This blog post is to showcase my source material I used to support the arguments for my This I Argue essay.
Thesis Statement: "the current amount is inadequate, if SNAP received more funding, families would be able to afford nutritional foods that would lead to an increase in the grades of students and we would be able to battle health problems caused by childhood obesity". Topic Sentence: (Supporting Paragraph 1) "Cuts to the annual budget for SNAP has left many single family households making dire decisions for something as simple as finding a meal to eat." (Supporting Paragraph 2) "if you do the math it just doesn't seem possible for the average person receiving SNAP to afford a balanced nutritional diet." (Supporting Paragraph 3) "Many families that receive food stamps have a hard time affording fresh fruits, vegetables and whole grain items." (Supporting Paragraph 4) "SNAP promotes a good work ethic by taking away 24 to 36 cents from his/hers benefit for every dollar." Source Material: "A Place at the Table" Video Documentary Policy Basics: Introduction to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). June 4, 2014 www.cbpp.org/cms/index.cfm?fa=view&id=2226 House approves GOP plan to slash food stamp funding. September 19, 2013. Washington Post. Ed O'Keefe and Niraj Chokshi www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/post-politics/wp/2013/09/19/house-approves-gop-plan-to-slash-food-stamp-funding/ The SNAP Challenge: A True Wake Up Call. November 12, 2013. Huffington Post. Jamison Doran www.huffingtonpost.com/jamison-doran/the-snap-challenge-a-true_b_4260842.html I think SNAP should receive an annual increase in funding from the federal government until it's no longer needed. According to a survey done by the U.S. Department of Agriculture the more members you have in your family the less money you get and the amount has dropped gradually since 2009. Eligibility for SNAP is based on a $25,400 gross income, the average American consumes 972,000 calories a year, and the median household income is $51,000 as of 2013 according to CNN, all the while the poverty rate is 15% that means people who rely on SNAP can't afford a 2700 calorie daily diet without SNAP. So it's self defeating as a nation to cut funding to programs like these. The food stamp program has done plenty of good over the years for many people which is why cutting funds from the program has left many people with no choice but find less favorable alternatives to making ends meet. Politicians need to realize that helping those less fortunate is the American way and its a right that we as human beings have to have food to eat. Hunger Is Everyones Problem
No one can truly understand how living on $4.50 can be unless you are one of the 47 million people on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). When lawmakers such as Rep. James McGovern tried to understand the effects of how cutting $39 billion from the program resonated with the families on SNAP, they were surprised to find out that the current fiscal amount just isn't enough. Rep. McGovern stated "There are people living on that food stamp allocation and you really can't, for us it was an exercise that ended in a week." (A Place at the Table). Rep. McGovern believes that the program needs to go under serious reform. SNAP is meant to be a temporary resource that helps the old, disabled, and low income families afford food, but the recent cuts to funding have been hurting the same people the program is suppose to be helping. Simply stated, the current amount is inadequate, if SNAP received more funding, families would be able to afford nutritional foods that would lead to an increase in the grades of students and we would be able to battle health problems caused by childhood obesity. SNAP needs more funding, the current amount is inadequate for families that live below the poverty line, with bills and added expenses the allocated amount given to these families just isn't enough. Cuts to the annual budget for SNAP has left many single family households making dire decisions for something as simple as finding a meal to eat. Barbie Izquierdo a single mother of 2 from Philadelphia experiences this first-hand in the documentary A Place at the Table, she says "I do get food stamps now but they last about 3 weeks out of the month and for that last week I'm just going crazy", young mothers similar to Barbie are all to familiar with situations like this yet politicians take a blind eye to people like this for reasons beneficial to themselves. In an article by the Washington Post authors Ed O'Keefe and Niraj Chokshi examined and wrote about the cuts to SNAP, they explained that the House voted 217 to 210 approving a bill that would overhaul the nation's food stamp program, cutting about $39 billion with the next decade. In the article House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.) was quoted saying "frankly its wrong for hard-working middle-class Americans to pay for that (SNAP)", given the stories from A Place at the Table, Mr. Cantor clearly doesn't know what hard-working Americans want. Many of those that receive supplemental assistance from the government are hard working Americans and it has become a sad story to witness as those same Americans can't afford nutritional foods and are suffering from food insecurities. A 5 pound bag of apples cost about $4.50 according to Walmart.com, according to cbpp.org the average person that receives SNAP gets about $4.45 a day for food, if you do the math it just doesn't seem possible for the average person receiving SNAP to afford a balanced nutritional diet. The content of affordable food being bought by SNAP recipients are absolutely terrible and unfit for healthy everyday consumption. Its understandable to see why people on the program buy food that's high in sugar, trans fats and predominately empty calories. I encourage anyone who thinks they can feed themselves healthily on $31.50 a week to take the SNAP challenge. The challenge uses some humbling techniques to educate people on just why SNAP needs more funding by having them ditch their everyday routine and spend only $31.50 on food, that is the equivalent to $4.50 which those receiving the assistance spend for food on a meal to meal basis. Jamison Doran a writer for The Huffington Post took the challenge and shared her experiences. Ms. Doran found herself hungry often, many times right after she had eaten. She stated "Despite probably eating the same number of calories as I usually do, I found myself always hungry." She reported eating foods filled with sugar and empty calories, everything she could afford was processed and non-organic. Given the $31.50 a week budget she just couldn't afford to cook healthy, its no surprise why young children who live on SNAP are developing diabetes and other health complications. No matter what your social stature in America you should be able to afford foods with adequate nutritional value, but with that being said wishful thinking does not put food in the mouths of people action and awareness does. A link can be made between the child hood obesity and the lack of affordability for healthy nutritional foods for many Americans on food stamps. Many families that receive food stamps have a hard time affording fresh fruits, vegetables and whole grain items. One group of people in particular are people that live in food desserts. These Americans live in rural sometimes urban areas where access to a nutrients filled diet are a rarity. A scene in the documentary A Place at the Table, introduces us to Tremonica, an overweight second grader, she was asked if she'd had anything to eat that morning and her answer was "no", but when she was asked what she eats at home after school she replies "cookies, chips and soda". Tremonica's mother claimed that because the fruits she shops for are so expensive, she opts out and usually gets chips or other processed food for her and her daughter to eat, unless those fruits are on sale. It should be shameful to each and every lawmaker who ignores the people who go hungry on a daily basis in this country. Even though it remains underfunded SNAP is a good program in the fight to end food insecurities in America. The purpose of SNAP is to help low income families, the old and people with disabilities afford a decent meal, the program does a good job in feeding many Americans but it has to be understood that SNAP is supplemental and no one should plan on living on SNAP forever. SNAP promotes a good work ethic by taking away 24 to 36 cents from his/hers benefit for every dollar that is earned by the individual receiving it (cbpp.org). If the government decides to add more funding to SNAP, I think we'd have smarter kids in school, less chances for childhood obesity, and a healthier generation. Teah Jappah
6/23/2014 English Composition Hunger Is Everyones Problem I encourage anyone who thinks someone could feed themselves on $31.50 a week to take the SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program) challenge. The SNAP challenge exposes just how underfunded the program is by challenging all those that don't utilize the service to experience what it's like to be on the program given its current funded amount. The challenge gives lawmakers the chance of experiencing the effects of the laws they pass especially the cuts that have been implemented throughout the program. By looking at the statistics a conclusion can clearly be made that the program simply needs more money. Funding for the SNAP program was cut by $39 billion within a 10 year time frame last year. Lawmakers are shifting the responsibility and saying its what the taxpayers want, instead of admitting to their own agenda. There are over 47 million Americans that receive assistance from the federal and state run program and their benefits are being cut based on the amount of people in their households. The federal budget for food stamp for fiscal year 14 is $75.7 billion. The stated amount just isn't enough for people to buy nutritional items fit for a day to day diet. By adding funds to the program it would significantly help those who live below the poverty line in affording food that's both nutritional and satisfying. No one can truly understand how living on $4.50 can be unless you are one of the the 47 million people living on supplemental assistance. For a few people the SNAP challenge gives insight on a program thats otherwise unknown to them. "There are people living on that food stamp allocation and you really can't, for us it was an exercise that ended in a week." These are direct quotes from Representative James McGovern from the documentary A Place at the Table, Rep. McGovern took the challenge because he thought the food stamp benefit was inadequate. There were wealthy participants that accepted the challenge as well such as Panera bread CEO Ron Shaich, he took the challenge and quickly realized that he could not purchase the amount of food he wanted or needed with the amount of money allotted. On his first day of the challenge Mr. Shaich stated that he entered the store with the intention of purchasing the most nutritional items possible within the budget, but found it difficult to do so. Mr. Shaich isn't alone in this debacle, Jamison Doran a writer for The Huffington Post had a very similar experience with the challenge. Ms. Doran found herself hungry often, many times right after she had eaten. She stated "Despite probably eating the same number of calories as I usually do, I found myself always hungry." She reported eating foods filled with sugar and empty calories, everything she could afford was processed and non-organic. Given the $28.70 a week budget she just couldn't afford to cook healthy. No matter what your social stature in America you should be able to afford foods with adequate nutritional valuea, but with that being said wishful thinking does not put food in the mouths of people action and awareness does. A link can be made between the child hood obesity and the lack of affordability for healthy nutritional foods for many Americans on food stamps. Many families that receive food stamps have a hard time affording fresh fruits, vegetables and whole grain items. One group of people in particular are people that live in food desserts. These Americans live in rural sometimes urban areas where access to a nutrients filled diet are a rarity. A scene in the documentary A Place at the Table, introduces us to Tremonica, an overweight second grader, she was asked if she'd had anything to eat that morning and her answer was no, but when she was asked what she eats at home after school she replies cookies, chips and soda. Tremonica's mother claimed that because the fruits she shops for are so expensive, she opts out and usually gets chips or other processed food for her and her daughter to eat, unless those fruits are on sale. It should be shameful to each and every lawmaker who ignores the people who go hungry on a daily basis in this country. It was at the end of last year when the House voted 217 to 210 for a decision to cut food stamps by $39 billion. Spearheading the strategy to cut funding is the House Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R.Va), In a article by The Washington Post, Mr.Cantor said "Frankly it’s wrong for hard-working middle-class Americans to pay for that" but just in 2013 alone a $901 billion budget was set aside for the military, while many of these spending are necessary a few are not such as $34.4 billion in foreign economic aid. It makes you ask yourself how can so much money be put into killing people yet so little be put into making live better for Americans. In what seemed to me like a way to cope with his decision, Mr. Cantor also said that there are too many people "that choose to abuse the system", which isn't true. SNAP fraud is at an all time low with just 2.77 percent of benefits get distributed to people that don't meet all the requirements. Even though it remains underfunded SNAP is a good program in the fight to end food insecurities in America. The purpose of SNAP is to help low income families, the old and people with disabilities afford a decent meal, the program does a good job in feeding many Americans but it has to be understood that SNAP is supplemental and no one should plan on living on SNAP forever. SNAP promotes a good work ethic by taking away 24 to 36 cents from his/hers benefit for every dollar that is earned by the individual receiving it. If the government decides to add more funding to SNAP, I think we'd have smarter kids in school, less chances for childhood obesity, and a healthier generation. Sources:
Should America provide more funding for SNAP? If so, how much of an increase? If not, how does the current funding seem appropriate?
I think SNAP should receive an annual increase in funding from the federal government until it's no longer needed. According to a survey done by the U.S. Department of Agriculture the more members you have in your family the less money you get and the amount has dropped gradually since 2009. Eligibility for SNAP is based on a $25,400 gross income, the average American consumes 972,000 calories a year, and the median household income is $51,000 as of 2013 according to CNN, all the while the poverty rate is 15% that means people who rely on SNAP can't afford a 2700 calorie daily diet without SNAP. So it's self defeating as a nation to cut funding to programs like these. How should Americans define “food insecurity?” How should Americans define “starving? What solutions can Americans use to overcome food insecurity and starving in America? I think food insecurities and childhood obesity go hand in hand and as Americans we should be aware of the dangers that inadequate nutrition for our kids possess. I think starving in America is far from that of starving in a third world country but never the less its still an issue that should be focused on and done away with. As Americans I think we can over come food insecurities and starving by making the subsidize small food shelters and food banks until they are no longer needed. Do you live in a food desert? How can America feed people who live in food deserts? I personally don't live in a food desert, there are many places in my neighborhood to get fresh organic fruits and vegetables for a reasonable price. I think America can feed these people living far from stores with nutritional foods by allowing more farms to grow in these areas therefore cutting the travel distance and maintaining healthy foods in these areas. Should America rely on charities to feed the hungry? How much of a reliance? I think at this point there isn't much of a choice especially for people who rely on these services for everyday use, and if 100% reliance on charities is whats needed, I don't think the people that donate to these places would mind much as long as they're helping out. In what ways can America better subsidize the farming industry and its crop production? If you drive across Americas heartland you can see the toll subsidized agriculture does to the "mom and pop" farms, they're virtually being ran out of business or being forced to farm something else. I this if the federal government spread out the money even it would give local farmers a chance to flourish and grow crops locally causing more local foods to be grown and possibly ending the food desert problem. What are the most common myths and misconceptions about those who depend on food banks and other food assistance programs? When we as Americans think of people who utilize the services of food banks and others, we tend to visualize a homeless person, or someone with 10 kids in a one bedroom apartment, but like the documentary A Place at the Table showed even a policeman can be the one in line for assistance, its strictly based on the situation you find yourself in. This documentary starts by navigating through scenes of various places in the United States. The story is told through the lens of various people from various background. The town of Collbran, CO is featured first. Collbran is a small Colorado town with residents who raise cattle, drive trucks, and ranch. We are introduced to a family of seven that was turned down for government assistance with a daughter in the 5th grade that is noticeably disadvantaged in the class room due to hunger. We are then introduced to Barbie a single Philadelphia mother of two who was also denied food stamps because she made more than the cut-off amount of $24,000. A similar trend is settles throughout the documentary but other social issues such as child-hood obesity due to insufficient amount of adequate nutrition, the price of fruits and vegetables versus the price of processed foods, and the access to healthy food become a major issue as the documentary progresses. Government subsidies to Agrbusinesses make it hard for funding to be placed in programs like SNAP, but lobbyist push $149 million dollars to get oil and gas bills through congress with ease. Raj Patel Author of Stuffed and Starved eloquently argues "why are people poor, right there in a political question, and one thats far more difficult to answer and involves asking questions about power, and about you know, class and about inequality and the persistent inequality in this country..." he follows up with those being the most difficult questions to answer.
I think the psychological effect of combat played a role in how Sgt. Price carried out the "taking care" of his dog as well as some underling signs of the omertà the combat veterans follow. On his way home from his tour he's constantly thinking about the events that happen while he was in country. One thing that I think stuck out was when he saw his XO slit the throat of a dying insurgent and he made the comparison of his XO to a PFC, meaning that's something someone who doesn't know better would do. I think he definitely knows right from wrong, so I think ruling out that he's crazy would be a good choice on making his decision to kill his dog with two shots to the chest and one to the head. Sgt. Price loved Vicar as he would a brother and didn't want him to suffer. I think thats the main reason he didn't want the vet to put his hands on his dog fearing the in the process of putting him down he could suffer or do the "death rattle" as he put it. He opens the story with "WE SHOT DOGS. Not by accident. We did it on purpose..." (Redeployment), that statement shows that killing a dog wasn't something he wasn't familiar with and he could do it, in a professional manner if he had to. The fact that Sgt. Price was still in "orange" upon his return didn't help much in trying to accept any other rational way of letting go of something he'd cared about so much. "Here's what orange is. You don't see or hear like you use to." I think there's also symbolism in him killing Vicar as if to say a part of who he used to be as an normal person living life in the "white" is now gone.
|