Caring for the poor - a human responsibility: echo opinion

A generous person will prosper; whoever refreshes others will be refreshed.

— Proverbs 11:25

SNAP - putting food on the table an echo opinion by Dustin Pugel

Published in the Kentucky newspaper - The State Journal

(MaineWriter opinion - Right wing Christians including those who call themselves "Evangelicals" are quick to support Donald Trump but they are silent about his cruel policies opposing programs that help the poor.)

In the 2018 holiday season, as Kentuckians (and Americans) celebrate with friends and family around the table, we must also remember the impact policy choices are having on one of the best tools we have to ensure we all get enough to eat.

The federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), formerly known as food stamps, plays a critical role in improving the health and well-being of 580,000 Kentuckians, including workers, children, seniors and 23,000 veterans. According to Feeding America, SNAP provides 12 meals for every one meal the network’s food banks provide. And, though relatively modest — SNAP supplements Kentuckians’ food budget with an average of $1.36 per person, per meal — it goes a long way to help prevent hunger and its consequences.

SNAP doesn’t just provide nutrition; it is also one of the best anti-poverty programs we have. In Kentucky alone, SNAP keeps 164,000 of us out of poverty, including 73,000 children. It also helps our economy. In 2017, the federal government injected $933 million into local Kentucky economies through SNAP. And, by reducing food insecurity, SNAP keeps us healthier, too. Research shows that people who are food insecure are likelier to have a chronic disease such as heart disease, cancer or diabetes.

Despite all of these benefits, the state has erected new barriers to SNAP participation in recent months. As a result, between May and September of this year, more than 10,000 adults lost food assistance after three months of not being able to prove they worked enough hours. Many of them live in “labor surplus areas,” communities with more people who need work than there are jobs. Some face discriminatory barriers to employment or work in low-wage industries where consistent hours are hard to come by. A significant number of those losing coverage were likely unclear about the new paperwork requirements they had to meet.

As time goes by, the number of people who cannot surmount the state’s new barriers is likely to rise, leading to more and more people losing nutrition assistance. Until this year, the state routinely waived time limits for communities facing economic challenges. It should return to the practice of doing so.

At the same time the state is kicking people off SNAP, Congress is working to finalize the Farm Bill — landmark legislation that is passed every five years and funds SNAP and other priorities. With many Americans and Kentuckians left behind in the slow recovery from the Great Recession, it’s crucial that lawmakers pass a Farm Bill that protects and strengthens SNAP — along the lines of what the Senate passed earlier this year — and avoid the harmful cuts to SNAP included in the House version. U.S. Rep. James Comer and Sen. Mitch McConnell of Kentucky serve on the conference committee that will decide the fate of SNAP soon. They should recognize the vital role SNAP plays in the commonwealth among their constituents and in our economy.

Many Kentuckians (and Americans) will donate food, serve in soup kitchens and take meals to neighbors in the coming weeks. Many will give even when it feels difficult financially to do so. This generosity strengthens our communities, but we can’t fight hunger through charity alone. We also need our lawmakers, both state and federal, to protect and strengthen SNAP. 

As we give thanks this season, let’s ensure all families can put food on the table.

Dustin Pugel is a policy analyst with the Kentucky Center for Economic Policy.

US Supreme Court has a chance to prove there's a right wing war on women - or not

It's surreal to be blogging about how the US Supreme Court is asked to rule on a woman's right to access reproductive health care. After eons of being at the whim of men's sexual freedom, women finally achieved reproductive choice, only to have right wing zealots challenge this hard won right.

This incredible assault on women's right to contraception came about because right wing conservative religious groups want to flex their political might. This is an expensive way to challenge government health care. It's disappointing to see the Supreme Court dragged into the decision, about whether or not corporations have religious liberty and thereby are exempt from paying for contraception. If the Supreme Court protects a corporation's right to religious freedom, this incredulous ruling will undoubtedly open a Pandora's box of other claims to undermine the rights of people who don't happen to agree with religious zealots.  As with the Citizens United ruling, whereby corporations now have free speech rights, the idea that these concrete organizations would also have religious freedom is even more ludicrous.  

Freedom's are gifted to human beings with souls - corporations have no souls and, therefore, should not be considered to have human properties. I suspect the US Supreme Court needs a very urgent course on the properties of the Homo sapiens human species. We members of this animal group, have souls. Corporations do not.

Religious liberty was never intended to trump individual rights. After all, even the Bible supports the gift of free will as a divine gift to all mankind. (Proverbs 16:9 - The heart of a man plans his way but the Lord establishes his steps.)

Nevertheless, if the US Supreme Court wants to validate the right wing's war on women, all they need do is support the claim of corporations to prevent health coverage for contraception. My hope is, the Supreme Court will rule against corporations and in favor of the individuals, in support of coverage for contraception. But, if this ruling goes right wing, perhaps it will wake women up, those who are ambiguous about their rights to reproductive health care, feeling it might always be there for them. A right wing ruling in favor of corporations will have the unintended benefit of putting every right wing Republican on notice that women will vote them all out of office! But, let's hope the US Supreme Court will protect humans over corporations and not create another Citizens United fiasco.