Jane Black, of the Washington Post, reports that food stamp use is expected to exceed 30 million this month - a number higher than the historic increase after Hurricane Katrina.

Any doubt that the next stimulus package should include increased food stamp benefits should now be erased.

“We soon will have the most food stamps recipients in the history of our country,” said Jim Weill, president of the Food Research and Action Center, a D.C.-based anti-hunger policy organization. “If the economic forecasts come true, we’re likely to see the most hunger that we’ve seen since the 1981 recession and maybe since the 1960s, when these programs were established.”

Earlier this month Obama’s new Chief of Staff, Rahm Emanuel said:

“Rule one: Never allow a crisis to go to waste….They are opportunities to do big things.”

When Congress returns to session, they should heed their former colleague’s advice and think big on ending domestic hunger.

Since Thursday is Thanksgiving, it seems particularly fitting to stick with a hunger theme this week. Today’s Baltimore Examiner, brought good news for families in Maryland. Governor Martin O’Malley has partnered with Share Our Strength, a non-profit organization based in Washington DC, to give children in his state greater access to nutritious meals.

More than 184,000 children go hungry in Maryland. This new partnership will invest $4.5 million existing federal dollars to fill this nutrition gap.

The goals of the new program are to significantly increase participation in the four basic nutrition programs: school breakfasts, lunches, the summer food service program when school is out, and the child and adult care food program, which operates through licensed child-care centers.

Yesterday, I wrote about our most recent “Memo to the Next President” on ending childhood hunger. One of the five policy recommendations includes the formation of creative partnerships between government, non-profit and religious groups. Maryland is already leading the way and can serve as a model for the entire country.

On a side note, I enjoyed reading this part of the article:

O’Malley was at a Democratic Leadership Council conference in Nashville in 2007 when he first heard about the plans for the new program. He took out his BlackBerry and immediately text messaged Debbie Shore, co-founder of Share Our Strength, based in Washington, to say he wanted Maryland to be first. Shore and O’Malley worked together in the 1984 presidential campaign of former Sen. Gary Hart.

The conference mentioned is our annual National Conversation, which brings together elected officials from all over the country to brainstorm and share ideas. It’s always rewarding to see ideas move into action.

As promised on Friday, our latest “Memo to the Next President” is by Joel Berg and Tom Freedman on ending domestic childhood hunger.  36 million Americans, including 12 million children have been classified as food insecure.  But even though these numbers are startling and depressing, we can fix it. How do we bring the troops home from Iraq? What is the best way to reduce green house emissions? Those are hard questions. How do we end childhood hunger? We have the tools and know-how to do that. Berg and Friedman note:

This is no quixotic venture. It can be accomplished by reforming existing programs and with some new spending, most of which would go into the expansion of school meals and food stamp benefits targeted at children.

They outline a five part plan to help President-elect Obama meet his goal of ending childhood hunger by 2015.

Step 1: Provide all children with a free school breakfast. Most low-income students are eligible for free- or reduce-priced school breakfast but do not take advantage of it because of stigma and availability. Adopting a universal school breakfast policy will feed more low-income children and produce positive effects throughout the entire school. Furthermore, it can save schools time and money through reduced paperwork and bureaucracy.

Step 2: Improve program accountability and efficiency. The application process for food and nutrition programs is too complex. Berg and Friedman argue that the Obama administration should combine the food stamp program with other nutrition programs to:

This will create administrative efficiencies, widen eligibility, and boost participation.

Step 3: Support Working Families. Berg and Friedman argue that we can’t end childhood hunger without making sure parents earn a decent wage. Therefore, we should expand the Earned Income Tax Credit and index the minimum wage to inflation.

Step 4: Reward Best Practices in the States. Provide bonuses to states that are particularly successful and innovative in reducing hunger.

Step 5: Provide Real Ammo for the Armies of Compassion. Berg and Friedman believe the government must form creative partnerships with non profit and religious groups to not only feed more people, but help break the cycle of poverty.

Read the entire memo here.

One of PPI’s dear friends and well known anti-hunger warrior, Joel Berg, has released a timely new book in which he offers a blueprint to end domestic hunger. In All You Can Eat: How Hungry is America, Joel suggests how President-elect Obama and the new Congress can immediately offer relief to the millions of Americans who have been forced to join the lines at soup kitchens and food pantries in urban, rural and even suburban communities across the country.

Joel has an extensive background in hunger issues, working for the Clinton Administration in the Department of Agriculture and as executive director of the New York City Coalition Against Hunger. And for those who know him, his passion for the issue is unparalleled. Therefore, it was no surprise to read this review:

With the biting wit of Supersize Me and the passion of a lifelong activist, Joel Berg has his eye on the growing number of people who are forced to wait in the nation’s modern breadlines. All You Can Eat reveals that hunger is a problem as American as apple pie and shows what it is like when your income is not enough to cover rising housing and living costs and put food on the table at the same time. Berg takes to task politicians who remain inactive; the media, which ignores hunger except during holidays and hurricanes; and the food industry, which makes fattening, artery-clogging fast food more accessible to the nation’s poor than healthy fare. He even chides organic food gurus such as Michael Pollan and Alice Waters for claiming that the recent increases in food costs are a positive development at the same time as low-income American are unable to afford enough healthy food.

If you are in the DC area, you should stop by Joel’s two book events on Monday:

DC Central Kitchen
10:00 am   425 2nd Street NW

Busboys and Poets
6:30 pm   1025 5th Street NW

Also, stay tuned for a “Memo to the Next President” that he co-authored with Tom Freedman on how the new Obama Administration can take steps to end domestic child hunger.

We don’t often talk about tax reform in the realm of economic development and social mobility. However, my colleague, Paul Weinstien Jr. has argued that President-elect Obama should do just that: use tax reform as a way to spur the economy and make America a more pro-work and pro-family nation. In his “Memo to the Next President” Weinstein writes:

One way to address our economic troubles, reduce our deficits, and invest in our future is to get serious about tax policy.

And this does not just mean cutting taxes. Sure, when you were on the campaign trail, you and your opponent got into all kinds of arguments over who would cut taxes more deeply and for more people. That is an American political tradition that goes all the way back to the Boston Tea Party.

But we need something more fundamental now, something rather revolutionary in its own right. Now that the campaign is over and you are getting down to the hard business of governing at a time of grave economic uncertainty, you need to think not merely of cutting taxes, but of reforming our entire tax system.

His three-part plan includes:

• Reducing the “thicket of current tax breaks” to four core incentives that focus on true economic priorities.

These new tax breaks would include the College Tax Credit - a $4,000 fully refundable credit to offset the cost of college; a Mortgage Interest Credit (MIC), which would extend the home-mortgage deduction to non-itemizing homeowners; the Family Tax Credit, which would combine the Earned Income Tax Credit, Child Tax Credit and Child and Dependent Care credit to one more generous benefit; and a Universal Pension that would replace the 16 IRA-type accounts with one portable pension plan.

• Enacting a middle-class tax cut that remedies the current imbalance between labor income and investment income.

The Obama tax cut plan proposed during the campaign can’t be completely financed by rolling back the Bush tax cuts for the top one percent of earners.  Thus, Weinstein proposes an additional offset: a securities-transaction tax.

• Simplifying business taxation.

This would be done by creating a “loop-hole closing commission” (similar to the BRAC commission) with the task of cutting the business tax structure down to a single rate.

Read his full memo here.

Today is hump day, so that means it’s time once again to look at a social mobility success story. For this installment of “What Works Wednesdays” we will focus on the connection between fathers and child development. Research shows that fathers play a vital and irreplaceable role in their child’s wellbeing. It’s is no surprise that children with absent fathers are:

• Five times more likely to be poor
• 54 percent more likely to grow up poorer than their parents
• Have a greater chance of incarceration
• More likely to become pregnant as a teen
• More likely to drop out of school

Absent fathers put a strain not only on their immediate families, but on society at large. A recent study by the late Steven Nock and Christopher Einolf shows that fatherlessness cost society an alarming $99.8 billion in direct and indirect costs during fiscal year 2006.

On the flip side, if absent fathers create hardship, responsible dads create enormous benefits. That’s why a group of more than 450,000 dads have decided to volunteer in more than 800 schools as part of the Watch DOGS (Dads Of Great Students) initiative. These dads serve at least one day each year in a variety of school activities ranging from mentoring, to monitoring hallways and assisting in the lunchroom.

Last week, ABC’s World News Tonight featured this organization started by Jim Moore and Eric Snow, two Arkansas parents. These dads have not only seen a difference in their children, but in the many kids without active fathers. They are convinced:

the program helps many children who don’t have fathers at home.

“We know that when a child has an active male role model who is highly involved in their life, that those children are going to develop more fully — academically, emotionally and socially,” said Snow.

The National Educators Association also heralds the involvement of dad’s in schools. They note:

The more involved a father is with the student’s activities at school the greater the likelihood of the student’s success. The study actually indicated that when a father is involved with activities, the child is more likely to be a straight A student.

Responsible fatherhood and social mobility are inextricably linked.  Obviously, it is most beneficial when a child’s real dad is involved in their lives and their school, but often that is not the reality. Today, there are 25 million children in this country who live apart from their biological fathers.  Watch DOGS is just one example of a program that can help these kids.

Today, the US Department of Agriculture released a report showing that 11.1 percent (13 million households) struggled to provide food for themselves and their families at some point during 2007. Of the 13 million food insecure households, 4.7 million had very low food security meaning:

the food intake of some household members was reduced and their normal eating patterns disrupted because of the household’s food insecurity.

In other words, 4.7 million households went hungry at some point during the year - a population that has steadily grown over the last decade.

The number of hungry children also risen. During 2007, 691,000 children faced low food security, an increase of 60 percent since 2000.

Unfortunately these numbers understate the actual amount of hunger today, because they were taken before this year’s sharp economic downturn.

Democratic lawmakers have pushed for a second stimulus package that includes more money for food stamps.  The chances of passing the bill during this lame duck session are slim, but let’s hope today’s news will spur them to action.

This Friday, members of the Nebraska state legislature will convene in a special session to amended its now famous safe-haven law.  The law, signed by the governor this July, was intended to protect newborns. Like other state safe-haven laws, it allows parents to give up infants without fear of prosecution.

The wording in the Nebraska bill however, has created unintended consequences and opened a Pandora’s box revealing the troubles facing many desperate families. This particular law:

extended the protection to “children,” meaning up to age 18, rather than specifying a maximum age of a few days or months.

Since July, 35 children from all over the country, ranging in age from 5 to 17, have been dropped off at Nebraska hospitals. At first blush, you have to wonder what type of person could drive their child half way across the country to leave them as wards of the state. Yet, reading their stories reveals deep and tragic problems of mental health issues, insufficient family and economic support, and complete distress and desperation.

The Washington Post reports that:

Of the first 30 children abandoned in Nebraska, 27 had received mental health services; 28 came from single-parent homes; and 22 had a parent or guardian who had been jailed.

Clearly, Nebraska must make changes to its law. As states face severe budget deficits, they can’t afford to care for abandoned children from all over the country. Yet, this experience has exposed a wound that the entire nation must examine:

• How do we support parents and families so that they don’t find themselves in these situations?
• How do we make sure parents have better access to existing state support services?
• How do we increase respite care opportunities?
• How do we make sure psychiatric services are widely available?
• How do we promote strong marriages and best support single parents?
• How do we care for children of prisoners so that we can break the cycle of incarceration?

Today’s Veterans Day series post focuses on the unique challenges facing female veterans, specifically as they leave active duty and transition into the workforce. Between 1980 and 2007, the number of women veterans increased from 1.1 million to 1.7 million. Yet, women policies and programs for veterans haven’t necessarily changed as the population of service members diversifies.

The Business and Professional Women’s Foundation (BPW) has produced a publication that highlights why a one-size all approach isn’t always the best for women veterans:

Women make up 15 percent of the active military and are a growing segment of the veteran population. However, many programs and policies were set up to meet the needs of male veterans from a different era. Shaping programs and policies to meet the needs of a new generation of veterans while maintaining strong support for existing veterans will be an ongoing challenge for decision makers in the first half of the 21st Century.

For example, the BPW reports:

While the official physical separation occurs within a limited time frame, results from a recent survey of women veterans indicates that the psychological transition can take place over an extended period of time - even for those who have successfully secured post-military employment. Standardized transition activities may not take into account the full breadth and range of the needs of women veterans. Additionally, certain characteristics of women veterans, such as marital status or education level, seem to play a significant role in determining the choices made during the transition between the military and the civilian workforce.

Women are more likely to delay the transition from active duty to the civilian workforce than men. And women without college degrees and those with a short military career need the most support in finding work.

We still need further research to help us understand how to best assist the female military and veteran population. However, these findings can guide policymakers and serve as a reminder that veterans are not a homogenous group. Therefore, programs should be flexible and easily tailored to meet the needs of all former service members.

In today’s Washington Post, conservative columnist and former Bush speechwriter, opines about the next steps for the Obama transition team and administration. He writes:

Political indifference to durable poverty in our midst has long been a scandal; from Obama it would be a tragedy. America does need to “spread the wealth” — but not in the simply redistributionist sense. The racial divide in our country is widest when it comes to assets. The median net worth of white and Asian Americans in 2004 was $142,700. The median net worth of African Americans was $20,400. There are many reasons for this massive disparity, including what Lincoln called centuries of “unrequited toil.” Reparations are a politically self-destructive dead end. But what if President Obama, for example, proposed to set up tax-free savings accounts for every poor child at birth and seeded those accounts with a few thousand dollars? Addressing the wealth gap through the miracle of compound interest would be a lasting contribution to the justice of our country.

My colleague, Jason Newman, and I offered a similar policy proposal in our chapter published in Big Ideas for Children: Investing in our Nation’s Future. Check it out here.