John Edwards And The Hunger For Facts

John Edwards has a plan to combat hunger in America but apparently his plan does not include informing himself as to the basic facts of the situation.  In his latest comments Mr. Edwards misunderstands the basic reports and overstates "the hungry" by roughly a factor of three - imagine my surprise.  And wouldn't we hate to go to war on hunger based on phony intelligence?

On the eve of Thanksgiving, Democratic presidential candidate John Edwards unveiled a plan to help feed Americans who cannot afford to buy food.

In a phone call with reporters, the former North Carolina senator said 35.5 million Americans went hungry last year, including 13 million children. "We have a moral responsibility as a country," to make sure no one goes hungry in America.

Let's introduce some reality to the reality-based community - here is the US Department of Agriculture report which inspired Edwards' burst of hyperbole but paint a much more encouraging picture:

Food Security in the United States: Conditions and Trends

Food secure—These households had  access, at all times, to enough food for an active, healthy life for all household members.

• 89.1 percent (103 million) of U.S. households were food secure throughout 2006.
• Essentially unchanged from 89.0 percent in 2005.

Food insecure—At times during the year, these households were 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. Food-insecure households include those with low food security and very low food security.

• 10.9 percent  (12.6 million) of U.S. households were food insecure at some time during 2006.

• Essentially unchanged from 11.0 in 2005.

And reading on a bit we see that in 2006 the "35.5 million people lived in food-insecure households, including 12.6 million children"; that jibes with Edwards' citation of 35.5 million Americans including 13 million children, which appears in the press and at his website.

However, the "Food Insecure" group is subdivided, and only one of the groups actually experiences any notable hunger:

Low food security—These food-insecure households obtained enough food to avoid substantially disrupting their eating patterns or reducing food intake,         by using a variety of coping strategies, such as eating less varied diets, participating in Federal food assistance programs, or getting emergency food from community food pantries.

• 6.9 percent (8.0 million) of U.S. households had low food security in 2006.
• Essentially unchanged from 7.1 percent in 2005.

Very low food security—In these food-insecure households, normal eating patterns of one or more household members were disrupted and food intake       was reduced at times during the year because they had insufficient money or other resources for food. In previous reports, these households were described as "food insecure with hunger." For a description of the change in food security labels, see "Hunger and Food Security."

• 4.0 percent (4.6 million) of U.S. households had very low food security at some time during 2006.
• Essentially unchanged from 3.9 percent in 2005.

So from this report, which formed the basis of the Edwards' assertions, we learn that "7.7 million adults and 3.4 million children lived in households with very low food security", which means they experienced hunger at some point during the year.  That is roughly one-third the number of adults and children cited by Edwards.

Let's reprise the definitions linked by the USDA report:

Low food security (previously known as "Food insecurity without hunger":

Reports of reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet. Little or no indication of reduced food intake.

Very low food security (formerly "Food insecurity with hunger"):

Reports of multiple indications of disrupted eating patterns and reduced food intake.

This is simply not that complicated; I would have thought a smart trial lawyer could have grasped these distinctions and presented accurate information. If he cared to. 

FROM THE JOHN EDWARDS WEBSITE:

"This week, as families across the country come together to give thanks, we are reminded of the sad fact that millions of American families still go hungry. Food insecurity is one more sign that the economy is not working for regular families. While the costs of health care and energy keep increasing, the average family is earning less than they did in 2000 and the cost of food is rising faster than it has at any time in nearly 20 years. More than 35 million Americans went hungry last year, including almost 13 million children."

FROM THE "HOW SOON THEY FORGET" FILE:  I want to hat tip someone for sending me to Jammie Wearing Fool's coverage of this story, but who?  Baffling.

Comments

[BarbaraS]

Edwards' version sounds better for his purposes then yours, TM. Normal scare tactics of the democrats. And who is to blame for all this hunger? Why George Bush, of course. Isn't he to blame for every time it rains?

[crosspatch]

Since Edwards' numbers include those who are on government food programs (looking at the definitions, participating in a food program places you in the "food insecure" group), his plan would make things WORSE. The best he could do is to move the 7% from very low to low. You apparently can't move someone out of "low" with a government program.

He is going to have to diddle with the criteria of "food insecure" to make that work.

[TM]

Isn't he to blame for every time it rains?

Not if the crops need water - then he is blamed for a drought.

[hit and run]

TM:
Not if the crops need water - then he is blamed for a drought.

Oh, you got that right...

Here in NC, tobacco is a huge crop. And the drought this year killed it.

And just how are we supposed to be paying for the increase in S-CHIP?

Uh huh, increasing cigarette taxes.

But Bush went and caused the drought, because he hates poor kids.

[Ann]

How to defeat Hillary for Women Only!

How to Defeat Hillary for Women under 45 and Single or for Women in General

WARNING! DO NOT GO HERE IF YOU ARE MANLY!

[Ann]

New slogan for Hillary and the Left:

Ride a Horse not a SUV,

Light a Candle instead of turning on an electric light ,

Make a pattern instead of destroying the environment,

Abort to save the planet,

Wear a head scarf instead of getting your hair done,

...someone continue, I am going to be sick!

[Just Me]

John Edwards - the white Jesse Jackson

[PaulL]

Do we know that Edwards is "smart"?

[iFEAMLEUSINGEYE]

The food thing is UN agreements with a government agency.

There were some coups and some new countries coming into existence.

Food insecure, like not secured. The explorer has been secured. I'm betting on the Philippino cooks or those Kiwis.

[DWPittelli]

No,

"Low food security" does not even mean "reduced quality, variety, or desirability of diet." It means either that or the mere fact of using "Federal food assistance programs, or... community food pantries."

It seems that to Edwards, everyone who gets food stamps is, by definition, "hungry."

[kim]

Interestingly, we are both undernourished and overcaloried.

Foraging is the best solution.
=====================================

[gabriel christou]

please visit
www.gabrielchristou.blogspot.com

you will see PHOTOS of WHO and WHERE Bin Laden and his NETWORKS ARE….

URGENT…PLEASE HELP…. I CANNOT FROM HERE….. I AM BLOCKED ALL AROUND
FORWARD THIS INFORMATION TO THE FBI.

[Semanticleo]

The cross-contamination of every federal agency by this WH makes your US AG stats moot.

BTW; Food and Gasoline commodities are not included in governmental calculations for inflation. I'm pretty sure that policy was in place before the advent of the New Dark Age (2000).

[Cecil Turner]

The cross-contamination of every federal agency by this WH makes your US AG stats moot.

Well, I suppose Edwards could claim the hunger epidemic in America is so bad we don't even know about it . . . because the evil Bushies are fudging the statistics. At least it'd (apparently) play well with the frothing fringe.

But, instead, he chose to mis-cite the available data. Which gives us the double bonus of being able to chuckle at his numerological knuckleheadedness, and torpedoes any disputed data defense.

[SteveMG]

The cross-contamination of every federal agency by this WH makes your US AG stats moot

Okay, who in the Agriculture Department is cooking the numbers?

All of this data is put together by civil service employees, not political appointees.

So, give us some names of the government workers who are manipulating the data.

The floor is yours.

SMG

[kim]

Semanticleo couldn't let a week go by without flaunting his BDS. It's a religious duty. Like the sabbath.
==============================

[Sweetie]

The reason Semanticleo is so off base can be found in simple economics - where are the incentives in civil service/executive agencies? Does the Agriculture Dept have incentive to flaunt problems that can be solved with more money or is the incentive with the position that calls for less money because there's no problem anymore?

Of course, the MSM only has room to discuss motiviations of folks like SBVT so we won't be seeing a discussion about civil service motivations in publishing poverty statistics anytime soon.

[Rick Ballard]

"BTW; Food and Gasoline commodities are not included in governmental calculations for inflation."

Semanticleo - liar or idiot?

You decide.

Here is the entire press release from the BLS covering CPI data in all of its multifaceted glory.

The MSM econ dullards pick and choose what they report but the government total report is as complete and detailed today as it has ever been.

You need to work on your lying, Tic. There's nothing to be done about the idiocy but you could become a better liar with a little effort.

[TM]

Re: "BTW; Food and Gasoline commodities are not included in governmental calculations for inflation." - thank you, Rick.

But my feelings are ever so slightly bruised - if the SClown manages to appear here, however did she miss my link to Brad DeLong, who debunked this very nonsense by Bob Herbert earlier in November?

Bob Herbert:

n an interview after the hearing, Representative Hinchey discussed the disconnect between official government reports and the reality facing working families.... [T]he most popular measure of inflation, the Consumer Price Index, does not include the cost of energy or food, “the two most significant aspects of the increased cost of living for the American people.”

Brad DeLong:

Yes, it does.

The good news - the SCLown continues to be a reliable propagator of lefty talking points.

The Better News - the talking points are nonsense.

[glasater]

In slogging through Brad DeLong's website some days ago--there was a study course discussion on economists and Milton Friedman's name came up. Had to take a look at that discussion for Friedman is a hero of mine.
Know this is off topic but it was an interesting exercise reading the students comments. It seemed they felt the need to knock Milton F. for a good grade but the comments were pretty articulate.
The topic is in the September 18, 2007 post.

[hit and run]

No offense inteded, but Mark Mangino, head coach of Kansas might be well served by a few food insecure days.

As interest has built in the Jayhawks this season, the one topic that Mangino has deftly avoided is his weight.

Mangino said he was not bothered by such talk, despite being the target of snide T-shirts that say “Our Coach Beat Anorexia” and “Our Coach Can Eat Your Coach.”

In all sincerity, though, good luck coach and good luck Jayhawks.

[saki]

I have worked for the Census Bureau in collecting the raw data used to calculate the CPI. There is nothing we spend money on that is not used for this.
Two different info gathering procedures are used to collect this data.
1. Diary - select households are chosen and asked to keep a dailey diary for two weeks. This diary if properly completed records every cent spent by the household in this two week period and what the money is spent for.
2. Quarterly Report - other households are visited once every quarter for 5 yearly quarters (1 year and 3 months). These households keep files of all money spent and for what and report quarterly.
Again all expenditures are notated.
It was difficult getting households to participate in these programs as the information required is very personal and there is a lot of mistrust regarding how the info would be used. As well I suspect mistrust of me knowing so much about their business.
How willing would you all be to tell me and the government how much is in your; checking account
savings account
IRA
CDs
stock holdings
How much do you owe and to how is it owed;
motgage
credit cards
personal loans

Believe me cleo nothing is overlooked!

[saki]

Forgot in the above post that along with expenditures of participating households, the surveys also require info on all income and from whence it is obtained.

[saki]

Forgot in the above post that along with expenditures of participating households, the surveys also require info on all income and from whence it is obtained.

[saki]

Forgot in the above post that along with expenditures of participating households, the surveys also require info on all income and from whence it is obtained.

[capitano]

Okay, who in the Agriculture Department is cooking the numbers?

All of this data is put together by civil service employees, not political appointees.

So, give us some names of the government workers who are manipulating the data.

Apparently AFSCME is well represented at the the AG Department. But didn't AFSCME endorse a candidate recently? I mean other than Al Franken, like some candidate for President?

Oh yeah, her.

[Semanticleo]

"Yes it does"

Oh well. If he said it, it must be true.

Naive much?

January 2000 inflation number 2.74%

October 2007---------- 3.54%

The CPI uses food and energy data and inflation is derived from that source.

Those two WIDELY disparate numbers spaced by seven years look mildly suspicious. Especially to folks like yourselves.

It's a shame you can't apply such skepticism to all endeavors.

[Semanticleo]

oops

[Semanticleo]

Maguire punks out, yet again.

If Hit and Run were not already taken, it might be an appropriate handle for you, son.

[kim]

But 'Hit and Miss' is still open, Semi.
=========================

[maryrose]

kim:
Good one and it provided my laugh for the day.

[sophy]

Please do not hesitate to have flyff penya . It is funny.