It's not spring yet, but think June. Children will be out of school and we will celebrate the second anniversary of the Supreme Court decision. dobbs decision, which ended guaranteed access to abortion throughout the country.
Those two events (the kids on vacation and the post-Dobbs reality) may seem unconnected. But there is a link, and it is unfortunate. Let me explain.
First, a little about Dobbs. Births have increased in all the states that rushed to ban most abortions after the green light from the judges. Republicans in those mostly red states told us not to worry because they had a new “Pro life” cause: They would provide better health care, nutrition and other support to needy women forced to give birth and their children.
opinion columnist
Jackie Calmes
Jackie Calmes brings a critical look to the national political scene. He has decades of experience covering the White House and Congress.
“We must show that being pro-life is not just about being against abortion,” Mississippi Governor Tate Reeves said on national television.
And now, as for the children during the school holidays: children from poor homes face what is called a “hunger gap in summer”. For about three months, they do not receive the free daily lunches they would receive at school, and their families are unable or unwilling to fill that gap. So President Biden and Congress created a program to provide eligible children with $40 a month ($120 total) in debit cards that households can use to buy groceries. It begins in June and is the first new federal food program of this scale in almost 50 years.
More than 30 million children could benefit. However, about a third of them will not. In 15 states, Republican governors have rejected the $2.5 billion program, even though the only cost to their states would be to pay half of the relatively small expense of administering the benefits.
Those governors' decisions leave up to 10 million children without access to the extra food that $40 a month could buy, at a time when hunger is rising, according to federal data. Meanwhile, many of those 15 governors loudly blame Biden for food prices that remain stubbornly high even as overall inflation has cooled.
As you can probably guess, almost all of the 15 free lunch supporters are also “pro-life” and apparently unconcerned, like so many Republican politicians, about demonstrating that their convictions only apply until the birth of a child. Hungry second graders? Fuhgeddaboudit.
and almost all They also represent states that are notoriously stingy when it comes to helping their poorest residents, especially women with children. The 15 are Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Idaho, Iowa, Louisiana, Mississippi, Nebraska, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont. and Wyoming.
Almost half (seven) range among the dozen U.S. states with the highest percentages of children in poverty. Reeves' Mississippi is number one, Louisiana is second, closely followed by Alabama, South Carolina, Oklahoma, Georgia and Texas. And seven (not exactly the same seven, but close) are among the 10 states that have refused to extend Medicaid eligibility to low-income individuals and families, primarily at federal expense, as established by the Affordable Care Act of 2010.
Several states that oppose summer lunches (Nebraska, Texas, Georgia and Louisiana) have the Higher rates of children facing food insecurity., according to the Department of Agriculture. About 1 in 5 children in those states do not routinely receive enough, healthy food. They are starving.
“I don't believe in well-being” saying Nebraska's number one governor, Jim Pillen, explaining his decision to reject the feds' program. When a bipartisan group of state lawmakers proposed forcing the state to accept the $18 million in benefits for about 150,000 children, Pillen bent: “Giving out money is not enough to meet the needs of children [sic] needs,” he wrote. “They need a lot more. … A hand up, not a handout.”
I understand? Because federal aid won't solve all the problems poor kids have, Nebraska doesn't want a little lunch money. Pillen's lack of logic reminds me of that of the House Republicans. meaningless rejection of the Senate's bipartisan border legislation this month: It didn't solve everything, so they decided to do nothing. Let the perfect be the enemy of the good.
Iowa Gov. Kim Reynolds offered her own unpleasant take on the summer program when the state announced it would not participate. “It does nothing to promote nutrition at a time when childhood obesity has become an epidemic,” she said.
Because, of course, no one eligible for a government food program can be trusted be responsible enough to buy fruits, eggs, vegetables and whole grain breads.
Reynolds and other governors noted that their states already have private food pantries and nonprofit groups that serve the poor, so to speak. Never mind that those charities are chronically under-resourced and desperate for a local, state, or federal hand.
Additionally, anti-hunger advocates have long pushed for what the program offers, a summer option that brings food aid directly to low-income families, so they don't always have to go to sometimes distant places to get food. and meals. One study showed that six out of seven children in need miss out on meals because distribution sites are hard to reach.
The feds are offering only a partial remedy for malnutrition, not a solution to hunger, of course. But state “leaders” who don’t accept it are failing the most vulnerable. constituents.
And once again, Republicans are mocking his post-Dobbs promise to give new meaning to “pro-life.”
