Food Insecurity In Texas

Food insecurity is not having reliable access to a sufficient amount of food to enjoy an active and healthy life. Hunger is a feeling of discomfort caused by the lack of food. Hunger would be difficult to measure, thus food insecurity is used to offer an accepted method for measuring food deprivation (Feeding Texas, n.d.). Food insecurity is a major issue in Texas. Texas ranks second highest nationally in total number of food insecure individuals (Camp, 2015). Texas also has a higher food insecure rate than the national average (Camp, 2015). People are embarrassed to talk about it and some fail to realize the lifelong negative effects the lack of nutrition can have. Those who do seek government assistance sometimes don’t qualify or don’t receive

it adequately. Although this ubiquitous problem is not new, it continues to worsen, and remains unsolved. Nonetheless, our government of Texas has the power to take action and solve this issue.
In most cases, a food insecure household does not lack access to grocery stores, however it refers to lack of food access based on financial limitations (Feeding Texas, n.d.).

Inevitably, food insecurity tends to be a never ending cycle. Often a constant battle of deciding whether to eat or pay the bills. A big misconception is the idea that simply because some low income families receive government assistance, they should be fine. On the contrary, many families who receive government assistance such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) still do not have enough, and therefore are food insecure. Another problem is that if one does not meet the requirements to receive public assistance they must rely on food banks and soup kitchens for sustenance. Also, it is not only single parents who are food insecure, but two employed parent households with low income, who at the end of the day can’t seem to make ends meet. Furthermore, some people assume that those who receive any form of government assistance are just cheating the system and are lazy, however ultimately those who seek it are really in need. I believe that just because they are asking for help does not mean they want to depend on welfare the rest of their lives, instead they are grasping an opportunity to help them get where they need to be both health and income wise. Clearly, I support government assistance programs, but I do believe they should be regulated in a different manner. For example, the

Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program does not restrict junk food and luxury items, and I believe it should.
While it may seem counterintuitive, there is a strong correlation between poverty, hunger, and obesity (among other health issues). The association between hunger and obesity is due to insufficient funds for the right nutrition. Obesity rates are highest among people in lower income groups. Our farm policy is in control of what we do and don’t subsidize (only one percent of fruits and vegetables are subsidized). Therefore food insecure families are inclined to buying processed foods which are packed with sugars, fats, and calories since they are cheap in oppose to healthy nutrient dense foods. In addition, it is also likely that individuals in food insecure households will develop binge eating behaviors and the disorder may continue after the individual is food secure. Consequently, this issue is likely to lead to multiple issues that can affect someone for the rest of their life.
Although there is no one solution, awareness of this problem needs to be spread. It may not directly fix this problem, but it is a start. The majority of our population throws away food without hesitating, but if we had any idea of how it is to live not knowing where our next meal was coming from if at all, we would think twice. Spreading awareness of food insecurity and advocating could encourage our society to come together and donate to local food banks. The government of Texas and our local governments can also help by funding or building more food banks across the state.
"The supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly known as the Food Stamp Program) is the nation’s most important anti-hunger program" (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2016). About seventy percent of SNAP participants are households with children. Sadly, these children facing food insecurity are defenseless. While the federal government pays for the SNAP benefits, the states split the cost of administering the program, and ultimately operate the program (Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, 2016). As previously stated, I believe SNAP should be regulated differently. This would contribute to the correlation among hunger and obesity. However it does not change the fact that some households receive an inadequate amount of money under the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. For example, if this program were to prohibit the purchasing of junk food it would limit and direct participants to buy foods that are healthier. Nonetheless, healthy foods are by far more expensive which would lead to participants being able to buy less amount of food.
According to the documentary A Place at The Table the onset of the obesity epidemic was in 1980. Not coincidentally around this time the price of fruits and vegetables had gone up while the price of processed foods went down significantly (Silverbush & Jacobson, 2013). Those eligible for the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program must have a monthly income at or below the poverty line. Thus causing fear of working too many hours because that would revoke those benefits. In a lot of cases working a minimum wage job and receiving benefits allows for a house hold to stretch the amount of food they are able to buy for the month longer than working at a higher pay and not receiving benefits. Therefore, our state and local government should take responsibility and restructure their policy on how much households receive in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program.
This problem of not being able to buy healthy foods because they are more expensive involves what we do and don’t subsidize.

Farm bills provide financial support for commodity crops such as wheat, corn and soybeans (Condra, 2011). However, they provide little to no financial support for fruit and vegetable producers. It seems as if our government is supporting a subsidy program that excludes fruits and vegetables while encouraging us to consume more fruits and vegetables (Condra, 2011). Fruits and vegetables should be reasonably priced because they are essential and are not luxury goods. Furthermore, Texas receives the most farm subsidy of all fifty states (Andrzejewski, 2014). According to USDA, 81 percent of farms in Texas did not collect subsidy payments. If as a state we are receiving plenty of financial support, why is it mostly going to commodity crops? In my opinion, fruit and vegetable producers should receive fair subsidy to be able to sell their products at a more reasonable price while still profiting regularly. Consuming fruits and vegetables most definitely should not be viewed as a privilege. They are a necessity in growth and development and in leading a long healthy

life.
Ultimately, it is the federal government who has the most control is solving this issue, but our local governments have the voice and responsibility to at the very least address it. Clearly it would take a lot of planning and effort, but this is not something that should just be talked about, rather it needs to be taken care of once and for all. Being food secure should be a right. People are ashamed of being labeled as food insecure but the bottom line is it’s the sad truth and it needs to be taken care of. Food is the most basic human need and as a society with the help of our government we are capable of ending food insecurity.