Last December, Iowa Governor Kim Reynolds turned down $29 million of federal funding that would have provided a low-income family $40 per month “to help with food costs” during the 3-month break in the school year. Her justification for snubbing the federal money was a cruel accusation that Iowa children are fat and that “childhood obesity has become an epidemic.” But let’s not have facts get in the way. Or, the lack of facts, thereof.
Erica Kenney, an assistant professor at Harvard University’s T.H. Chan School of Public Health, said “there is no evidence that a program like this has anything to do with childhood obesity. It’s absolutely true you can have obesity and be struggling to get food on the table for your family. It is not all true that helping people who are struggling financially means they’re going to eat more and gain weight.”
The governor’s heart may be in the “right” place when she claims that the $40 per month will not “promote nutrition,” but it’s not like the family receiving the assistance will give the EBT card to the kid so that the child can run down to Candyland and splurge on Mountain Dew and KitKat bars.
For someone who is family-oriented with parental rights at the forefront, the governor’s contradiction of total government control over the food choices of families is beyond flagrant.
Reynolds rejected the $29 million deal claiming that it would cost the state $2.2 million in administration fees. However, State Senator Sarah Trone Garriott questions that amount since it costs Iowa $2.2 million in shared administrative costs to run the entire Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) for the whole state.” Moreover, the $900,000 for grants is a 15% increase in the already $6 million of federal money that was used by Iowa last year to fund the Summer Food Service Program. And supposedly, the money is for administrative purposes as well as money for healthy protein, veggies and fruits.
Secretary of Agriculture Vilsack estimates Reynold’s rejection last December means “Iowa will take a $100 million economic hit. The federal assistance “rolls around” in the economy, creating jobs at grocery stores and other businesses.”
Let’s do the math: the program that was rejected by Reynolds would provide $40 per month per child for three months; that’s $120 per summer per child. That doesn’t seem like a lot, but with several children at home during the summer parents can determine which foods to buy with the extended SNAP dollars. Without subtracting administration costs, that would assist 241,666 children in Iowa. Using Gov. Reynold’s Summer Food Service Program and Seamless Summer Option, which is nothing more than a continuation of free breakfasts and lunches provided by the federal government, not every child who received free meal in school will be able to participate. There are two reasons for this. First, over one-third of Iowa’s counties had either no meal sites or one meal site per county in 2023. Second, there are three options to the plan.
If operating a congregate meal, federal regulations require that parents and caregivers cannot pick up meals for their children, and “all meals must be consumed on-site.” However, a child may take “one fruit, vegetable, or grain item from their meal off-site to eat later.” According to the government website, a “typical lunch, for example, could include a [cold] turkey sandwich on wheat bread, milk, and apple, and a salad.
Another option is that the program is free to all children who attend camp, which is not defined, but most likely includes Vacation Bible School.
The third option is a non-congregate site where meals may be offered “to-go,” where a recipient or parent may pick-up the meal, or possibly delivered. How this differs from the first option is not explained.
All options for new meal site under the grant “must be located in an area where at least 50 percent or more of the children are eligible for free or reduced-price meals.”
A huge problem with Reynold’s program is that many adolescents sleep in during the summer. Having to be at a congregate site at a certain time will cause many teens and pre-teens to miss the most important meal of the day – breakfast. The program rejected by Iowa would have provided a breakfast meal at home. No walking in the rain, the sun, and scorching heat.
The Seamless Summer Option is a political response to an apparent uproar over criticism that the governor cares little about feeding hungry children.
This is a program that should be audited in the Fall. However, since this administration has tied the hands of Iowa’s Auditor, duct-taped his mouth shut and blindfolded his eyes, don’t count on that happening.
***
This article first appeared in the April 2024 issue of the Prairie Progressive.
Please help Fawkes-Lee & Ryan maintain this website by donating $10, $20, $30, $50, $100, or more.
Your support is appreciated.
Subscribe (It’s FREE): Email mrtyryn@gmail.com with “Subscribe” in the Subject Line.
Fawkes-Lee & Ryan
2516 Lynner Dr.
Des Moines, IA 50310
Copyright (c) 2024. Fawkes-Lee & Ryan. All rights reserved.
Thanks for this! You are right that parents can make $120 go a long way. When I looked at food bank websites recently, the foods they constantly ran out of included the following: peanut butter, applesauce, oatmeal, bread, crackers, and canned fruit, soup & vegetables. Many of these items (especially if you buy a store brand) are relatively inexpensive, which — to me — suggests that the people in need are not extravagant but spend money wisely.
I’ve been following this sad story of bad actions by the Governor and find your comments to be right on point! Too bad Iowa’s children became political pawns in a game they can’t win. Thanks for sharing.