Thursday, November 16, 2006
"Food Insecurity" Shows Little Improvement
A report released yesterday by the United States government shows that some 35 million Americans could not put food on the table at some time last year, 2005.
That's right, nearly 12% of American households lacked food; looked at another way, that's over one in ten.
Skeptics have frequently claimed in the past that the annual report by the USDA was fabricated. According to an article in the Washington Post, Texas governor George Bush said words to that effect in 1999, accusing the democratically controlled administration of trying to cast Texas in a bad light. Texas is one of the worst states for "food insecurity," which is the current term used to obfuscate the issue. This year, the report was delayed until after the election, and Democrats charged the department with political motives.
Politicians can attack the motives behind the report, but curiously, there does not seem to be specific criticism of the methodology and process used to compile the figures.
Nearly 11 million Americans reported actually going hungry in 2005.
The data bolsters my contention that we are becoming more like a third world nation every day.
The statistics show some improvement of the problem; the current "food insecure" figure of 11% is higher than the previous year's 11.9%.
We can only hope and pray that God softens the hearts our people; for Americans are a stiff-necked people, unable to hear the words of hope and unable to answer the call to compassion.
(The report itself can be found here.)
That's right, nearly 12% of American households lacked food; looked at another way, that's over one in ten.
Skeptics have frequently claimed in the past that the annual report by the USDA was fabricated. According to an article in the Washington Post, Texas governor George Bush said words to that effect in 1999, accusing the democratically controlled administration of trying to cast Texas in a bad light. Texas is one of the worst states for "food insecurity," which is the current term used to obfuscate the issue. This year, the report was delayed until after the election, and Democrats charged the department with political motives.
Politicians can attack the motives behind the report, but curiously, there does not seem to be specific criticism of the methodology and process used to compile the figures.
Nearly 11 million Americans reported actually going hungry in 2005.
The data bolsters my contention that we are becoming more like a third world nation every day.
The statistics show some improvement of the problem; the current "food insecure" figure of 11% is higher than the previous year's 11.9%.
We can only hope and pray that God softens the hearts our people; for Americans are a stiff-necked people, unable to hear the words of hope and unable to answer the call to compassion.
(The report itself can be found here.)
Labels: Bush, food insecurity, hunger, Texas
Comments:
<< Home
Visit My Current Blog!
I am absolutely appalled at the craziness of "relabeling" things like hunger and human deaths as a result of war. "Food insecurity" is ludicrous as is "collateral damage." All of it is designed to allow folks to ignore harsh realities and retreat to the comfort of their illusions. Thanks, Mike, for writing about this. I have a friend in St. Louis, a pastor, who has written me several times recently about the food insecurity label. He is even more astounded than I am because he works more closely with folks who experience real pangs of hunger and the "collateral?" side effects of poor nutrition.
Jan
Jan
# posted by 
: 2:26 PM
: 2:26 PM
Thanks Jan. I originally got this from the Washington Post. Their story inaccurately said the hunger problem is worse now than in the previous year. The KC Star then picked up the story, repeating the innacuracy. The Ag Dept website, though, actually said there was the improvement I reported.
Inaccuracies such as these undermine the credibility of the news; yet, we must rely on the news in making decisions and trying to allocate scare resources.
Post a Comment
Inaccuracies such as these undermine the credibility of the news; yet, we must rely on the news in making decisions and trying to allocate scare resources.
<< Home
