per week would supplement this meal. Of course, a frozen package of burritos ($2.49) and a package of Oreos ($2.50) might sound just as good (or your $5 pizza). Again, all of this comes down to personal choice. The choice to eat less than a well-balanced meal often deals less with economics and more with convenience.
At $2.39 per person, per meal a family of 6 would be spending over $300 a week on groceries. Who spends that much? I think couponing classes would be a better start. SNAP benefits should stop paying for soda, candy, and chips. When you can use a link card to buy a soda and chips at the gas station, it is not helping. It is hurting both those using the benefits and those paying for them. It increases the burden on the health care system. And don't cry about taking away rights to choose. If you want chips buy them with cash. If you are getting free food, those giving it should make it healthy. I know a few years ago you couldn't buy organic foods, but could buy junk food. The mechanism is already in place to put restrictions on what types of food can be purchased, it is just being used poorly.
I agree with you. Chips shouldn't be allowed to be purchased with a LINK card. However, talk to the junk food companies, they are the ones blocking that from becoming a reality. The mechanism is not in place, that's just what you wish was happening. Big money makes the rules.
WIC, on the other hand, is a different program that does put very strict rules in place on what can be purchased.
Serf, You're correct. There have been a number of efforts to restrict what can be purchased with food stamps going back to at least the GHW Bush administration. The record indicates powerful and diverse interests such as Cargill, Frito Lay and The National Association of Convenience Stores Political Action Committee have all spent lobbying efforts to defeat proposals that would restrict what can be purchased with food stamps akin to existing rules in the WIC program. Food stamp purchases account for roughly 10 percent of all food consumed in the US, so it isn't difficult to understand why powerful interests oppose any changes.
I just hope they do pass a law that requires Drug testing and possibly a photo ID on the card maybe even being choosy on only healthy food that you buy.
this abuse with the LINK is getting out of control. AND do you all know you can buy a cake made to order from the bakery too.
I don't disagree with the original poster here at all! People give money to Japan because it makes them feel better about themselves. Yet we have kids in East Central Illinois who don't get enough food, don't have warm enough coats, and don't have decent shoes to wear. While it is noble to try to aid everyone else in the world, we should be taking care of our closer neighbors first.
But we don't do that, because giving to a food pantry in Urbana isn't as "hip" as texting $10 to Japan relief. We already give plenty of money to Japan (and Haiti et al.) simply by paying our taxes every year. The billions in aid that our government is going to give to Japan to help rebuild is going to make a much bigger difference than the $20 that could go a long way at a local food pantry.
But keep giving to Japan instead, if it makes you feel better about yourself.
Many good comments here! Mostly I agree with mendys' first -- who do YOU actually know who doesn't truly get enough food? Ever watch holiday news-clips of the long food-basket lines waiting for boxes of free turkeys and trimmings? Not too many of those takers LOOK like they've ever missed a meal. And yes, "food insecurity"? -- who comes up with these daft euphemisms and "studies" that we're all supposed to uphold with a serious face?
Finding sustenance is the most primal of instincts, supposedly to keep one "fighting fit" in the struggle for survival. Thank heavens most of us don't have to forage anywhere except at stores or restaurants, but I'm not sure that allowing for bigger "free public feeding troughs" helps anyone survive. The obesity "epidemic" certainly doesn't bode well for our species. Go to an all-you-can-eat buffet and take note.
Speaking of distended, I'm glad mahometmom points out that $2.39 cost per person per meal is somewhat bloated. Apparently some haven't heard of ramen noodles -- six packets for a dollar, cheap! So are tomato plant SEEDS. But then, they both require some degree of self-discipline and EFFORT to become edible. And kirk-pabst does well to point out that healthful food need not be more expensive than easy-pre-made-quick-to-gobble stuff.
What's become of the notions of self-reliance or "make do" with less? Or even the motto "Eat Light, Be Bright!"? Seems to me that rather than actual indigence or inability to afford food, the overriding problem in our social-services-coddled country is the rampant growth of easy greed, gluttony and irresponsibility (self-incapacitation though drugs, booze, sloth, or an entitlement mentality).
My cynicism of course doesn't extend to the aged, infirm or those who legitimately can't shop, cook or fend for themselves. I'm not hard-hearted or uncharitable, and certainly no child should ever have to go hungry in this land of bounty. But I do wonder about all this alleged "need" and those who are quick to throw nonexistent tax-money at it. For example, who determines which students "must" take home backpacks of food from their schools or "go without anything to eat over the weekend." Granted, growling bellies in class don't aid growing minds, but should it REALLY be the job of a school to feed those bellies AWAY from school? Isn't that simply encouraging unfit parents to abdicate their most basic of responsibilities?
And isn't THAT the core of the whole problem? Too many mouths to feed?
Received a text today that said GE, General Electric had no taxes to pay the government for 2010. That would suggest tax dollars spent on Unemployment, Snap and WIC are both less costly and a means of limited income as a temporary path to sustaining the unemployed, Obama pledges to consider changing corporate tax law. Two plus years into his term and they just now notice how no or little taxes corporations are paying and making money to keep america unemployed by way of the elected law makers/legislatures. What political parties put this scenario in play? And Wisconsin Walker and several other states move to bust union died for rights egregiously remembered today marking the anniversary of a textile fire in New York City, (Triangle Factory Fire), killing 128 non-union women workers burned alive or jumping to their deaths to escape corporate greed induced slavery. Nothing has changed. It is the same stuff and a different day. Welcome to America. Its time to wake up.
Excellent previous comment. The country is rapidly becoming two groups. The poor, and the middle class are becoming the same. The top 5% are becoming more noticeable in their greed. This will lead to their own destruction if reforms are not made. The middle class is losing it's dream of home ownership, retirement saving, providing a competitive education for it's children, and maintaining the basic living costs. Other countries in history saw the same scenario which brought about enraged society change. More union busting, outsourcing, reduced public services due to unequal taxation, less jobs other than service industry jobs, minimum wage employment, and loss of hope by the young will bring about a storm that cannot be stopped. It only takes one martyred hero, and one demonstration. The Arab Revolt, and London's riot can happen here also. It would be better to make the reforms now. What delays the reforms are the best politicians that money can buy.
You surprise me saying these can only be liberally connected. Its the reality of business. Business that can be made profitable, less profitable, use new technologies or opt to use more manual labor creating more jobs. Within this line of latitude exist the lobbyist which fund the campaigns and gifts of the law making legislatures demonstrating who currently has the power to influence politicians to their view as obviously the legislatures have no moral code, guidance or ethics when drawing a line of protocol for Americans.
What is done in corporate america trickles down to the common citizen/working person. You address the issue of SNAP, Unemployment and WIC as do you know anyone starving? Yes, many americans looking for work. Starving for paychecks, opportunity to prosper, health insurance, life insurance, etc. You say starving and I see much more than just obese, food insecure and isolated cases, I see all which applies when considering what people need though in this article it is selectively and intentionally avoided by discussing only food rather than all which applies to basic necessities which includes prosperity, health insurance, law makers, their influence on quality of life or lack of, morality and so on. Take the blinders off and see the whole picture.
Comments
News-Gazette.com embraces discussion of both community and world issues. We welcome you to contribute your ideas, opinions and comments, but we ask that you avoid personal attacks, vulgarity and hate speech. We reserve the right to remove any comment at our discretion, and we will block repeat offenders' accounts. To post comments, you must first be a registered user, and your username will appear with any comment you post. Happy posting.