FREE NEWSLETTER
In our 55+ community my husband and I see signs of food insecurity on a regular basis. The line of cars picking up food boxes at a local church frequently fills the parking lot.
Earlier this year, two of the three local grocery stores started selling pork, beef and chicken sausages–made with scraps of meat trimmed away from higher end cuts–for 25 cents each.
After Thanksgiving, many residents began setting out their leftover food on the tables outside one of the recreation centers. It disappeared quickly.
The most telling sign of residents struggling to feed themselves comes from a report issued by a non-profit organization that provides financial help to members of our retirement community. In 2023, the fund dispersed nearly $290,000 in cash to residents. Recipients can request help for any number of reasons. They might not be able to make their mortgage or rent payment for a month or two. They may require an expensive repair to their air-conditioning unit. But increasingly the requests appear to be for help affording food. In 2023, the fund dispersed nearly $60,000 in food cards to residents who requested assistance.
Today I’ll be sending a check to our community fund. The way the fund is structured, any donations my husband and I make–up to $900–will reduce our own state tax liability. But more important is knowing we’ll be helping our own neighbors.
Kristine, I think what you describe is the benefit of a principle called subsidiarity where actions taken at the lowest possible political level are most effective. That is, help for those suffering from food insecurity is best handled when that assistance comes from the community rather than from the state or federal level.
Community members banding together best understand what their less fortunate members need rather than state or federal government bureaucrats. And the help these folks receive doesn’t involve filling out forms or meeting quotas.
I hope that your community and others like it across the country continue to assist your members directly rather than sit back and call for the government to “do something.”
Thank you for this comment–I wasn’t aware of the term subsidiarity. This ideal definitely appeals to my ‘smaller government is better’ beliefs.
As far as I know, our community fund doesn’t require much in the way of documentation from those folks who request assistance. While this could potentially lead to some amount of fraud, the fund has been around since 1982. If fraud was frequent, I don’t think it would have that kind of longevity.
In the short time my husband and I have lived here, we’ve seen numerous examples of neighbors helping neighbors. It’s heartening to see.
Thanks again for your thoughtful–and educational–comment.
You’re right to point out that the longevity of your community fund demonstrates that fraud is not widespread.
Perhaps a bit of fraud is tolerable if it enables a community program to effectively meet people’s needs with minimal overhead. And minimal overhead is likely a major factor contributing to the longevity of the program.
Besides, when run at the local level, anyone contemplating defrauding the program might think twice when a friend or neighbor is involved.
Can anyone explain to me, with data rather than anecdotal observations, why there is said to be “food insecurity” in this country when the Federal budge for SNAP (food stamps) exceeds $120 billion annually? Thank you in advance as I have long wondered about this paradox.