More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Billy Shore

GET UPDATES FROM Billy Shore

The National Conversation About New Priorities: Including Those Most Vulnerable

Posted: 06/26/11 06:39 PM ET

The nation's priorities are finally beginning to shift, as President Obama acknowledged last week in his televised address about reducing troops in Afghanistan: "America, it is time to focus on nation building here at home."

That same week the Conference of Mayors approved a resolution calling for an early end to our military role in Afghanistan and Iraq and asking Congress to redirect the $126 billion dollars spent annually there toward "urgent domestic needs," especially jobs. It was the group's first advocacy about the balance between foreign and domestic priorities since the Vietnam War.

Along with recent national public opinion polls, or perhaps because of them, these developments signal a distinct and long overdue change in the national conversation, one that began without the president's leadership but which he was savvy enough to recognize and at least give lip service, if not embrace.

The question now is what, beyond job creation, will make it onto the new list of domestic priorities? Will special interests see a new pool of billions of dollars in play and succeed in dominating the debate? Will politicians compete only to see who can appeal the most to the politically influential middle class? Will we let the greatest income gap between rich and poor in history continue to widen further? Or will those most vulnerable and voiceless -- the record number of Americans who are hungry and living in poverty -- finally be acknowledged and included in the national conversation?

This may be the best opportunity in decades to lay a moral foundation at the base of our public policy choices. Where to begin?

Notwithstanding the likelihood of many competing interests, there is one issue that politicians of all stripes should be able to agree upon because its redress is inextricably linked to solving so many other issues of import -- and that is the issue of childhood hunger. Aside from being unnecessary and just plain wrong in a nation of such abundance, allowing children to go hungry undermines our ability to achieve vital national goals.

Childhood hunger is a health care issue because the long-lasting consequences of hunger and poor nutrition manifest themselves in maternal and child health, diabetes, obesity, hyper-tension and an enormously expensive array of other health care costs borne by society at large.

Childhood hunger is also an education issue. Large majorities of public school teachers assert that hunger is an obstacle to kids in their classrooms learning at the level they should.

That means childhood hunger also directly impacts our ability to compete in the global economy and ensure our economic security.

And of course childhood hunger, which impacts those who are the most vulnerable to and least responsible for the suffering they endure, is unquestionably a moral issue.

Ironically, childhood hunger is probably the issue that is least expensive for our nation to address, especially because the resources to do so already exist in the form of programs with long track records of effectiveness and bipartisan support: school lunch and school breakfast, summer meals, SNAP (food stamps) and the Women, Infant and Children's Supplemental Nutrition program. The problem is that millions of kids who are eligible are not accessing and participating in these programs because of lack of awareness or because communities have not made it easy for them to do so. That's why simply elevating attention to the problem and the existing solutions could lead to powerful change. Some governors -- Democrats O'Malley in Maryland and Beebe in Arkansas, and Republican McDonnell in Virginia -- have begun to do just that and the results have been dramatic. A national focus could do even more.

The window that now exists to reshape our nation's agenda and priorities will not remain open long. There will be many voices competing to be heard. But if we are to reclaim moral leadership, and get to some of the root causes undermining education, health care and economic growth, then our national agenda must also reflect the needs and the rights of those whose voices are not heard. There's no better place to begin than by ending childhood hunger and addressing poverty in a more serious way than we've done in at least half a century.

 

Follow Billy Shore on Twitter: www.twitter.com/billshore

 
 
  • Comments
  • 6
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
03:04 PM on 06/28/2011
Food Network has a deep commitment to raising awareness of childhood hunger and child obesity. These problems get worse in summer, when school-based meal programs go on hiatus. One program we're working on with Share Our Strength, is called “No Kid Hungry in Summer.” It works with local partners across the country to connect kids with meals.

And Food Network is partnering with Comcast and Boys & Girls Clubs to build Good Food Gardens in ten cities. These self-contained gardens help teach kids the origins of food, and encourage them to eat more fresh fruits and vegetables.

Read more about these programs on the Scripps Networks blog, and sign a quick petition (scroll to the bottom of the post) to thank elected officials who are already working on childhood hunger.

http://blog.scrippsnetworks.com/?p=9
photo
HUFFPOST PUNDIT
procrustes13
02:11 PM on 06/27/2011
Hungry children don't have enough money to bribe the politicians so it's tough luck for them, and remember children, Money is Free Speech and Free Speech is Money... you have no Free Speech.
nothingchanges
too soon old, too late smart
09:27 AM on 06/27/2011
In January of this year, three Republican members of the Colorado Joint Budget Committee voted to defund a program that provided breakfast to poor children that came to school hungry. The total amount needed to keep that program going was $125,000 for the rest of the year....12 cents per child per day. The program was killed.

When asked by the press, one representative said it was a hard choice, but we just don't have the money.

On the same day, these same three members voted 3 million a year in tax breaks to the largest workers comp insurance company in the state. A company that made headlines last year when it was found that executives treated select members of their Colorado appointed board of directors to a golf bacchanalia in California at a cost of over $318,000 for five days. The booze tab alone was over $6,000.

Nearly three times as much money wasted in 5 days to corrupt an oversight board, as was needed to fund a program providing food for a year for poor children. The insurance company got their tax breaks.

"We can't afford it". How often have I heard Republicans say this. Now we know why.

They use government money and power to "buy" favors for their corporate patrons, its' disgusting.

Our system is broken, and the poor are paying for it.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
Delmark Goldfarb
Singer/songwriter, movie extra, grandfather
04:48 AM on 06/27/2011
Hungry children can't hire lobbyists, so they may lose out on this one.
03:41 AM on 06/27/2011
In places like L.A. county for example, 89% of the children on the free school lunch/breakfast program are children of illegal aliens. Don't you think many of these programs should eliminate individuals who are not even supposed to be in the country, much less deriving benefits of programs designed to aid our poor and hungry?
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
themightyabealrd
screw the real world-I'm an artist!
06:54 PM on 06/26/2011
Thank you, Billy, for calling attention to this issue. The well-being of our nation's children would seem to be an issue without controversy, one that everyone with a functioning heart can agree upon. There is a focus on situations that divide us & shifting that energy to something like childhood hunger would seem a sage move.