How the Feds Distort Their 'Food Insecurity' Numbers

This isn't about hunger. It's about feeling that the 'quality and variety' of available food isn't what you'd prefer.

WSJ article by James Bovard. Excerpts:

"Is being "food insecure" the same as going hungry? Not necessarily. The USDA defines a "food insecure" household in the U.S. as one that is "uncertain of having, or unable to acquire, enough food to meet the needs of all their members because they had insufficient money or other resources for food" at times during the year. The USDA notes: "For most food-insecure households, the inadequacies were in the form of reduced quality and variety rather than insufficient quantity."

In 2013 the USDA reported that federal food programs—most notably food stamps provided by the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP)—"increase food security by providing low-income households access to food, a healthful diet, and nutrition education." But food insecurity was more widespread in 2013 (14.3%) than in 2007 (11.1%), while food-stamp recipients rose to 47 million from 26 million.

The National Academy of Sciences urged the USDA in 2006 to explicitly state that its food-security survey results are not an estimate of nationwide hunger. The USDA responded by dropping any mention of "hunger" in the survey's response categories."

"families receiving food stamps are over 50% more likely to be "food insecure" than similar households not on food stamps."

"food-stamp participants "tend to be more food insecure" compared with eligible nonparticipants."

"enrolling in the food-stamp program failed to significantly boost participants' food security or dietary quality."

"children ages 2 to 11 in households with less than $25,000 in annual income consume significantly more calories than children in households with incomes above $75,000."

"Congress has virtually no information to ensure that the program is operating effectively" (food stamps or SNAP)