Feeding Children Rather Than Campaign Consultants

           “Unparalleled”, “historic”, “staggering” were the words used by the press to describe the plan of the Koch brothers political network to spend $889 million to ensure a conservative results in the 2016 elections. @ http://tinyurl.com/k8dmjxk

            These same words used to characterize unprecedented political influence might also apply to the unprecedented number of Americans who have been economically and politically marginalized: 46.5 million on SNAP food stamps, 45 million below the poverty line for the third year in a row, child poverty rates near 20%.  Unparalleled, historic, staggering.

Most of the reporting has analyzed the projected gap between liberal and conservative spending, and between private spending and that of the major parties themselves. But it is also worth speculating on the amount of good that could be done if such financial support were targeted to the urgent human need of many in America today

Once active in presidential politics, but now working in the nonprofit sector to end hunger, I’m dismayed by the corrosive impact of such special interest spending (legal though it may be under current Supreme Court rulings.) But at least there’s some consolation in feeding America’s hungry children rather than feeding campaign consultants which is probably the first and perhaps most immediate byproduct of the Koch Bros lavish spending.

Seizing the Moment: An Emerging Consensus to Make Poverty a National Priority

Politico reported yesterday that if Mitt Romney runs for president again he will make poverty one of the three pillars of his campaign (the middle class and foreign policy being the other two.) Ohio’s re-elected Republican Governor John Kasich said that in his second term he would renew his call to help “people in the shadows”.  Jeb Bush is talking about income inequality and those who believe “the American dream is now out of their reach.”

            The media will view all of this as political positioning. Democrats will reflexively find fault.  Many of my anti-hunger colleagues will be cynical and dismissive. But this is a moment in time too important to treat casually or caustically.

If the first responsibility of anti-poverty and anti-hunger advocates is to the poor and struggling Americans we exist to serve, then we have a responsibility to seize this moment and treat it anew. 

We should be reaching out to national Republican leaders and sharing with them what their statehouse colleagues like Governor Sandoval in Nevada or Governor Snyder in Michigan have done to promote increased school breakfast participation.  We should be generous in sharing advice and policy ideas for programs that work.  Most of all we should be listening with open hearts and open minds to see if there is an authentic opportunity to work together.

While we know there will be deep disagreements about the best means to the end, the fact that there is an emerging consensus to treat poverty and inequality as a national priority is a huge step forward. If a new door is opening, even if only a crack, who knows what kind of breeze might blow through?   

We may someday soon look back on this as nothing more than lip service. But even lip service about poverty has been all too lacking.  At least for this week, Governors Romney, Kasich and Bush are giving voice to something other than politics-as-usual. Let’s makes sure that we do too.

An inspiring example for the new 114th Congress: voters investing in kids

           The 114^th Congress convenes today, constrained as usual by the conventional wisdom that Americans are frustrated and unwilling to spend their tax dollars for government programs. But such a generalization misses an encouraging yet little noted trend in American politics: voters supporting increased taxing and spending when it is (a) focused on children, (b) in their local community, and (c) in ways that represent an investment in the future with measurable return for all.

An example is last November’s ballot question in Seattle where residents voted to tax themselves to fund a $58 million pilot program to make pre-school available for low-income families. http://tinyurl.com/mab2rzw  According to the Seattle Times, the Proposition 1B levy will cost a Seattle resident with a home valued at $400,000 about $43 a year.

It was estimated that a dollar spent could yield as much as $17 dollars’ worth of return in the form of higher graduation rates, lower crime, more job creation and less welfare.  Communities in Florida, Texas, and elsewhere have taken similar steps to support children through investments in early education. 

The bipartisan support we’ve seen among governors for our No Kid Hungry campaign fits with this trend toward local support for children’s most fundamental needs.  Our work is an opportunity to create a new positive narrative American politics so desperately needs

The issue is not whether there is political will for investing in the future; it is what form such investments must take to gain the political will needed. When those investments are focused on kids, in one’s own community, with results that can be seen and measured and will ultimately benefit everyone through better educational outcomes and economic competitiveness, then partisanship dissipates and political support grows.

This small oasis of bipartisan productivity at the local level may be America’s most fertile ground for reversing the plunging confidence in government, due to partisanship, political paralysis, and the role of money in elections. If we can effectively serve those who are most vulnerable and the least responsible for the situation in which they find themselves – America’s children – we have a shot at restoring that once taken-for-granted key ingredient of the American dream - that the next generation will be better off than our own.

We must give the new Congress a chance and see what it can do. But if the reconvening of vast numbers of Congressional incumbents, dependent on PAC funding and committed to the status quo turns out to be less than inspiring, perhaps we should convene some of the local leaders who against all odds have achieved breakthroughs in their communities on behalf of Americans most voiceless kids.

Hunger during recession is tragic, during economic growth it’s an inexcusable betrayal

            During the holidays the Commerce department reported the economy grew last quarter at its fastest rate in a decade.  Economic output rose 5% over the summer. Business investment and consumer spending increased. Unemployment is steadily falling.   @ http://www.nytimes.com/2014/12/24/business/us-q3-gdp-revised-up-to-5-percent.html?src=me 

Hunger during a recession is tragic. During periods of economic growth hunger is inexcusable, a failure of our institutions and leadership, and a betrayal of the people they serve. 

A growing economy make our work both easier and harder, in these ways:

            First, corporate partners, donors, clients, and other stakeholders are in a better position to support us more generously.  We should see even stronger revenues and more resources to support our mission.

            Second, during recession and recovery, there is increased attention to those struggling with poverty and hunger.  When the economy starts to grow again, news coverage shifts to those making and spending new fortunes. Hunger is not top of mind.

            Third, even in periods of economic growth, millions of Americans are left behind. The growing economy often does not reach them.  This creates even greater responsibility during the good times to make sure America’s blessings are shared by all.

            Finally, there never seems to be a good time to act boldly on poverty in America. When the economy struggles, opponents of support for the poor ask “how are we going to pay for this?”  When the economy booms nobody wants to be distracted by negative news about poverty. That’s where we come in.  In his Christmas card this year, Rep. Jim McGovern, a great anti-hunger champion, quotes El Salvador’s assassinated Archbishop Oscar Romero: “Those who have a voice must speak for the voiceless.”   Likewise, those with strengths must share theirs, and create vehicles for others to share their strength as well.

A growing economy is a whole new ballgame. In 2015 we’ll solidify No Kid Hungry’s first phase: compelling proof of concept in key states where we’ve made substantial investment, plus inspiring results in other parts of the country.  We will lay the foundation for going from proof to scale between 2016-2020.

But because economic growth will not be even or equal, our fight is not just against hunger, but also economic injustice. Economic growth helps build a strong nation. But we can’t have a strong America with weak kids. We must not only be the voice for school breakfast and summer meals, we must be the voice that says we won’t allow bureaucracy, politics or indifference to stand between a hungry child and a healthy meal.