Sunday, July 29, 2007
enlarge
Staff photo by Jim Evans
enlarge
Staff graphic by Sharon Woodfrom the Kennebec Journal
Sport of Kings
New Medicaid billing system inspires doubts among some
Christmas spirit
Guidance counselor: Dismiss complaint based on criticism of same-sex marriage
CHELSEA: 'Practice burn' provides thrill for 9-year-old
Trust eyes orchard purchase
GOLFER OF THE YEAR: Bonenfant rises up Cony ranks
YOUTH SOCCER: Local team gives 'care package' to children in Afghanistan
All of today's:
News | Sports
from the Kennebec Journal
from the Morning Sentinel
YES ON 1 BACKER REBUTS CLAIM
New system for Medicaid payments worries providers
After petition drive, Clinton police force budget will go a third time before voters
A rock musician makes trip home via Black Taxi
MADISON: After revaluation, abatement requests reviewed
Parks to have facelift
GOLFER OF THE YEAR: Sweet does job for Madison
YOUTH SOCCER: Local team gives 'care package' to children in Afghanistan
All of today's:
News | Sports
from the Morning Sentinel
Seventh in a 7-day series
For I was hungry, and ye gave me food: I was thirsty, and ye gave me drink: I was a stranger, and ye took me in. –Matthew 25: 35-40
Whether our motivation is religious or secular, spiritual or pragmatic, we must feed those among us who are hungry.
They are many.
They are our neighbors, our friends, our co-workers, our family.
They are our children and our parents.
They are strangers.
All deserve our compassion and our action.
Why?
Choose your justification:
From a biblical perspective, all who are hungry are the children of God, first among equals and more deserving because of their suffering.
From a political perspective, the hungry cannot achieve the promise of America — “Life, Liberty and the pursuit of Happiness.” To be hungry is to live an incomplete life, to be enslaved to one’s most basic need, to be sad and defeated and lacking in dignity.
That is not the promise of America.
From a pragmatic perspective, hungry children, hungry workers, hungry seniors and hungry veterans cost us money. Hungry children don’t learn well, hungry workers don’t perform well, hungry seniors and veterans get sick and need to be taken care of, often with our tax dollars.
That’s not sentiment speaking: A recent study by researchers at the Harvard School of Public Health puts the cost of hunger to the nation at a minimum of $90 billion a year in reduced workplace productivity, health-care costs and charitable donations. Lead author J. Larry Brown concluded: “It costs many times more to maintain the problem than to actually end hunger.”
And from a moral perspective, it is wrong to allow hunger among us. It is unacceptable that in this country of plenty, there are many who are not ensured the fundamental human right to adequate nourishment.
In this series, we have brought you the faces of hunger in Maine. They are not the faces of an alien tribe in our midst. The only difference between the hungry and those who are not is that the hungry don’t have enough food.
Our purpose in this investigation has been to help Mainers understand how pervasive hunger is — and how hidden. In its very ordinariness, its wholesale acceptance by us as a fact of life, hunger is a rebuke to our morality.
We must become intolerant of hunger. It must become as dreaded as high taxes, as repulsive as sexual predators, as reviled as terrorism. It must become as unacceptable as all the other things we rail against daily. But first, we must resolve among ourselves to see hunger, to count it, to take its full measure and respond to it wholly and in a sustained way — not simply by pitching a quarter into a donation jar.
And then, once we understand how pervasive hunger is in Maine, we must act. Specifically:
The state should mandate that all schools that serve reduced-price and free lunch also offer reduced-price and free breakfast.
The state must effectively promote the school breakfast program so that the percentage of students getting free and reduced price breakfast doubles.
The federal government should change the standard deduction used in calculating food stamp benefits, which keeps benefits at a ludicrous $1 per meal average benefit per person. That would increase monthly benefits by $24 to an average household of three or fewer members.
The federal government must raise the cutoff level for food stamp eligibility to allow benefits for those working their way out of dependence on the program.
These are modest, but essential, moves that should be taken to begin the end of hunger in Maine.
Much more will need to be done over many years and across a much bigger landscape. Making higher education more affordable and accessible, accomplishing economic development in some of our must rural and hard-hit areas, retooling our public assistance programs to reward, not punish, initiative — these are all long-term initiatives that should, ultimately, bear fruit. But the very largeness of the task should not force us into willful blindness to the things we can and must do immediately.
What about the cost to Maine taxpayers of ending hunger in our state? Isn’t there consensus that Maine spends more than it can afford now on human service programs?
In many respects, we agree with these rhetorical sentiments. And this newspaper has and will continue to argue for a combination of reduced public spending in some areas, and greater investment in areas that promise long-term prosperity for every Mainer.
But no one can make progress when they don’t know where their next meal will come from. The cost of immediate and effective action to stem hunger in Maine is not so great, especially if the economic and moral cost to our entire society of not doing it is greater.
In the end, this issue is not simply about the hungry among us. There is an Old Testament verse in Isaiah that speaks to the task before us:
“If you offer yourself to the hungry, and satisfy the afflicted one, then your light will shine in the darkness, and your night will be like noonday.”
Hunger is a terrible scourge that is allowed to continue because it lives in the shameful shadow regions of our lives. We must force it into the light — where it cannot survive.
Reader comments
Sort by: Oldest first | Newest First
previous page | next page1-10 of 33 comments:
Well written, well reported, great job!
It appears there has been some negative feedback to the story, it also appears these people weren't raised to help your fellow man.
Hunger is everywhere, when are some of you going to step up.
I am college educated, great job, supportive family...and I still had to seek food assistance in my earlier days. It was degrading that I had to show people I needed help, but I did it to survive. Now I am successful and have the ability to give back, financially and by volunteering.
This article exposed the truth about the "working poor" in Maine, well done. There are many that don't want a handout, they are hardworking but can't get by in this society.
Kudos KJ!
One thing everyone can do is stop talking and start doing: support your local food assistance program(pantries, kitchen, shelters), support the state's top notch food bank, the Good Shepherd Food Bank, support your local farms by growing or buying a row for your local pantry or the state's food bank.
I can't say again how wonderful the series is, thank you, thank you, thank you.report abuse
Its very hard to be hungry, really hungry, and walk down the road and smell mcdonalds or chinese food. it makes your stomache hurt. I would rather see the food benefits increased than any other benefit. These articles say poor diet leads to other health issues that taxpayers pay for. Pay the extra in food and save possibly millions in health care later. report abuse
I have disabilities and so my garden is a raised bed and small enough for me to work in it. Yet I can produce some vegetables to supplement my food choices and budget. report abuse
Why people become so mad is understandable; most people barely make ends meet with two good paying jobs due to the cost of basic necessities; food, gas, shelter, medicine, and we are taxed to the hilt as it is now. People can not support higher taxes. The answer to giving more money is simple but not pragmatic - cut government spending in other areas. Defense spending seems the most logical, but when you propose that you are called a communist or anti-american, or worse! We do not need hundreds of nuclear ballistic missiles in today's world - and I can not envision ever needing so many, as it is assured self-anniliation if we used them, and the deterrent is the same with 50 as it is with hundreds, right? Another argument of folks is to lower or lessen the tax burden on big business or upper income folks, as that gives incentive to produce more goods, which creates higher paying jobs, right? Well, we have been trying this for the past two decades or more, and it HAS NOT WORKED! No more tax breaks for the wealthy. I understand that these folks have worked hard in some cases to become wealthy, but we need to do SOMETHING! Finally, no social security payments to the wealthy, regardless of whether or not they earned it - they don't need it! That saves billions alone. Feeds a lot of people!report abuse
The purpose of taxes is that we all share the costs of upkeep in this country. Taxes pay for new bridges, street lights, the fire department, social services, and much more.
Every time a billionaire gets his tax bill cut (or eliminated) by Bush or any other president, somebody else has to pay his share--that somebody is us.
We're all doing our best to help the billionaires, so we keep cutting public services and then we snipe at the poor. God forbid we should make billionaires pay their fair share.
Just keep in mind that every time we attack somebody for buying more or better food with food stamps than we'd like them to, a billionaire is looking down on us and chuckling. report abuse
previous page | next page
You must be a registered user of MaineToday.com to post a comment. Register or log in.