Today in the New Jersey Star Ledger, appeared a despicable LTE, deriding tax payer supported school meals, written by Joy Pullmann, (neo con: fellow of Heartland Institute, articles for The Daily Standard); it is not available on line. Although I can barely tolerate the position espoused, I have never been motivated to write a response. Perhaps it is the contempt which bleeds through that set my hair on fire. The sheer snark used to disparage government programs which ameliorate child hunger is similar to that of Fox news (which I watch occasionally, keep your friends close and your enemies closer) when they refer to “the nanny state”.
So, I’ve penned the LTE below. It is a little long, but the paper has been publishing letters that are over 250 words lately. I’m posting it here to:
-solicit comments to make it stronger; anyone have facts or figures which are particularly germane?
-offer it as a template for other LTE responses; why is Pullman posting in a NJ paper? Me thinks there are other similar stink bombs in the papers around the country.
Feedback regarding content/grammar is also welcome, especially for the ending; it could be stronger but I couldn’t think of how to make it so without sounding like a harpee (because in my head I'm screaming these words).
My LTE is below the orange squiggle. This is the first diary I’ve posted, though I’ve been commenting for awhile; Kos kept me sane during Limbaugh/Fluke, Alec outings,
Limbaugh/Fluke, Christie Crises; Palin politics, did I mention Limbaugh/Fluke??? Thanks you guys!
In a recent LTE, Joy Pullmann, of the conservative Heartland Institute, opens with an extremist rant opposing tax payer funded school meals, e.g., “What’s next, subsidizing toilet paper? Perhaps we should pay for people to wipe kids’ mouth and bathe them.” In the next paragraph she repudiates the statements as sarcastic; however goes on to make exactly the case that “…the job of feeding hungry people….belongs to charity. The government is not a charity…” The implication is clear, such government measures are an inappropriate use of tax payer money. Even in an Ayn Rand charged political atmosphere, the callousness and shortsightedness of such rhetoric is staggering. At a time when there are unprecedented levels of unemployment (since the great depression), when almost 50 million American live in poverty, when one in five children experiences some degree of hunger and charitable food pantries nation wide cannot keep up with demand. It is contrary to the American way not to provide some form of relief to its citizenry in the face of overwhelming need.
If the appeal is not for humanitarian reasons, research indicates there also exists country-centric reasons for supporting childhood nutrition efforts: As a matter of national security, Pres. Truman initiated the school lunch program after a study found a high rate of rejection for WWII conscripts due to medical conditions attributable to childhood malnutrition. Further, a well respected meta-study of implications for childhood food insecurity states that workers who experience hunger as children are not as well prepared physically, mentally, or emotionally to perform in the contemporary workforce, creating a pool that is less competitive with lower levels of education and technical skills and depressed human capitol (feedingamerica.org/Sitefiles/child-economy study.pdf).
Despite the dwindling government support for food security programs in a time of wide spread food insecurity, (federal and state proposed cut backs), Ms. Pullmann believes the most “individually empowering” and “cost effective” way to ensure that children do not go hungry is to encourage “….fewer people to eat government cheese”.
The ostensible divergent positions may provide a lens with which to view the ideological divide facing the country in the next election: will we be a country that supports community or one which values individualism above all else.
EDITED VERSION:
In a recent LTE, Joy Pullmann, of the conservative Heartland Institute, opens with a rant opposing tax payer funded school meals, e.g., “What’s next, subsidizing toilet paper? Perhaps we should pay for people to wipe kids’ mouth and bathe them. She says it is sarcasm, but continues with “…the job of feeding hungry people….belongs to charity. The government s not a charity…” The implication is clear: this is not an appropriate use of tax payer money.
The callousness and shortsightedness of such rhetoric is staggering. There are unprecedented levels of unemployment (since the great depression). Almost 50 million Americans live in poverty. One in five children experiences hunger. Charitable food pantries nation wide cannot keep up with demand. It is un-American to turn away from citizenry (especially children) in the face of overwhelming need.
If the appeal is not for humanitarian reasons, research indicates there is also a national purpose to support childhood nutrition efforts: As a matter of national security, Pres. Truman initiated the school lunch program after a study found a high rate of rejection for WWII conscripts due to medical conditions attributable to childhood malnutrition. Further, a well respected study states that workers who experience hunger as children are not as well prepared physically, mentally, or emotionally to perform in the contemporary workforce, creating a pool that is less competitive with lower levels of education and technical skills and depressed human capitol (feedingamerica.org/Sitefiles/child-economy study.pdf).
Despite the dwindling government support for food suppliment programs in a time of wide spread food insecurity, (federal and state proposed cut backs), Ms. Pullman believes the most “individually empowering” and “cost effective” way to ensure that children do not go hungry is to encourage “….fewer people to eat government cheese”.
These two different postions frame the question facing our nation in the upcoming elections: Do we stand together in community or just say sorry, you’re on your own.
Thu Sep 13, 2012 at 9:33 AM PT: I've posted the edited version, and used many of your wondeerful suggestions. It is a far better LTE after community input. DailyKos rocks! Here's hoping it makes it into print. Thanks so very much, Cogno