It might seem odd to think that something as small as diapers can affect bigger things like education, jobs and child welfare, but it's true.
The debate should be about how we get child care to everyone who needs help with it, paid parental leave, assured child support and a decent system of income assistance.
Mitt Romney made $15,080 every 6 hours in 2010, a year in which he grossed more than $21 million in income. It would take a minimum wage worker 1,436 years and 10 months to make what Mitt Romney made in 2010.
Given that nine states have attempted to pass bills to try to improve SNAP, (all failed thanks to a combined lobbying effort by the food industry and anti-hunger groups, which also stopped New York City's high-profile attempt) why not give the idea a chance?
Ending poverty and reversing unemployment may be complex, but feeding a child is not. If policymakers start to listen to the voices of Americans, they might move more quickly to ensure that no child is hungry.
Last month the U.S. Department of Education issued their most recent report on the education of homeless children. The results -- which even the agency admits are incomplete -- paint a bleak picture of the nation and its glut of homeless kids.
Many of those on the right think that, as a rule, people are poor because they deserve to be, because they haven't "worked hard" or some other such reason. You know these people, the ones who talk about being a "maker not a taker."
We conducted a review of campaign spending by the crop insurance industry's top political action committee and its lobbyists it has contracted through a Virginia law firm, and found, unfortunately, unsurprising results.
Ending poverty may be complex but feeding a child is not. This is not Syria or Sudan, not entitlement reform or credit swaps. This is a problem for which we know the solution and have the necessary resources, but lack only the will.
As Congress proposes cuts to hungry families, my new report raises questions about how much food makers, retailers and big banks profit from food stamps.
There are 16 million children in the United States who a...
The latest edition of UNICEF's report on child poverty showed the United States ranks second out of 35 developed countries on the scale of what economists call "relative child poverty" with 23.1 percent of its children living in poverty. Only Romania ranked higher. It was another shameful reminder that, as economist Sheldon Danziger put it, "Among rich countries, the U.S. is exceptional. We are exceptional in our tolerance of poverty." For the Lynch family in Columbus, Ohio, profiled here, headlines like this aren't news. Their family is a portrait of deep poverty in America. In 2010 20.5 million Americans were living on less than half of the federal poverty level.
The fact is that food stamps are an effective investment. For every dollar that's invested into the SNAP program, we get $1.71 back in return.
Living within a food stamp budget for one week was a challenge for both of us, but that challenge has ended. Unfortunately, the same cannot be said for millions of others.
We hear constantly... Oh, it is dinned into our ears... what our two major political parties are going to do for the middle class. The middle class, t...
Protecting our children from obesity requires more than increased physical activity and access to healthy food at school. It also compels us to do all we can to be sure they aren't coming home to poorly stocked kitchen cabinets. Childhood obesity and hunger are related and real problems -- and both are also really solvable.