There is much to be grateful for this Thanksgiving: that Democrats once again control Congress, that Rummy and Mehlman are out -- with Rove possibly on the way, that we don't have to live Michael Richards' future (to paraphrase the Soup Nazi: "No career for you!"), and most gratifying, that there are no more hungry people in America. At least not officially.
That's right, the Orwellians in the Bush administration have decided to no longer use the word "hunger" to describe the 35 million Americans -- that's 12 percent of the population -- who aren't always sure where their next meal is coming from. Instead, the poor people formerly known as the hungry will now be referred to as people experiencing "very low food security."
Of course, according to the USDA, which measures Americans' access to food, this has nothing to do with trying to sugarcoat the disgraceful reality of 35 million people not being able to put food on the table in one of the wealthiest countries in the world. It's all about accuracy. Hunger, you see, is actually the byproduct of being "food insecure" and thus harder to precisely measure. In the words of a USDA advisory panel, hunger "should refer to a potential consequence of food insecurity that, because of prolonged, involuntary lack of food, results in discomfort, illness, weakness, or pain that goes beyond the usual uneasy sensation."
Just writing that gives me an "uneasy sensation."
Here is the bottom line: the change in nomenclature doesn't hide the reality that the number of Americans experiencing hunger -- I mean, a "prolonged, involuntary lack of food" -- has risen over the past five years.
Unfortunately, this shameful state of affairs isn't all that surprising. Almost 7 years ago, in December 1999, I wrote a column criticizing both political parties for ignoring America's poor. This was prompted by then-presidential candidate George Bush's chilling reaction to a federal report showing that 5 percent of households in Texas had suffered from hunger during his time as governor. "Where?," Bush had asked, adding, "You'd think the governor would have heard if there are pockets of hunger in Texas." He also challenged the accuracy of the USDA findings, saying, "I'm sure there are some people in my state who are hungry. I don't believe 5 percent are hungry."
He didn't believe it then, and he doesn't want to believe it now. Thus, the linguistic gymnastics. But the White House's whitewash won't change the reality of hunger in America.
That will take a national commitment to overcoming poverty from our leaders -- and from all of us. Something to think about as we sit down to our Thanksgiving feasts.