Some conservative politicians get upset over the idea of government helping those that need help (as opposed to those who don't need help). They get really upset with the idea of helping people get food, even children.
We have two stories, one American and one Canadian. While the Canadian politician did eventually apologize, these two stories are a microcosm of an attitude, mostly in the United States, that helping people who are struggling with getting food is one of the worst deeds for government to do.
---
Rep. Jack Kingston (R-GA) is trying to stand out in a field to replace Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) in the Senate. Kingston's views on school lunches will definitely make him stand out.
Rep. Kingston really has a problem with free school lunches, as he expressed to a meeting of the Jackson County Republican Party.
"But one of the things I’ve talked to the secretary of agriculture about: Why don't you have the kids pay a dime, pay a nickel, to instill in them that there is, in fact, no such thing as a free lunch?"
Think that is too severe? Kingston is one step ahead of uh, something.
"Or maybe sweep the floor of the cafeteria — and yes, I understand that that would be an administrative problem, and I understand that it would probably lose you money. But think what we would gain as a society in getting people — getting the myth out of their head that there is such a thing as a free lunch."
Even by the standards of the U.S. South, Georgia's children come up short. More than 25% of Georgia children live below the poverty line (already set pretty low), and the state has the 6th highest child poverty rate.
---
"Is it the government's job — my job to feed my neighbor's child? I don't think so," Canadian federal Industry Minister James Moore.
Moore said this in a radio interview about child poverty and hunger in British Columbia, Moore's home province.
"Obviously nobody wants kids to go to school hungry … but is that always the government's job? To be there to serve people their breakfast? Empowering families with more power and resources so they can feed their own children is I think a good thing."
Moore hit on a conservative theme: giving more power to families to feed their own children. Or using private charity to help those in need. In theory, that sounds lovely. It doesn't match the reality on the streets and in the neighborhoods.
To reiterate, Moore did apologize later for this remarks.
"Great work has been done to tackle poverty and the challenges associated with poverty. And while more work is needed, I know the cause of fighting poverty is not helped by comments like those I made last week. For that, I am sorry."
---
Rep. Kingston is worried about poor children thinking the world is full of "free lunches." MP Moore is worried about people thinking the government job is to feed children who need food.
Children, regardless of social structure and status, do not think about how much food costs. They don't get that toys can be expensive, no matter how cool they look on TV.
If the children are poor, then they already know their world are not filled with metaphorical free lunches.
The government's job isn't to feed people. And food assistance doesn't do that; food assistance allows people a boost so they can afford rent and food. You can treat it as a subsidy to farmers markets and grocery stores if that will make you feel better.
MP Moore's suggestion of empowering families to feed their own children is a rather good suggestion, but neither the United States nor Canada is doing so.
Saying that food assistance isn't what we should be doing is not enough; conservative politicians from both countries need counter proposals that can work in real life and be implemented. And no, "hiring" children to clean up is not a real-life suggestion.
Offer solutions to help a growing concern over food security. And if you can't do so, offer help on improving food assistance. And if you can't do so, get out of the way.
Didn't anyone learn from the 47% gaffe from the 2012 election?
Posted by: Tim | January 23, 2014 at 07:25 PM
There is definitely a disconnect between the "Two Americas." Those that have food don't know the people that struggle with food insecurity.
Posted by: Chad | January 23, 2014 at 09:38 PM
When Teachers, etc. make far above the income average (amongst "middle class" citizens) plus higher pensions and incredible job security... and North American kids today are also scoring poorly in math, reading, etc., ... look towards the public money/debt quietly being spent if overall children are living in poverty.
However, blame the Parents if/when fast food fed children are either hungry, markedly over fat, and/or lazy and ignorant.
In most cities, how many regular teachers commute via the poor masses' public transit for instance?
Posted by: CQ | January 26, 2014 at 09:20 AM
Well-fed children do score higher on standardized tests, and make teachers' jobs easier. Poverty is a societal issue, especially in major cities. The U.S. does have more of a gangs issue, which negatively affects education in inner cities.
In Chicago, teachers often have to travel long distances to get to their school. Would seem better for them and the kids if they knew the neighborhood they were teaching in.
Posted by: Chad | January 27, 2014 at 09:17 AM