It took roughly eight weeks for the glow of The Christmas Carol to fade, at least for 14 Republican governors. The season of light gave us Scrooge, whose self-absorbed meanness made audiences gasp. What an awful man! To let children suffer from “Hunger” and “Ignorance,” the scourges of the poor! When the three ghosts forced Scrooge to change course, from miserliness to philanthropy, audiences cheered. Scrooge saved not just his soul, but fed some of London’s hungry children. Miserly Scrooge morphed into Benevolent Scrooge! Hooray!
Now, weeks later, those Republican governors have segued back to Miserly Scrooge. Scrooge’s business was “business;” theirs is the business of state. Forget the children unlucky enough to live under their purview. They can go hungry. The “budget” trumps (I used the word advisedly) both compassion and decency.
The 14 states are: Alabama, Alaska, Florida, Georgia, Iowa, Idaho, Louisiana, Mississippi, Oklahoma, South Carolina, South Dakota, Texas, Vermont and Wyoming. (Washington Post, Jan. 10). Initially, Nebraska Governor Jim Pillen joined the bunch, declaiming federal welfare; but on Feb. 12, after a public outcry (including a petition signed by more than 6,000 voters) Gov. Pillen had a change of heart — Scrooge would understand.
The battle — Benevolence versus Miserliness — came to a head with the reauthorization of the children’s food program, which gives food to children not only during the school year, but during the summer. For the states, the battle centered on food for the summer. Fourteen Republican governors could have said “yes.” Most other governors, including some Republicans, agreed to the program, approved as part of a bi-partisan budget agreement in 2022. But the nay-sayers held firm, rejecting this newly federally funded program to feed children during the summer. Roughly eight million children will meet Miserly Scrooge this June.
The program is expected to serve 21 million children. In terms of the total US budget, the $2.5 billion in relief is minor. Children eligible for free or reduced lunch will receive $120 per child to defray the costs of summer lunch. Typically, public recreations programs distribute lunches during the summer: not gourmet fare, usually a sandwich, milk, fruit, a cookie. The stipend is not lavish, would not pay for much more.
Many children, though, do not participate in organized summer activities; in fact, for many children there are no convenient activities. Those children remain at home, sometimes overseeing siblings. And while the program comes with a price tag, Uncle Sam picks up that tab. States do not pay.
Nevertheless, governors, including some in the poorest states, have said “no,” citing a slew of reasons that evoke Scrooge. Children are obese anyway. The program offers money to children at home, who do not attend summer programs. Their parents can feed them. The program is inefficient. Our state does not have hungry children. This is yet another form of welfare. The excuses spew forth, a callous justification for denying food subsidies to poor children during the summer. (When those children are in school, they eat subsidized lunches.)
Yes, many children, especially poor children, are overweight. The solution, though, is not to deny them food, but to give them nutritious food. Yes, the subsidy will augment the family’s food budget — hardly wasteful given the pervasive poverty of many families. As for government efficiency, this program does not promise to be more egregiously inefficient than a lot of state programs; indeed, the program gives a tangible benefit: food. Finally, yes, the program is another form of welfare, but the families need welfare to escape penury.
Of course, Miserly Scrooge did not become miserly just with this program. Ten states have not expanded Medicaid – Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kansas, Mississippi, South Carolina, Tennessee, Texas, Wisconsin, and Wyoming. Seven of them (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Mississippi, South Carolina, Texas and Wyoming) also nixed the summer lunches. Their governors were never truly benevolent.
Politicians in this season of endless campaigning are praising the innovation, the imagination, the thrift of states that use taxpayers’ money prudently. This season a slew of Republican governors (including those from South Carolina and Florida) have shown how miserly and mean they can be. Maybe the electorate can give them the kind of intervention that the ghosts gave Scrooge — awakening them to the abject misery around them, encouraging their hearts to overcome their miserliness.
Joan Retsinas is a sociologist who writes about health care in Providence, R.I. Email joan.retsinas@gmail.com.
From The Progressive Populist, March 15, 2024
Blog | Current Issue | Back Issues | Essays | Links
About the Progressive Populist | How to Subscribe | How to Contact Us