The White House has rescinded a directive that froze federal grants and loans after a federal judge ruled it unlawful. While the freeze was lifted, a review aimed at eliminating spending on so-called "woke" ideologies will proceed. Advocates in Ohio say the confusion underscores ongoing challenges in ensuring accessible federal assistance, including the WIC program.

Brittany Boulton, vice president with Groundwork Ohio, shared her concerns.

"Our WIC system is one of the only in the country that is still all in person. Families have to go in person in order to enroll, to load benefits and get health assessments. We have tons of families that at eligible that are not participating because it's such a barrier," she explained.

Although the funding freeze was short-lived, it caused disruptions to various agencies and state programs and comes as Ohio recently passed House Bill 7, which aims to modernize WIC by moving much of the enrollment process online.

Despite the rollback of the funding freeze, the White House maintains that its broader executive orders on federal spending remain in effect. Meanwhile, lawmakers who opposed the freeze say public pressure played a key role in its reversal. Senate Democrats -- including Patty Murray, D-Wash. -- emphasized the power of collective action at a news conference Wednesday.

"When the American people speak out with one voice, when regular people stand up, it makes a difference," Murray contended.

Ohio remains focused on making WIC more accessible, but the funding review could complicate things for organizations reliant on federal support -- including those providing housing assistance, school meal programs and Medicaid services.

Reporting by Ohio News Connection in association with Media in the Public Interest and funded in part by the George Gund Foundation.


get more stories like this via email

Hundreds of people from across Oregon gathered in Salem for an advocacy day last week, urging lawmakers to pass what's known as the Food for All Oregonians bill.

Supported by a coalition of more than 180 organizations, it would ensure older adults and children could get food assistance regardless of their immigration status.

Research shows hunger rates are rising across the state, leaving one in six children facing food insecurity.

Oregon Food Bank's Associate Director Cristina Marquez said access to food benefits supported her family growing up, and made it easier for her to go to college.

"We know that programs like SNAP are the most effective anti-hunger tools we have," said Marquez, "being able to lift folks out of poverty each year and keeping families stable."

Food for All Oregonians would create a new, state-run program similar to the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

Youth and older adults who would otherwise qualify for SNAP except for their immigration status, would be eligible. Opponents of the bill are concerned about its cost.

It is scheduled for a public hearing tomorrow in Salem.

Oregon Food Bank points to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture showing every $1 spent on food assistance generates about $1.50 for local economies.

Marquez added that immigrants of all statuses contribute to the state's functioning, especially in agriculture.

"Many of the folks that would be affected by the passage of Food For All Oregonians are folks that are currently farm workers," said Marquez, "essential workers, critical to many of the industries here in Oregon."

Marquez noted that California and Washington have already enacted similar policies extending food benefits to people regardless of immigration status.

Food for All Oregonians is part of an immigrant justice package of bills, which would ensure legal representation for immigrants and create a farm worker disaster relief fund.

While affordable housing advocates across the state have been cheering on Washington's rent stabilization bill in Olympia, so have organizations fighting hunger in the state.

Claire Lane, director of the Anti-Hunger and Nutrition Coalition, stands behind the bill, which would limit yearly rent increases to 7%. Lane said her coalition partners with housing advocates because if someone is housing insecure, they are also likely to be food insecure.

"Really, the most important thing to take away from that is, we're not going to be able to solve hunger in Washington until we can ensure that people have more stable, more affordable housing," she explained.

Washington's rent stabilization bill has passed the House and is now in the Senate. Votes for the bill have largely been along party lines, with Republicans arguing it will result in less housing and higher rents.

Along with capping increases, the rent stabilization bill would require landlords to give tenants six months' notice for significant rent increases. Lane explained that having more time is key to supporting people having enough food, and added if a family only has two months to move because of a rent hike, they will prioritize paying for housing over food.

"And that's where you start cutting back on your groceries. That's where you start skipping dinner or you start skipping breakfast," she continued.

Lane pointed to new data from the University of Washington focused on lower income households, showing more than half of participants experience food insecurity, and said the data show food insecurity in the state is widespread, especially in communities of color.

"Seventy percent of Hispanic respondents, compared to 54% of non-Hispanic respondents, experience food insecurity. Those are huge numbers no matter how you look at it, but the disparity is obvious," she contended.

Democrats are confident the rent stabilization bill will pass this year, with some tweaks in the wording.


get more stories like this via email

Children's advocates are crying foul after House Republicans called for $12 billion in cuts to school meal programs, including the Community Eligibility Provision, which allows high-poverty school districts to offer free breakfast and lunch to all students regardless of their ability to pay.

Erin Hysom, senior policy analyst at the Food Research and Action Center, said the funds are an important public investment and no child can learn on an empty stomach.

"We hear from teachers all the time that when schools offer healthy school meals for all, behavior in the classroom improves," Hysom reported. "Their academics improve and they're able to graduate and become more productive members of society."

Some 557 Colorado schools serving more than 206,000 students are projected to be affected. The proposed cuts are part of a sweeping effort by Republicans to eliminate waste and inefficiency in the federal budget in order to pay for extending President Donald Trump's 2017 tax cuts and other policy priorities, including mass deportations.

Hysom noted the Community Eligibility Provision has already reduced inefficiency and red tape, and cuts would send school nutrition directors away from kitchens and back to their desks to deal with unnecessary paperwork. She added the move would also affect farm-to-school initiatives putting money directly into the pockets of local farms and ranches.

"They're able to meet with local agricultural producers and bring in local products that not only improve the nutrition of the meal but also support the local economy," Hysom explained.

Cuts to federal nutrition funding would certainly not help Colorado's Healthy School Meals for All initiative, passed by voters in 2022. The popular program is competing with other priorities as the state grapples with a $1.2 billion budget shortfall.

Hysom worries the cuts could also mean the return of lunch line shaming.

"It really creates this stigma in the cafeteria," Hysom contended. "When we offer school meals to all children at no charge, it reduces that stigma."


get more stories like this via email