I blog...because the news is interesting.

Friday, September 28, 2007

George Bush Doesn't Care about the Children

Browsing through my BBC newsfeed this morning, I came across the following item:


Child health bill faces Bush veto

The US Senate has overwhelmingly passed a bill to expand a children's health care insurance scheme, setting up a policy showdown with President Bush.

Mr Bush has threatened to veto the bill which he argues takes the programme beyond its original purpose of insuring children from low-income families.

The legislation would raise tobacco taxes to provide an extra $35bn (£17bn) to insure some 10 million children.


I am a non smoker, so the tax would not affect me, but I think it's a good idea. Maybe even expand it a little and start taxing soda sales. I'll pay $1.59 for a coke if that means children get health insurance.

Unfortunately, the bill is not a done deal:

The SCHIP was set up to help working families who could not afford private health insurance but who earned too much to qualify for Medicaid - the government health care programme for the poor.

Opponents of the legislation said the increase in funding was too large and expanded government-subsidised health care.

They also accused the legislation's backers of attempting to win political points ahead of 2008's presidential and congressional elections.

"Democrats are counting down the hours so they can tee up the election ads saying Republicans don't like kids," said Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell.

"Meanwhile, they're using SCHIP as a Trojan horse to sneak government-run health care into the states," the Associated Press quoted him as saying.

Sponsors of the legislation rejected criticism that it would expand coverage to families of four earning up to $83,000.


The criticisms don't hold water in my book. Looking at the figure quoted, it seems very very high - how could someone who makes $83,000 a year not be able to afford health insurance?

Unfortunately, quite easily. Assuming you live in a major metropolitan area, salaries are high - but so is the cost of living. So that $83,000 for a family of four does not explain the realities of what it costs to feed and clothe a family - particularly if you are one of the millions of independent contractors who has to pay for insurance out of their own pocket.

So, if your 80K is tagged for rent (40%) and taxes (25%), you are really only working with $28,000 a year. Now account for food, clothing, and transportation across 4 people, with $28,000. See? The situation starts to look bleak.

And with independent health care options for a family of four STARTING at around $350 a month (esurance has some current quotes) it is no wonder why people banking $80K might struggle trying to afford the crippling cost of insurance.

I am surprised at the short memory of President Bush. At the beginning of this year, the DC area was shocked at the revelation that a child had died for the lack of proper dental care. The child had an abscess in his tooth which allowed bacteria to seep into his brain. Due to limited finances, his mother had to choose which child could receive emergency dental care - his brother was deemed a higher risk.

Fund the damn bill.

Labels: , ,

Thursday, September 13, 2007

Why Food Politics is an activist issue

Sorry for all the gaps between posts - it's been a weird summer. Things should straighten out by October.

In the meantime, the Louisiana Weekly has an interesting article on the Farm Bill and Urban Food Policy. (See the title link for the full article.)

The article states:

The nation's capital leads the nation in childhood obesity, according to a recent U.S. Department of Health and Human Services survey. This fact comes as no surprise to the National Urban League. We studied D.C.'s 8th Ward, where more than one-third of residents live in poverty and more than one-third of its children are obese.

The neighborhood is a classic food desert. Saturated with fast food outlets, it doesn't offer a single full-size chain supermarket, and the three small grocery stores that do business there offer outdated meat and tired-looking produce. Fast food and convenience stores make up 81 percent of food resources. The Food Research and Action Center, a D.C.-based nonprofit working to eradicate hunger in the United States, has even given the neighborhood a grade of "D" for community food security.


This is something I've witnessed first hand. In many parts of DC, there is no major grocery store for 20 mins in any direction. It might sound like a minor inconvenience to suburabanites, but that time and distance really add up - especially if you need to haul groceries on the metro, or ride a crowded city bus with bags at your feet.

The article continues:

As 8th Ward residents struggled to find a decent apple or a non-wilted bunch of collard greens, only one mile away the U.S. House of Representatives was writing its 2007 Farm Bill, the nation's most vital piece of food legislation. Calls for reform in farm-support programs and significant increases in nutrition and conservation spending made little progress. While the House included new programs and increased spending for existing ones, their size and scale simply do not measure up to the scope of the problem.

Over 300 doctors and other health professionals asked Congress to write a farm bill that will improve access to healthy foods, such as fresh fruits and vegetables, and help to build the infrastructure to get healthy foods to low-income communities.


This is sorely needed as most affluent US kids do not get the nurtition they deserve. What about the kids with no access to health care, dental care, or basic green leafy foods?

With 35 million Americans classified by the USDA as food insecure, the House passed a bill that made only marginal improvements to the Food Stamp Program, the nation's most important defense against hunger. It increased the minimum monthly allotment from $10 per person-where it has been now for over 30 years-to a stingy $18.


That's just pitiful. Think about how much it costs to eat each day. I can blow through $10 at the local deli, on a breakfast sandwich and juice. And someone is trying to survive on that?

Since 1985 the actual price of fruits and vegetables has risen 40 percent, while the price of sugar and fats has fallen as much as 14 percent. These disparities in the cost of healthy and unhealthy food reflect U.S. farm policies that give nearly nothing to fruit and vegetable producers but pass along the lion's share of public support to commodity crop farmers.

Let there be no mistake about it-urban America wants farmers to succeed. We have watched with delight as 4,500 farmers markets have blossomed nationwide. As those farmers have brought their abundance to urban consumers, we have brought our demand for healthy locally grown food. The synergy between city and country has never been so robust and the market opportunities so immense. That is why our farm policies must do more to strengthen the viability of local and regional farming to help meet the surging demand.

Underserved communities cannot be denied access to the same healthy and affordable food that is available to more affluent Americans. With good food and farm policies, we can realistically expect that our future generations will be free of the dietary challenges that now confront them.


Agreed.

Labels: , ,

Monday, September 03, 2007

DC and the Continuing Dance of Gentrification

Browsing the blogs, I stumbled across this piece in USA Today:

Much has changed since Ben's Chili Bowl opened nearly 50 years ago on a bustling strip known as America's Black Broadway for its thriving black-owned shops and theaters.

Back then, the red-and-white diner was a popular hangout for black bankers, doctors and blue-collar workers who lived and worked along U Street. Even jazz greats Duke Ellington and Ella Fitzgerald could be found devouring chili half-smokes and milkshakes after performing at nearby clubs.

Now, on some days, the crowd at the Washington landmark is mostly white, reflecting a neighborhood metamorphosis that has brought in high-end condominiums and businesses like Starbucks.

"Sometimes you look around and wonder, 'Where are all the black people?"' said Virginia Ali, who opened the diner with her husband, Ben, in 1958.


Stephen Colbert had once joked "DC is the chocolate city with the marshmallow center." Unfortunately, it is becoming a situation where the marshmallow center is slowly overtaking the whole city.

Now, taken individually, I do not have a problem with more white people moving to the city.

I have no problem with the city undergoing some much needed structural improvements.

And I see no issue with revitalizing neighborhoods.

However, this quote illustrates my reservations:

Change also is happening near the new convention center on the edge of downtown, where Shirley Williams is trying to hold on to the apartment she has lived in for 33 years. Her landlord recently agreed to sell to a developer who plans to tear it down.

"I've been here through all the rough times and now that it's getting better they want me to leave," the retired school teacher's assistant said. "I don't think that's right."


Why do these changes have to come at such a steep cost to historical residents?

Why am I priced out of my own city?

Labels: ,