Even regular food drops are not enough to alleviate food insecurity and hunger for many people. (©FlaglerLive)
Written by Carla Ventura
We operate a food pantry. We are proud of our work. But if lawmakers passed a livable minimum wage and invested more in programs like SNAP, people like me wouldn't have to rely on food pantries.
Pantries are an important piece of the anti-hunger puzzle, but they are a connecting piece. Government nutrition programs with the infrastructure and funding to get the job done should take center stage.
I grew up on food stamps called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). My mother worked hard, but her wages were too low to meet our basic needs. Sometimes I felt embarrassed pulling out stamps at the cash register. I was worried that kids would talk about me at school.
However, this assistance was a blessing. It helped protect us from hunger. Still, food stamps weren't designed to last a month. Most months, we had to travel long distances to find food reserves.
SNAP is the most effective anti-hunger program in the United States, feeding nearly a quarter of America's children. This program will reduce hunger by approximately 30%, improve long-term educational, health, and economic outcomes for children, and help address systemic racial disparities in poverty.
SNAP is your first line of defense in an economic downturn. In fact, the pandemic-era increase in SNAP benefits led to food insecurity dropping to an all-time low of 10.2% in 2021, at the height of the pandemic. But now that these benefits have expired, almost 13% of us are experiencing food insecurity.
For many Americans, wages are simply too low. In South Carolina, where I live, two adults and two children must earn at least $21 an hour to meet basic needs. However, our state's minimum wage is only $7.25.
To afford a modest two-bedroom apartment here, you would have to work 106 hours a week for that wage. In fact, the minimum wage is not enough to cover the average rent for a two-bedroom apartment in the country.
More than 44 million Americans rely on SNAP to fight hunger. But some members of Congress are proposing cutting the program by a whopping $30 billion over the next 10 years. South Carolina alone, which is among the top 10 most food insecure states, will suffer $400 million in cuts.
That would be devastating for families like mine.
I'm a single mother with three children. At age 3, one of my son's boyfriends was diagnosed with autism, but we couldn't find an affordable daycare center that would accommodate his needs. Every week, I had to leave his job immediately to either help him or rush him home. Unable to maintain employment. I needed help during that difficult time and SNAP provided it.
I now run a food pantry called Food for All, and I have found that I am never alone.
I listen to the people who come here and share my story to ease their embarrassment. When people say, “I can now afford to buy medicine,'' “I can now make rent,'' or “I don't have to choose between feeding my child and buying new shoes,'' I'm there to help. I breathe a sigh of relief. ”
But sometimes you have to watch people who have been waiting in an hour-long line get turned away because they ran out of food. There is no way we can get enough food donations to meet the enormous needs.
But I won't give up. None of us can do that.
That's why I continue to fight for stronger SNAP funding and against proposed SNAP cuts. People should not rely on food pantries to feed themselves or their families.
We know what works. When hunger was predicted to skyrocket during the pandemic, we saw how investing in the well-being of our families reduced hunger. I have to do it again.
Carla Ventura is a mother, founder of the nonprofit organization Food for All, and poverty expert from Columbia, South Carolina.