Speaker 1: Citizen Chef is a production of I Heart Radio. Hey everybody,
Speaker 1: Tom Felicio here and welcome back to Citizen Chef. You know,
Speaker 1: feeding people has always been my passion, and therefore I
Speaker 1: have been an advocate for fighting for food and security.
Speaker 1: And yes, people come to my restaurant and they spend
Speaker 1: a lot of money to eat, but I'm talking about
Speaker 1: fighting for people who are struggling to put food on
Speaker 1: the table. Healthy food is a basic necessity for survival.
Speaker 1: It brings families together, it brings joy. You know, think
Speaker 1: about when we celebrate holidays, and let's think about the
Speaker 1: importance of just sitting around a table and sharing a
Speaker 1: meal with your family. Every night. You get to on wine,
Speaker 1: you get to talk about the day. Well, what if
Speaker 1: you didn't have food to put on that table. How
Speaker 1: would you feel as a parent if all of a
Speaker 1: sudden you found yourself out of work and you were
Speaker 1: struggling to feed your family. You know, parents are out
Speaker 1: there right now skipping meals so their kids could eat.
Speaker 1: So this is something that really I think is is
Speaker 1: a basic necessity for so many people. Um and uh
Speaker 1: and and people are struggling. So this is why I
Speaker 1: was really excited to hear some truly historic news that
Speaker 1: the Department of Agriculture has made the largest permanent increase
Speaker 1: to the SNAP benefits since And if you listen to
Speaker 1: our episode with Dr Kathleen American, you'll remember that SNAP
Speaker 1: is the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program and it helps millions
Speaker 1: Americans across the country get food on their tables. And
Speaker 1: so what is really exciting is that we have reevaluated
Speaker 1: the types of foods that can be included in the program.
Speaker 1: Americans now have, uh they can make healthier choices on
Speaker 1: what they're feeding their family. Listen, this is it's it's
Speaker 1: a huge change and and uh so I want to
Speaker 1: turn to the experts to talk about this. So today
Speaker 1: we're talking to SNAP expert Ellen Volinger. Ellen is the
Speaker 1: legal director of frak Are, the Food Research Action Center,
Speaker 1: and their state admission is to eradicate poverty related hunger
Speaker 1: and under nutrition in the United States. And they do
Speaker 1: that through research, advocacy, and by consulting with everyone who
Speaker 1: actually creates policy, but also those people who are receiving
Speaker 1: the benefits as well. They're talking to the people who
Speaker 1: certainly need a place at the table. And Ellen herself
Speaker 1: is responsible for directing fract's advocacy on behalf of SNAP,
Speaker 1: So there is no one better to talk about how
Speaker 1: these changes came to be and why are They're welcome
Speaker 1: changes to the anti hunger advocates and so welcome to
Speaker 1: the program. Ellen volunteer, Hello, Hey, how you doing okay?
Speaker 1: Thanks so much for doing this and having me on
Speaker 1: so Ellen listen. UM, I wanted to talk to you
Speaker 1: because I guess what's happened recently is fairly historic. UM.
Speaker 1: And UH for our our listeners, UM that don't know. UM,
Speaker 1: the SNAP program, Uh, the supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, which
Speaker 1: I would actually wish they would get rid of the
Speaker 1: supplemental and just turn into the NAP program, the Nutrition
Speaker 1: Assistance program. Uh. Finally we were making some headways after
Speaker 1: years and years of the benefits pretty much staying the
Speaker 1: same for a long time. UM, we finally had some
Speaker 1: big changes. And it's it's a technical change that I
Speaker 1: really thought it would be interesting for people to understand
Speaker 1: how we actually calculate SNAP benefits. And there's something called
Speaker 1: the food plan, and there's there's three three pieces of
Speaker 1: that plan. There's a thrifty, there's the low, and then
Speaker 1: there's the jump right here now because I'm forgetting what
Speaker 1: the third one is. But we made some change to
Speaker 1: this plan, and that's actually putting more money into people's
Speaker 1: pockets to purchase food. So can can you explain to
Speaker 1: us what the the what really happened to the thrifty
Speaker 1: Food Plan and where the changes are and what it's
Speaker 1: gonna how it's gonna make a difference for so many
Speaker 1: people who are struggling to put food on the table. Yeah, no,
Speaker 1: and Tom, thank you so much for having us. And
Speaker 1: you certainly are a leader in the effort to end
Speaker 1: hunger in American You were already aware even before COVID
Speaker 1: nineteen how much hunger existed in the United States. Um.
Speaker 1: And one of the pieces of inadequacy of being able
Speaker 1: to afford food and being hungry is that snap which
Speaker 1: is the most fundamental of the federal government's anti hunger programs,
Speaker 1: the Supplement of Nutrition Assistance program, as you said, it
Speaker 1: used to be called food stands. It's the program that's
Speaker 1: available to all kinds of of Americans and it's designed
Speaker 1: to help them afford a basic diet. When it was designed,
Speaker 1: the government picked one of its food plants. It has
Speaker 1: little different grades of food plants and it picked the
Speaker 1: most meager one called the Thrifty Food Plan. Just so
Speaker 1: people know. So this food plan is used for various things.
Speaker 1: I mean number one is used to calculate the amount
Speaker 1: of alimony someone has to pay for child support. It's
Speaker 1: also used how to calculate how many calories are are
Speaker 1: service members need to know to survive, especially when they're fighting.
Speaker 1: So it's it's used for a lot of different things,
Speaker 1: not just food. Well, the different levels are that's acceptive
Speaker 1: of food plan, but unfortunately for UM purposes of adequacy
Speaker 1: of benefits for SNAP, the government has chosen for decades
Speaker 1: now the very lowest wrung and it's that thrifty Food
Speaker 1: Plan that's used only for SNAP. Really that UM you know,
Speaker 1: it's only used for emergency food and SNAP. It's not
Speaker 1: what's used these other needs. But it was still supposed
Speaker 1: to provide lower income Americans with UM a food package
Speaker 1: that they could afford based on SNAP beat with SNAP benefits.
Speaker 1: So when SNAP is calculated, the government looks to what
Speaker 1: it costs to purchase the Thrifty Food Plan. It's a
Speaker 1: it's a market basket. It's actually good government puts together
Speaker 1: a set of different goods that are supposed to meet
Speaker 1: americans dietary needs, they're supposed to be within a lower
Speaker 1: range of cost, and that was done decades ago. Over
Speaker 1: the years, as the government has change things to do
Speaker 1: with the dietary guidelines, as Americans are shopping and preparing
Speaker 1: food differently, even if they're not as good at preparing
Speaker 1: it as you are, jub, people all have changed how
Speaker 1: they're preparing food, and the time that they have to
Speaker 1: do it is very different from what it was decades ago.
Speaker 1: Especially with so many working families and um to two
Speaker 1: parent working families, time constraint is a real problem. And
Speaker 1: over the years, the Thrifty Food Plan was not really
Speaker 1: adjusted fully to take into account all those realities. Instead,
Speaker 1: people who were reviewing it to see whether there should
Speaker 1: be changes to it would feel that they needed to
Speaker 1: do it within the amount of money that was spent
Speaker 1: on the on the then existing package, a little bit
Speaker 1: of inflation adjustment, but largely just basically within working within
Speaker 1: those confines. And what is so a significant about what
Speaker 1: has happened with this USDA review. It was directed to
Speaker 1: be done by Congress in in a bipartisan bill, but
Speaker 1: it's been undertaken by the Biden Harris U s d A.
Speaker 1: What's so historic about it is that for the first
Speaker 1: time after this food plan was set up, they actually
Speaker 1: asked the question, what would it take for Americans now
Speaker 1: to be able to have a lower kind of um
Speaker 1: food cost package that would be more meaningful when it
Speaker 1: comes to healthier food options, things that reflect what we've
Speaker 1: learned about changes in the dietary guidelines and what we've
Speaker 1: learned about how people shop and prepare food, and then
Speaker 1: answer the question, this is what it costs, as opposed
Speaker 1: to starting out with, well, we've we've got this certain costs.
Speaker 1: Let's see what we do within it. And that is
Speaker 1: a game changer. It's a fresh look and they should
Speaker 1: be congratulated from doing it right. So let's clarify Pea
Speaker 1: thles here. So one, uh, this was again mandated under
Speaker 1: the last truck me if I'm wrong, I believe the
Speaker 1: last Farm Bill, where changes could have been taken up
Speaker 1: by the U. S d A, you know, alatly by
Speaker 1: the U. S d A. And under Trump's administration, sunny
Speaker 1: produces completely ignored. Well, we just chose not to address
Speaker 1: at all. We don't know what they were doing behind
Speaker 1: this well, of course, right, but but we have no
Speaker 1: evidence that they were on this path or that they
Speaker 1: were going to meet the deadline. Congress had told them
Speaker 1: to get this done by two and so the Biden
Speaker 1: administration is very much on time with this. It's an
Speaker 1: overdoe when you think about the kind of reviews that
Speaker 1: were really needed over decades. This is overdue in that sense,
Speaker 1: but it's right on time in terms of what Congress
Speaker 1: told them to get done by two And wasn't that
Speaker 1: bipartisan past um farm bill. So yes, it's um it's
Speaker 1: very well needed. And I would say that you know,
Speaker 1: they looked to scientific evidence when they made the change.
Speaker 1: That's what Congress asked them to do. They asked them
Speaker 1: to do an evaluation. They looked at that. They also
Speaker 1: to I think the researchers credits also looked to the
Speaker 1: input of snap participants who frankly are as well um
Speaker 1: situated to tell us all what constraints they're under in
Speaker 1: trying to be able to obtain this diet that we
Speaker 1: would want to make sure people have the opportunity to get.
Speaker 1: So again, they they they've made up a change that's
Speaker 1: a much more realistic mix of healthier options that can
Speaker 1: be prepared by working families who may be short on time,
Speaker 1: as we all are, right, And so I'll go back
Speaker 1: to that time piece because and correct me if I'm wrong,
Speaker 1: but I believe that, and this is why the time
Speaker 1: piece is so important. The assumption was that if you
Speaker 1: were on food assistance, you weren't working. Therefore you had
Speaker 1: thirteen hours a week to prepare food, where I think
Speaker 1: the average household really only spends about seven and seven
Speaker 1: and a half hours a week preparing food. But the
Speaker 1: assumption was because you needed assistance, you weren't working, therefore
Speaker 1: you had a lot more time, and therefore you can
Speaker 1: buy things that weren't prepared already. Creates shortcuts and is
Speaker 1: that roughly yeah, yeah, I think you know absolutely. The
Speaker 1: the the assumptions behind the original food plan really don't
Speaker 1: reflect how Americans live today. For who the snap participant
Speaker 1: is so many now and we know now the majority
Speaker 1: is not recipients have at least one member of the
Speaker 1: family work, if they're they're working, if they're working age, yes, yes, absolutely,
Speaker 1: and and so yeah, very outdated assumptions. Assumptions about you know,
Speaker 1: your transportation, your ability to buy in bulk, your ability
Speaker 1: to store what facilities might have just very unrealistic in
Speaker 1: terms of, um, where are we now what would a
Speaker 1: modern look be? And so that's really what USDA tackled.
Speaker 1: And again we we think that they you know, they
Speaker 1: got it right. Yeah, and we know that you know,
Speaker 1: for years, if you've heard the stories of you knew
Speaker 1: that SNAP dollars weren't actually in use at the end
Speaker 1: of the month. There were stories or people who would
Speaker 1: line up the first day of the month and when
Speaker 1: their benefits got replenished, on their on their on their car,
Speaker 1: lining up at the grocery store the first month to
Speaker 1: go out and buy food because there was just nothing
Speaker 1: left in the refrigerator. And uh so, yeah, so we've
Speaker 1: known for a long time that that there wasn't adequate dollars.
Speaker 1: So let's let's get let's get to the dollars here
Speaker 1: for a second, because I think there's also something that's
Speaker 1: very misleading. So U a couple of things happened since
Speaker 1: the pandemic uh UM. Snap was increased because of the
Speaker 1: pandemic UM, but then this was an additional increase and
Speaker 1: so what what I know there's numbers out there that
Speaker 1: sound like very big numbers in terms of the percentage
Speaker 1: that was added to the SNAP program, and that percentage
Speaker 1: was was that correct, So the the increase in the
Speaker 1: value of the Thirsty Food Plan was about roughly that.
Speaker 1: But um, you know, I think the thing that throws
Speaker 1: people off when they hear the percentages is that they're
Speaker 1: thinking about a program um and they're thinking about what
Speaker 1: the aggregate spending. It's They're often hearing about billions of dollars,
Speaker 1: and I think for them to I think see it
Speaker 1: in perspective before the pandemic, before there were these temporary boosts,
Speaker 1: and is one of those boosts. But there's even more
Speaker 1: impactful boost that's called emergency allotments. It was done that
Speaker 1: also will be ending at some point. Before those boosts,
Speaker 1: SNAP benefits only averaged about four dollars a person a day.
Speaker 1: That's that little more than that. That's about what it
Speaker 1: was the mass about. Yeah, I mean, it's it's it's right.
Speaker 1: So this change is going to make the benefits better.
Speaker 1: It's a more you know, it's more in line with
Speaker 1: what the Thrifty Food Plans should be, but it is
Speaker 1: still not going to give SNAP households um a tremendous
Speaker 1: increase because when those temporary boost expire, and some of
Speaker 1: them are expiring very soon and others won't be too
Speaker 1: far behind. Then when you compare the difference in step
Speaker 1: benefits pre this scripty food plan change, you know, it's
Speaker 1: very very very modest. It's going to get them, uh,
Speaker 1: somewhere close to, you know, a little more than five
Speaker 1: dollars a day, I think around a person to day,
Speaker 1: which and again that's with a decimal point between the
Speaker 1: two and the nine. They're not a lot of zeros
Speaker 1: when you when you're looking at it from the perspective
Speaker 1: of one snap household, they don't see all these zeros
Speaker 1: that show up. And so when you've got a very
Speaker 1: low benefit and you make any kind of a meaningful increase,
Speaker 1: it's gonna sound like a big percentage. And that's because
Speaker 1: the reviewers who did reviews prior to this administration's evaluation,
Speaker 1: we're playing within that same package size that they were
Speaker 1: given and for decades never moved beyond that package size.
Speaker 1: They never really adjusted. They just said, well, what can
Speaker 1: we do within the constraints of kind of the existing
Speaker 1: type of package and what that general cost is. The
Speaker 1: buying administration did have a cost lens in the sense
Speaker 1: that even this package looks at a set of foods
Speaker 1: that are lower cost there, you know, but it's a
Speaker 1: broader range and a much better mix of healthier options,
Speaker 1: and also one that does take into account the way
Speaker 1: people shop and prepare and their times and strengths. Can
Speaker 1: you walk us through with that basket? Looks like is
Speaker 1: that's the other thing? I think there's a misconception. And
Speaker 1: you know, again you see these stories on on Fox
Speaker 1: about people buying lobster tails they're snapped dollars and things
Speaker 1: like that. Yeah. No, um, you know, people people on
Speaker 1: on a thrifty food plan plan, you know, should have
Speaker 1: um access to a range of products. But with the
Speaker 1: old plan some some of the way it worked out. Yes,
Speaker 1: she was part of the old Thrifty Food Plan, but
Speaker 1: it was something on the order of two ounces for
Speaker 1: a household for a week or something. I mean, very
Speaker 1: very little amounts on some of the things that you
Speaker 1: would take for granted would be a piece of a diet.
Speaker 1: And of course, as people's and you mentioned this Toime,
Speaker 1: as people had their benefits running out in a month,
Speaker 1: they were turning to emergency food um, trying to do
Speaker 1: other things to cope and often they were foregoing when
Speaker 1: they had to stretch those dollars, particularly at the end
Speaker 1: of the month. They're going with options that aren't the
Speaker 1: optimum option, aren't the healthier part of the thrifty food plan.
Speaker 1: They're going where the calories are to fill the belly.
Speaker 1: So we do know from the kind of evidence youth sided,
Speaker 1: but also a report that was released this summer by
Speaker 1: the administration that on the barriers to healthy eating for
Speaker 1: people while they're on snap. The biggest barrier cost of food.
Speaker 1: I mean, that is just um, you know, the biggie.
Speaker 1: And we know that when people have more opportunity to
Speaker 1: make the choice that is maybe lean need or the
Speaker 1: healthier proofs and vegetables, when it's a more affordable choice,
Speaker 1: that's an easier choice, that's more in reach. And this
Speaker 1: goes in that direction, doesn't go far enough for people
Speaker 1: to have everything they need, but it's a it's it's
Speaker 1: such a welcome improvement and as I say, overdoing the
Speaker 1: sense of what government should have done over decades. Yeah,
Speaker 1: it's interesting. I was I was reading about a program
Speaker 1: in Boston that started during the pandemic where people are
Speaker 1: actually we're getting direct payments. Uh, and of the money
Speaker 1: they were given were spent on foods. Yeah. And you're
Speaker 1: seeing that even now come in real time with with
Speaker 1: one of the really good things that government's got going
Speaker 1: on right now, and that is the child tax Credit
Speaker 1: that's getting benefits out of the households. And the early
Speaker 1: evidence that the Census Bureau found in terms of how
Speaker 1: people are ending those benefits, spending them on food is
Speaker 1: one of those big categories. Yeah. Right, And what was
Speaker 1: the cutting childhood hunger? We cut it in half, correct, Yes,
Speaker 1: I mean that is when you look at um and
Speaker 1: it's not just the child tax credit, but certainly that's
Speaker 1: the big driver on that when you look at the
Speaker 1: fact that there have been the boosts and snap benefits
Speaker 1: that have been making it more more possible for people
Speaker 1: to afford food during the pandemic. Again, these are separate
Speaker 1: from the way the Thrifty Food Plan operates, but separate
Speaker 1: boots that Congress enacted last year and then again this year. Uh,
Speaker 1: those have contributed. And then of course, I know you've
Speaker 1: been very following school meals and and and know quite
Speaker 1: a bit about it based on your own personal history
Speaker 1: that school meals are really important and cutting childhood hunger.
Speaker 1: And some of what government has done during this pandemic,
Speaker 1: which is to create a program called Pandemic Electronic Benefit
Speaker 1: Transfer EB that's the kind of credit card debit card
Speaker 1: technology that's used to deliver snap and if it's they've
Speaker 1: been getting snapped like benefits to many many households to
Speaker 1: help replace the value of the free school meals that
Speaker 1: kids missed when there were school closures and disruptions at
Speaker 1: at schools during COVID. So those combined are really helping,
Speaker 1: I mean right, so yeah, so let's just the listeners
Speaker 1: could put that on perspective. It's about thirty million children
Speaker 1: who used to school breakfasts and lunch program um, you know,
Speaker 1: per day, and when schools were closed, that money had
Speaker 1: to come from somewhere. Households didn't have it. They were
Speaker 1: counting on these these these children receiving breakfast and lunch
Speaker 1: at school. And so now all of a sudden, you know,
Speaker 1: parents had these children at home and they had to
Speaker 1: figure out a way to to stress their dollar even
Speaker 1: further to to put more food on the table. Um.
Speaker 1: And we see the same thing happening when there's you know,
Speaker 1: whenever there's a snow day, I automatically think that we're
Speaker 1: gonna have a problem here. In fact, when when I
Speaker 1: you know, going back to March, when I realized that
Speaker 1: schools were gonna be closed, one of the first person
Speaker 1: I called was actually Ellen Teller, who works with you, uh, Fractics, says,
Speaker 1: what are these kids are gonna do? And she said,
Speaker 1: they'll they'll be an emergency feeding program, it will be
Speaker 1: set up, it will happen, um. And so it gave
Speaker 1: me some comfort to hear that. More of my conversation
Speaker 1: with fract Legal director Ellen Voluner right after the break, well,
Speaker 1: let's talk about you know, the money. Yes, there's additional money,
Speaker 1: and that's great, but we're also looking at alone can
Speaker 1: people are facing it's called, you know, a cliff or
Speaker 1: you know, some people call it a hunger cliff. When
Speaker 1: it really has to do with benefits that are going
Speaker 1: to disappear once once they usually start moving out of SNAP,
Speaker 1: if they if they receive a job and they're no
Speaker 1: longer eligible to receive SNAP benefits. Um, everything is taken
Speaker 1: away once and and uh but typically um, you know,
Speaker 1: they're still paying back bills, they may behind on rent
Speaker 1: and things like that. But We're also facing a different
Speaker 1: kind of cliff right now because somebody benefits, including unemployment,
Speaker 1: including the UM the extra additional money because of the SNAP,
Speaker 1: it's going to go away. And so you want to
Speaker 1: talk about the cliff effects a little bit. Yeah, Yeah,
Speaker 1: we're very worried about it because these temporary boosts. There
Speaker 1: are two types in SNAP. One is called emergency allotments,
Speaker 1: and those have been very significant improvements in the size
Speaker 1: of allotments. For households that were already at the maximum
Speaker 1: benefit level since since April under the Biden administration, they've
Speaker 1: been able to get nine dollars more on their monthly allotment.
Speaker 1: But for households that were at the very lowest household
Speaker 1: that pre pre COVID would be getting sixteen dollars one
Speaker 1: six for the month, they've been able to get well
Speaker 1: over two hundred dollars. And as soon as those emergency
Speaker 1: allotments end, they will go right back down. Now, the
Speaker 1: fifteen percent boost that you mentioned has been significant, but
Speaker 1: that sunsets at the end of September. So although the
Speaker 1: thrifty food Planet Smith is not related to that, the
Speaker 1: fact that it will be in place is going to
Speaker 1: help mitigate UM that particular cliff, but it it's not
Speaker 1: going to mitigate whenever it is that these emergency allotments
Speaker 1: go away. And as you mentioned SNAP, households and people
Speaker 1: who are facing food and security that's not the only
Speaker 1: thing that defines them, or that they face the loss
Speaker 1: of unemployment insurance from the federal help. That is going
Speaker 1: to be really bad news for this coming labor day.
Speaker 1: And of course the rental assistance that's available UM is
Speaker 1: going to go away, and it hasn't had as good
Speaker 1: a take up, right. We haven't been able to get
Speaker 1: that out to people sufficiently. And the moratorium on residential
Speaker 1: evictions is only into early October. So these are real
Speaker 1: pressures on families and we do we work closely with
Speaker 1: a text company called Propel and they have an app
Speaker 1: that Snap and with customers women in Children program, they
Speaker 1: use that app to check on their balances for their benefits,
Speaker 1: to see what they've spent, what they have left. It
Speaker 1: really helps them when they're going to a grocery store
Speaker 1: and know what they've got in the in the thing easily.
Speaker 1: And because they have five million Snap subscribers, Propel has
Speaker 1: been checking with a sample five thousand of those households
Speaker 1: every month might be a different set of households, but
Speaker 1: a sample of five thousand of its household to see
Speaker 1: what's going on with them, and many, even as they're
Speaker 1: getting enhanced SNAP, are still struggling, turning to friends and
Speaker 1: family for additional help. But they're also struggling mightily with
Speaker 1: housing costs and debt and worried about being able to
Speaker 1: you know, pay the debt down. So these are things
Speaker 1: that are combining. But just on the SNAP hunger cliffs,
Speaker 1: those are looming. And we've been advocating throughout the pandemic
Speaker 1: to encourage the government to do what should have been
Speaker 1: done with the last recession, which is due more on
Speaker 1: the stimulus side to get us out of this COVID
Speaker 1: crisis on the economic side. And that's what so many
Speaker 1: economists have said that with the last recession, the Great Recession,
Speaker 1: some good recovery stimulus was provided, but it was too little,
Speaker 1: too short, and that they should not make policymakers should
Speaker 1: not make the same mistake with this COVID recession. SNAP
Speaker 1: can be a piece of not only providing something that
Speaker 1: people will need to mitigate food hardship during COVID, but
Speaker 1: because of its economic stimulus value, the SNAP benefits turnover
Speaker 1: in the economy. It's one of the best countercyclical tools
Speaker 1: the government has and it can play a significant role
Speaker 1: in making sure that we as a as a country
Speaker 1: get an economy and a recovery that's more robust, with
Speaker 1: more jobs, with better wages this time, and more equitable um.
Speaker 1: But if we pulled back on these support it's food
Speaker 1: hardship is going to be significantly worse in a bad economy.
Speaker 1: So again we're urging let them continue with what is
Speaker 1: working right now. And as you say, you've seen that
Speaker 1: needle come down on childhood onger when when these benefits
Speaker 1: are out there. What you're referring to is that when
Speaker 1: when people receive SNAP benefits, it's usually people who are
Speaker 1: uh struggling, food on the table. Every single book that benefit,
Speaker 1: that benefit is spent, okay, and so that goes into
Speaker 1: the economy. Now, typically for every dollar spend, it's usually
Speaker 1: uh creating a dollar seventy five economic activity because in
Speaker 1: the supermarkets in turn are hiring people. Get that money
Speaker 1: is flowing through the supermarkets, um, and so it just
Speaker 1: creates this this this stimulus effect and actually helps helps
Speaker 1: you reduce the economy, and I think this is what's
Speaker 1: the most important I want I want to actually talk
Speaker 1: about another program called a double bux program that is
Speaker 1: so important because, as we know, in this country, nutritions
Speaker 1: expensive calories are somewhat cheap, but if you're trying to
Speaker 1: put healthy food on the table, it's it's very expensive.
Speaker 1: And a double Bucks program, uh enables people that are
Speaker 1: shopping with snap dollars in a farmer's market. Um. Two,
Speaker 1: if they're buying fruits and vegetables, they actually would get
Speaker 1: a coupon for double what they just spent. So if
Speaker 1: they spent forty dollars on fruits and vegetables and just
Speaker 1: throwing the number out there, it's a big number. Um,
Speaker 1: they get additional forty dollars. Now, the great thing about
Speaker 1: this is this money goes not to supermarkets but directly
Speaker 1: to farmers, and in turn, they're actually really using the
Speaker 1: economy because they're they're buying I mean, they're they're hiring
Speaker 1: more people who work the farm, they're buying seeds, they're
Speaker 1: they're buying equipment. And so this is a program that
Speaker 1: not only double bucks for the people who are using
Speaker 1: the program, but almost a double boost the economy. Yeah,
Speaker 1: tom it you know that program varies of course state
Speaker 1: to state and how much it will double, but absolutely
Speaker 1: you're right. They snap dollars no matter where they're spent,
Speaker 1: help all along that food chain, including farmers. But you're
Speaker 1: right when it's that direct sale by the farmer at
Speaker 1: a farmer's market or there there's even community supported agriculture
Speaker 1: allowed and snap. You know, they're different ways. Uh, that
Speaker 1: is very impactful and having more purchasing power does give
Speaker 1: them the opportunity to get more of their of their
Speaker 1: food that way. And I think it's it's a it's
Speaker 1: a no brainer in a lot of respects. I don't
Speaker 1: know why anybody would not think it's a pretty popular
Speaker 1: way to go. Yeah. No, it's a great way to go.
Speaker 1: So you know, we touched on on time. But there's
Speaker 1: one thing else, that else that we're missing from this.
Speaker 1: Not everybody knows how to cook. Well let me let
Speaker 1: me say this. One of the strength of Snap, we've
Speaker 1: we've always felt it track is that it does run
Speaker 1: on the regular rails of commerce. But that is one
Speaker 1: of the fundamentals of it. Government isn't setting up its
Speaker 1: own warehouses, it's not setting up its own distribution sites
Speaker 1: and things like that. It's it's working through the retail sector,
Speaker 1: and it's using the regular EBT Electronic Benefit Transfer Technology
Speaker 1: system to get those payments um, you know, processed, and
Speaker 1: that allows people to get their food with SNAP benefits
Speaker 1: in ways that all of us shop um, much more
Speaker 1: mainstream ways. And that of course contributes to dignity and
Speaker 1: the idea of hot prepared foods, which is what normally
Speaker 1: SNAP customers can't use their benefits for. Uh. We thought that,
Speaker 1: you know, that would be important. And we know that
Speaker 1: out of New York City that two of the congress
Speaker 1: people who have been urging that very forcefully are representatives
Speaker 1: of men and spat and they they're really in keeping
Speaker 1: if you think about it with how do you leverage
Speaker 1: what might be available in the private sector, what might
Speaker 1: be good routes to get people things? Um these are
Speaker 1: by the way, particularly these are hot prepared foods. Those
Speaker 1: are things the U. S d A has had long
Speaker 1: experience with allowing and SNAP in the case of disaster recovery,
Speaker 1: they'll allow them. You know, after a hurricane if the
Speaker 1: state asks that says, you know, people are dislocated, they
Speaker 1: are not in their kitchens that may not even be
Speaker 1: in their homes. They're gonna need access to be able
Speaker 1: to get hot prepared foods, and they allow that. So
Speaker 1: it's not as if, um, these things are science fiction
Speaker 1: by any stretch. I would defer to you, Thomas, you
Speaker 1: know the mechanics of some of it, because of your
Speaker 1: particular expertise. This is why I think that you know,
Speaker 1: possibly you know, a nonprofit facility where you're producing food
Speaker 1: not for profit, where it's not the it's not the
Speaker 1: government that's doing it. I wasn't I want to suggest
Speaker 1: that the government should take over. So there's there's a
Speaker 1: whole lot of logistics that go along with this, But
Speaker 1: I think, yeah, you let the people who know how
Speaker 1: to make hot food, let them make hot food, you
Speaker 1: figure out the way to distribute, you let people use
Speaker 1: snap dollars to purchase it. Hopefully there could be a
Speaker 1: better way to go about this than you know, again
Speaker 1: to help people who can't prepare foods. But there there's
Speaker 1: a lot that's been learned during COVID that business as
Speaker 1: usual isn't necessarily the way we're going to ago even
Speaker 1: after COVID, and you know ends that certain things need
Speaker 1: to be flexible. Yeah, and my hope, and I've said
Speaker 1: this before, my hope and I think looking at what
Speaker 1: happened with COVID, one one thing that struck me is
Speaker 1: when I looked at the lines of cars, you know,
Speaker 1: that were lined up for three and four hours at
Speaker 1: a food bank, our food distribution site looking to get food.
Speaker 1: And if you look to that line, there were plenty
Speaker 1: of Mercedes Benz and you know BMW's in that in
Speaker 1: that line, um, and these were people who were solidly
Speaker 1: middle upper middle class, you know, pre pandemic, who never
Speaker 1: had to worry about putting food on the table, and
Speaker 1: all of a sudden, both you know, both income earners
Speaker 1: out of work, struggling. And so what I'm hoping is
Speaker 1: that there's a deeper sense of empathy that the average
Speaker 1: person has for someone that's struggling out, because you know,
Speaker 1: something can derail someone's very comfortable life very quickly. What time,
Speaker 1: I can't thank you enough for everything you do, but
Speaker 1: in particular, when there were efforts to really undermine SNAP
Speaker 1: over the years, really change it so that it wouldn't
Speaker 1: be able to respond as um well to crises, whether
Speaker 1: they're economic or or disasters or weaken the benefits structure
Speaker 1: that was there, you know, had those changes, some of
Speaker 1: which were tried by conservatives in the Farm bill in
Speaker 1: some of them were tried in regulatory actions by the
Speaker 1: last administration. There's no way SNAP would be as as
Speaker 1: solidly prepared as it was to kick in UM during
Speaker 1: COVID nineteen. Uh. It needs it needed more, It needed
Speaker 1: more boots and things. But as people fell into economic need,
Speaker 1: they were able to be enrolled if they applied and
Speaker 1: went through the process, they were able to be enrolled.
Speaker 1: They weren't put on waiting lists. Some of the changes
Speaker 1: people had proposed over the years that would have would
Speaker 1: have blocked granted SNAP for instance, those folks would have
Speaker 1: been on waiting lists and not have gotten the need.
Speaker 1: You know, met at all UM for quite some time.
Speaker 1: And the way the program structured and the fact that
Speaker 1: people like you have spoken up for it over the
Speaker 1: years meant that it really was a much better support
Speaker 1: during COVID nineteen. Not everything people needs still further strength
Speaker 1: that I needed all of that, but that structure being
Speaker 1: in place was vital. And I want to thank you
Speaker 1: for for saying what you just said, UM. But when
Speaker 1: you know, when my wife started her and Christie Jacobson
Speaker 1: are partner started working on a place to the table.
Speaker 1: Organizations like frack uh joel Bergs of the world, Um,
Speaker 1: really gave us an education on the system. You know,
Speaker 1: I before that was very happy to raise money for
Speaker 1: anti hunger organizations as work as a as a chef,
Speaker 1: you know, showing up to do events. UM, but really
Speaker 1: didn't quite understand what was happening. And it wasn't until um,
Speaker 1: you know, Laurie set out to to make that film
Speaker 1: that we got a first rate education from organizations like
Speaker 1: yours and also our our next guest, Jimmy Governed, the
Speaker 1: converseman from the great state of Massachusetts, who is the
Speaker 1: champion in Congress. And there are others as well, but Jim,
Speaker 1: you know, along with people like Roses de Laura and
Speaker 1: Shelley Painry are are real champions hunger. But Jim, Jim
Speaker 1: certainly has been leading that charge from day one and
Speaker 1: so uh, um, so we have we got a great
Speaker 1: education on the program. And so it's it was it's uh,
Speaker 1: it's been uh, it's been an interesting last ten years,
Speaker 1: are so. But hopefully we're in a better place and
Speaker 1: hopefully we'll stay stay that way, and obviously with organizations
Speaker 1: like yours, uh, we we do have a fighting chance
Speaker 1: of making sure that people in this in this country, UM,
Speaker 1: don't have to worry about where their next meal is
Speaker 1: coming from. So thank thank you so much. Thank you,
Speaker 1: Stay well, stick around for more Citizen Chef. Hey, you're
Speaker 1: listening to Citizen Chef, and this week we're talking about
Speaker 1: historic changes made to snap Athans. So our next guest
Speaker 1: is uh Jim McGovern. Jim is a Congressman from the
Speaker 1: second Congressional District in Massachusetts. UM. He's also the head
Speaker 1: of the Rules Committee. Was a very big job. UM.
Speaker 1: But listen, I know Jim as the most anti hunger
Speaker 1: advocate in Congress. We met back when my wife was
Speaker 1: making the film. Uh. He was was in the film
Speaker 1: and was really just just amazing. Since then, Uh, he
Speaker 1: has been, uh my go to on the hill. If
Speaker 1: there there's an issue around hunger, I usually give him
Speaker 1: a phone call. He's he's been fighting poverty and hunger
Speaker 1: his entire life. You know. He started out working as
Speaker 1: a as a Senate aide to Senator McGovern, who, for
Speaker 1: those that follow these things, was really instrumental along with
Speaker 1: Senators Dole from Kansas and creating and modernizing our food
Speaker 1: Safety Net UM way back in the seventies. And so
Speaker 1: it's my absolute pleasure to welcome Congressman Jim McGovern to
Speaker 1: citizen chef. Hey, how are you doing? Hello? How's it going?
Speaker 1: And we think it's beautiful? Is it in its own way? Yeah?
Speaker 1: Under God's heaven. I know that you have been so
Speaker 1: instrumental in in my education when it comes to why
Speaker 1: people are hugging in this country and what we can
Speaker 1: actually do about it. And I guess what I want
Speaker 1: to talk about today is we we finally got some
Speaker 1: really good news, and that is that that the the
Speaker 1: Biden White House acted on what the Trump White House
Speaker 1: could have acted on UM and finally changed the Thrifty
Speaker 1: Food Plan. And so this means so many great things
Speaker 1: for people who are struggling. Well, first of all, it's
Speaker 1: a huge deal. I mean, it's the first update in
Speaker 1: more than forty five years. Uh. And you know they
Speaker 1: earlier this month, at the direction of Congress in U
Speaker 1: s d A in twenty t U s d A
Speaker 1: updated the benefit calculation for SNAP and and the benefits
Speaker 1: levels now, um, you know, the benefit levels had been
Speaker 1: steady for years I mean there was no increase at all. Uh.
Speaker 1: And before the pandemic, the average Snap benefit was about
Speaker 1: a dollar forty per person for meal, my duck and
Speaker 1: Donna's coffee. Because more than that, uh and uh you know,
Speaker 1: we know people need more money to be able to
Speaker 1: buy not just food, but more nutritious food. And this
Speaker 1: will increase uh at a uh the amount of people
Speaker 1: get by a boat on average thirty six dollars a month,
Speaker 1: which doesn't sound like a whole a lot, but it's
Speaker 1: it's a big deal when it comes to somebody who's
Speaker 1: food and secure. So so this is this is a
Speaker 1: major step in the right direction. Let's let's talk about
Speaker 1: how difficult it is for people who are are are
Speaker 1: using Snap dollars to feed their family. I know, uh,
Speaker 1: you took the Snap challenge and Snap challenges to uh
Speaker 1: live a month using the money talent for Snap for
Speaker 1: for for your your your household food and you mentioned
Speaker 1: coffee and to me very correctly, coffee was your downfall.
Speaker 1: Let's talk about how how how you you dealt with
Speaker 1: with the Snap channel. Well, coffee didn't fit into my budget.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, again, about a dollar forty per
Speaker 1: person for meal and you know that's what I had
Speaker 1: to buy myself with and and and you know, I
Speaker 1: had to decide, am I gonna you know, get you know,
Speaker 1: food or I go get coffee? And uh, I could
Speaker 1: do it over again. I get the coffee because it
Speaker 1: was so addicted to coffee. But the bottom line is, uh,
Speaker 1: the SNAP benefit is not enough for people to live on,
Speaker 1: and it's certainly not enough to have a nutritious diet.
Speaker 1: And I mean, I'm you know, I just finished two
Speaker 1: days of farm tours in my district of Massachusetts, and
Speaker 1: one of the things that's been really encouraging to me
Speaker 1: is that more and more farms are you know, are
Speaker 1: accepting uh SNAP benefits. More and more farms and farm
Speaker 1: stands are part of this Healthy Initiative program when you
Speaker 1: double your SNAP dollars if you buy fresh fruits and
Speaker 1: vegetables at a at a farm stand or at a farm.
Speaker 1: So those are you know, some ways that our local
Speaker 1: farmers are connecting with communities that are struggling. Well, look,
Speaker 1: we we need to understand that a healthy diet cannot
Speaker 1: be had on a SNAP budget. Is that we need
Speaker 1: to fix that because you know, when we talked about
Speaker 1: ending hunger, food and security. It's not just about filling
Speaker 1: up your stomach. It should be about you know, also
Speaker 1: helping improve your health and your well being. I don't
Speaker 1: want to solve one problem by giving you rousy food
Speaker 1: and you end up with another problem, which is diabetes
Speaker 1: or heart disease or high blood pressure. So everything is
Speaker 1: connected here right again, looking at your your feet. A
Speaker 1: global village farm. Is that one of the farms there was? Yeah,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean the woman um uh who runs
Speaker 1: it is from uh Urgent from guatemala Um. It's uh,
Speaker 1: you know, a local tribe basically controls that land. Uh
Speaker 1: and they are you know, trying to uh not really
Speaker 1: grow things and get it to people who need it.
Speaker 1: But they're also trying to teach people how to farm,
Speaker 1: how to grow things. So they invide people on the farm.
Speaker 1: So you want to you know, you want to farm
Speaker 1: on your own, you can. They also provide these these
Speaker 1: farm boxes. Is that they can help you retrofit for
Speaker 1: your for your yard at home so that you can
Speaker 1: grow things. I mean their views and everybody should be
Speaker 1: growing something. Everybody can be a farmer, whether it's a
Speaker 1: pot or whether it's you know, fifty acres of land. Um,
Speaker 1: you know, we all can do something and um, you know,
Speaker 1: and they're very much dedicated to giving back to the
Speaker 1: community and to respecting the land and farming in a
Speaker 1: way uh that respects the land. You know. They provide
Speaker 1: C C S, A S two people who struggle, um,
Speaker 1: and those people can use their snap benefits or there
Speaker 1: are there are this healthy in the Centers program to
Speaker 1: be able to get access. And so our farmers are
Speaker 1: in the forefront of of of trying to d hunger
Speaker 1: this country and trying to end a nutrition insecurity as well. Right,
Speaker 1: that's so important that you mentioned that, because you're right.
Speaker 1: I mean, you know, nutrition is expensive in this country.
Speaker 1: Food colories are cheap, and so if you're trying to
Speaker 1: feature family healthy food, if you want to go to
Speaker 1: a overs parket you're buying fruits and vegetables, it's it's
Speaker 1: so much more expensive. Um. And and yet you're you're right,
Speaker 1: and I don't want to do is is having people
Speaker 1: eating really unhealthy food. I think currently right now we're
Speaker 1: spending about two hundred billion dollars a year on health
Speaker 1: related costs their associate poor diet. So we certainly don't
Speaker 1: want to I don't want to create more more of
Speaker 1: a health issue. UM. You know this is something I
Speaker 1: heard a lot of ground with the with the thrifty
Speaker 1: Food program, with our previous guest, Ellen Folinger, who she
Speaker 1: was a great friend, and yeah she was. She was
Speaker 1: on right before you when we talked a lot about that,
Speaker 1: and UM, so I thought we could take the time
Speaker 1: to really focus on something that I know, for as
Speaker 1: long as I've known you, you've been you've been fighting
Speaker 1: for and uh and that is the White House Conference
Speaker 1: on Hunger. UM. I believe the last one was in
Speaker 1: nineteen sixty nine. Now you were were you in eight
Speaker 1: and sixty nine? To senter McGovern, No, I was an
Speaker 1: AME in the late nineteen seventies, so so you weren't
Speaker 1: out that last that last time. I wasn't. No, I wasn't.
Speaker 1: But but George McGovern when I worked from in the
Speaker 1: late night the seventies, headed up the Special Select Committee
Speaker 1: Nutrition and Human Needs UM. And you know that was
Speaker 1: a a community. It was that cut across jurisdictional you know,
Speaker 1: boundaries of the regular committees and actually focused in on
Speaker 1: how we and hunger and that conference that you mentioned
Speaker 1: that happened fifty two years ago. Um, while it was
Speaker 1: imperfect and people a lot of people would live experiences,
Speaker 1: their voices weren't heard, and some of the complexities of
Speaker 1: this country, uh, you know, weren't elevate. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: tribal communities you know, have different challenges than you know, uh,
Speaker 1: you know, you know many of our our other communities,
Speaker 1: and we have territories in this country and we have
Speaker 1: I mean, it's it's very complexly so one glove doesn't
Speaker 1: at all. But in any event, that conference help us
Speaker 1: help produce WICK. It helped you know, produce the modern
Speaker 1: day food stand program and helped emphasize the importance of
Speaker 1: a child nutrition. It did a lot um and there's
Speaker 1: much more to do, and that's where we pick up
Speaker 1: with this second conference. And the goal here is to
Speaker 1: have everybody at the table. I mean everybody, including people
Speaker 1: who lived experiences, and it's designed to connect all the
Speaker 1: dots and to come up with a holistic plan to
Speaker 1: not manage younger but end it, but do so in
Speaker 1: a way that addresses a whole bunch of other colleges.
Speaker 1: You know. It's you know, the way our system is
Speaker 1: set up. You know, we we only talk about little
Speaker 1: sliveries of this debate. You know, at a time, you
Speaker 1: know it's all snap one day, or it's a child
Speaker 1: nutrition another day, or it's senior citizen food and security
Speaker 1: or college students and security. We need to talk about everything,
Speaker 1: and it also means that we need to look at
Speaker 1: our systems holistically and understand we need to change things,
Speaker 1: not just the way we deliver food and the kind
Speaker 1: of food we provide people, not just the benefit, but
Speaker 1: also how we integrate nutrition and agriculture in our school system.
Speaker 1: I mean, I've I visited schools that have done that.
Speaker 1: It's it's incredible, and yet there such resistance in other
Speaker 1: school districts to even doing that. They're just crazy. Kids
Speaker 1: should who learn about nutrition early on, you know, they
Speaker 1: can teach their parents, teachers right and and it's it's
Speaker 1: it's all, it's all good. I mean, I visited the
Speaker 1: you probably visited the Green Bronx Machine and in New
Speaker 1: York Stephen Rich's program. What he's done in that school
Speaker 1: um is amazing. Again, I mean, it fits for that
Speaker 1: school in the Bronx, but it could be replicated in
Speaker 1: other places. Our medical system it's so detached from food
Speaker 1: and nutrition. You want crappy food, go to a hospital,
Speaker 1: you know, I mean, and uh, you don't even have
Speaker 1: to be a patient to have bad food, you know,
Speaker 1: going to the cafeteria. But yet we need to understand
Speaker 1: that that so many of our doctors are not trained
Speaker 1: in nutrition. Uh. And if they can write out a
Speaker 1: prescription to help lower your blood pressure, you know that's costly.
Speaker 1: What why can't they write you out of food prescription? Um?
Speaker 1: So we we we have to look at everything and uh,
Speaker 1: and that's what this conference will do here. So I
Speaker 1: don't want to focus on something that you said, we
Speaker 1: manage hunger. We need to focus on ending hunger. What
Speaker 1: what we have? We have the resources to end hunger, right,
Speaker 1: we have enough food in this country. People aren't hungry
Speaker 1: because of famine, because of war, because of drought. People
Speaker 1: are hungry, not not yet anyway that that could be
Speaker 1: coming if we don't figure that that out. Um. But uh,
Speaker 1: the managing to ending hunter what has to happen in
Speaker 1: between those two things? Did to make that happen? So
Speaker 1: as I say, hunger is a political condition, we need
Speaker 1: to have the political will. I mean it's that simple,
Speaker 1: But I mean I've been in trying to win support
Speaker 1: for this conference. I've been talking to President Biden's cabinet officials.
Speaker 1: They talked to Secretary of Bill Sack. He says he's
Speaker 1: on board, and I'm really grateful for that that. I
Speaker 1: talked to Secretary Transportation Pete Buddha Judge as I need
Speaker 1: you to be on the on board on this, and
Speaker 1: he and I explain why, because transportation plays a role
Speaker 1: in addressing the challenge of getting food to people and need.
Speaker 1: We need refrigerated trucks. People live in food deserts. I
Speaker 1: visited this company in Phoenix, UH a few weeks ago
Speaker 1: called neuro If you ever watched TV and you see this,
Speaker 1: this unmanned vehicle called delivering pizzas to people, well, you
Speaker 1: know what. They're interested in figuring out how whether they
Speaker 1: can play a role in food delivery for people in need.
Speaker 1: We had to, you know, I don't know how far
Speaker 1: away that is, but we had to. We had to
Speaker 1: look at that. I talked to Dennis mcdonnal, the Secretary
Speaker 1: of the v A. He's on board because we have
Speaker 1: a lot of veterans who we're hungry. We have active
Speaker 1: duty military servicemen and women who were hungry. Everybody has
Speaker 1: a role, and the pandemic thrust a whole bunch of
Speaker 1: people who never thought they would ever be hungry of
Speaker 1: food is to secure, and so I think there's a
Speaker 1: greater awareness of how vulnerable we are. You know, you
Speaker 1: could be working and making what would be considered a
Speaker 1: decent wage in Mitchell, South Dakota, but it's not a
Speaker 1: livable wage in New York City, or it's not a
Speaker 1: livable wage in San Francisco or Boston. And yet oftentimes
Speaker 1: those are the people you know who are hungry even
Speaker 1: with their wages, but they are eligible for nothing. We
Speaker 1: talked about thirty seven million people, and so I kind
Speaker 1: of believe we can do a hellab better than that.
Speaker 1: Always always interested in how people got to where they are.
Speaker 1: You know, when when did you recognize this was such
Speaker 1: an issue? Because it was even fighting his fight for
Speaker 1: a long time. But can you go back to when
Speaker 1: when you actually realize that that there are a lot
Speaker 1: of hungry people here and that government has a role
Speaker 1: to actually so was when I was, you know, a
Speaker 1: college paid intern for Senator George McGovern uh, you know,
Speaker 1: getting no relations the interns back and they paid back.
Speaker 1: Then then they stopped paying now we're paying again. It's
Speaker 1: a good thing. Um. But I you know, I sat
Speaker 1: through many of those hearings that he had in the
Speaker 1: Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, and I heard
Speaker 1: him talk about his experiences with people and and I
Speaker 1: went with him on a number of of his uh
Speaker 1: of his vissite visits, and I saw people who are hungry.
Speaker 1: And then I got elected to Congress, uh, and people
Speaker 1: started coming in my office looking for food, you know.
Speaker 1: And I've been to schools um in my district where
Speaker 1: kids are hungry. My two sisters teaching the Worcester Public
Speaker 1: school system, they talked about it all the time. I mean,
Speaker 1: I've I just I see it all around and I
Speaker 1: know sometimes we try to not look at things that
Speaker 1: are uncomfortable to look at, but it's there. And here's
Speaker 1: the bottom line. What motivates me now because I'm just ashamed,
Speaker 1: I just really am. I mean, I'm a United States congressman,
Speaker 1: right um. Uh. You know I've never been hungry. Uh.
Speaker 1: You know, I've never been poor. Um. And you know
Speaker 1: when there are people that I represent, there people go
Speaker 1: out to this country who don't know where the next
Speaker 1: meal is gonna come from, and we can find the
Speaker 1: money to build nuclear weapons. We can find the money
Speaker 1: to send arms to that country of this country. We
Speaker 1: can find money for tax cuts for you know, billionaires
Speaker 1: and millionaires. And and yet you know, we we tolerate this.
Speaker 1: You Hillary Clinton says it takes the village. She's right,
Speaker 1: I say it takes a plan. I mean, because you
Speaker 1: need the village to advocate for something, and it's this
Speaker 1: plan and we can do it. I mean, this is
Speaker 1: this is not a problem that cannot be solved. And
Speaker 1: that's what makes us so maddening. Yeah, you know, so
Speaker 1: much of this takes vision. It takes of just looking
Speaker 1: down the road and what what does Americans look like
Speaker 1: without hungry people? Politicians who have diminished the struggle of
Speaker 1: those who are in poverty. They have demonized people on Snap.
Speaker 1: They have qutot a narrative. It doesn't represent the reality.
Speaker 1: Um And so there's a lot of this misinformation out
Speaker 1: there when people say, I mean, oh, you know people
Speaker 1: around snap forever, No, they am not. I mean, you know,
Speaker 1: even the statistics from the Trump White House with Trump
Speaker 1: usd A with tell you the average person is on
Speaker 1: there less than a year. And that's why, and that's
Speaker 1: why with with the with the BIDE administration did um
Speaker 1: with increasing the snap benefit, reclculating you know, what constitutes
Speaker 1: a nutritional meal is important. And that's why Congress needs
Speaker 1: to do the right thing and pass this second Infrastructure,
Speaker 1: the Human Infrastructure Package. We can make some of these
Speaker 1: things more permanent and um, and I hope that we
Speaker 1: do that by the end of September. Jem listen, this
Speaker 1: has been it's been great talking to you and and
Speaker 1: I think you're absolutely right, UM. This is a lesson
Speaker 1: that we learned from Mary and Chilton, who I know
Speaker 1: you know well, um Or that you need to hear
Speaker 1: from people who are actually experiencing hunger, UM, and hear
Speaker 1: from them. It's not about just that people like us
Speaker 1: that are trying to to to to alleviate, but really
Speaker 1: hearing from those people with the lived experiences. But you, Laury,
Speaker 1: helped elevate that and and and and the reason why
Speaker 1: those voices are important not only because they have firsthand
Speaker 1: knowledge of what works and what doesn't work. But I
Speaker 1: think it's hard for any human being to turn away
Speaker 1: from somebody telling their lived experience, telling their life story. UM.
Speaker 1: I think I think it's a powerful motivator for politicians
Speaker 1: of both parties to actually do something. We're gonna do this.
Speaker 1: I feel really good about it, I really do. Thanks
Speaker 1: again to Jimmy Government for joining us today. You know
Speaker 1: what he says, it's so true. You know, kids are
Speaker 1: out there suffering and uh, now listen, if they weren't hungry,
Speaker 1: they would do better in school. Uh, they would be
Speaker 1: better in sports, they would do better in life. You know,
Speaker 1: those snap indgits they really benefit so many, so many people. Again,
Speaker 1: I wanted to talk with Ellen because she's been on
Speaker 1: the front lines making these changes happen for years. And
Speaker 1: you know, those changes don't just happen overnight. They take
Speaker 1: lots of careful planning and research. Forty five years is
Speaker 1: a long time, and I bet it was tempting to
Speaker 1: give up the fight. But those changes are necessary to
Speaker 1: the overall health far entire nation, not just those using
Speaker 1: these benefits. It was a relief to see those headlines.
Speaker 1: So I am so honored that Ellen and Jim took
Speaker 1: the time to talk to us and explain why so
Speaker 1: many families would breathe a little easier tonight. You could
Speaker 1: think and plan a drink so much more when you
Speaker 1: don't have to worry about whether you'll have dinner tomorrow night,
Speaker 1: and I can't wait to see what comes out of
Speaker 1: all that extra dreaming. Citizen Chef is executive produced by
Speaker 1: Chris Grasciotas, produced by Gabby Collins, and researched by Lillian Holman,
Speaker 1: and there's always a special thanks to a place at
Speaker 1: the table. Citizen Chef has a production to the I
Speaker 1: Heart Radio for more podcasts like this, and visit the
Speaker 1: I Heart Radio app, Apple podcast, or wherever you get
Speaker 1: your favorite shows.