The Biden administration says it will convene a conference on hunger, nutrition and health in September — the first such gathering since 1969. It’s part of the White House’s goal to end hunger and increase healthy eating by 2030, to improve overall national health. The conference has been a top priority for Massachusetts Congressman Jim McGovern, a Democrat from the 2nd district.
In addition to chairing the Rules Committee, McGovern sits on the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Nutrition, Oversight and Department Operations.
McGovern spoke with WAMC News Thursday.
I've been trying to get this conference since Obama was in the White House. And I really am grateful to President Biden and his team for only agreeing to do it. But they're going to be doing it in a meaningful way. He announced this himself in a video, they have a webpage set up. This is more than just check the box. This is about really trying to figure out a holistic plan to end hunger in this country, and also to promote better nutrition.
Specifically speaking, what problems would you like the conference to address?
Well, the reality is we live in the richest country in the history of the world, and close to 40 million of our fellow citizens are hungry. I mean, that's just a huge number. And we all should be ashamed of that. So I want this conference to develop a roadmap where we end this, where we reverse that trend. And what I have learned over the years is it's not just one program or one aspect of the issue. We need to connect the dots. There's intersectionality here between a number of issues. So our schools have a role, our hospitals and healthcare system has a role, you know, federal safety net programs have a role. The nonprofit world has a role. The business community has a role. Federal, state and local government has a role. And we're asking for an all of government approach to this because it's not just a USDA issue or a Health and Human Services issue. It's a housing issue. It's an environmental issue. It's a jobs issue. It's a transportation issue. So we want to look at this in a way where we’re coming at it from a number of different perspectives. And we're actually moving the ball forward to not manage hunger, but end it.
How come these conversations haven't been happening outside of the context of this White House conference?
Well, the way our system is set up is it really doesn't encourage holistic approaches to problems. I sit on the Agriculture Committee. And if we want to talk about SNAP, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, that's the form you talk about in it. But if you want to talk about school meals, well, that's the Education and Labor Committee. And if you want to talk about food is medicine. Well, that's the Energy and Commerce Committee, and the same within the various executive branch agencies.
I chair the Rules Committee, which, you know, doesn't have jurisdictional constraints. And we've been doing hearings, looking at this more holistically, all across the country. And when you look at it holistically, when you don't get stuck in these silos, what begins to emerge are solutions that can actually deal with the issue more effectively. So this conference will pull everybody together. And the president's telling all of his departments and agencies, you got to be part of this. And by the way, the Department of Defense needs to be part of it. Because we have enlisted men and women who are on active duty who are on military bases in the United States who are stationed there with their families, who need to go to food banks. They don't earn enough, they get a housing allowance, but that counts towards their overall income. And it makes them ineligible for any federal benefits. The people who are serving our country shouldn't have we relied on food banks and food pantries to put food on the table. So they have a role to play. And as I said, I mean, no matter how you look at this issue, you know, somebody in every department and every agency can do something. So this is about bringing everybody together and looking at this as a whole rather than they live in little bits and pieces.
How much of this question comes down to funding?
Well, some of it is funding. Some of it is, you know, a lack of imagination. Some of it is regulatory barriers that have been put up. Some of it is lack of coordination. I mean, there's a lot of it. It's not just about more money. It's about spending the money that we're using now better. In some cases, it may be that we need to increase certain programs. But in our fight against hunger, there's been a real lack of imagination. In fact, there’s no plan. I mean, I don't care whether it's a Democratic administration or Republican administration. If you were to ask any president, what is your plan to end hunger in America? There isn't one. There's plans to manage it. There's plans to respond to it like with SNAP and other food programs. But there's nothing aimed at ending it. And by the way, there's not a congressional district in America that is hunger free. And you know, and it's not just an urban issue. It's a rural issue. And it's especially a rural issue, and it's a suburban issue.
So, look, we have a decision. Are we going to solve this problem? Are we going to continue to live with it. If we continue to live with it, understand there's a huge cost. Kids who go to school hungry don't learn. Senior citizens who are told to take their medication with a meal, but take them it on an empty stomach because they can't afford their medication and their rent and their heat end up taking it on an empty stomach and end up in emergency rooms. Workers who are not eating on a regular basis are less productive. There were avoidable health care costs that are incurred because of hunger in America. People who are struggling tend to rely on food that is less nutritious, that actually causes healthcare problems. So let's figure this out. You know, my grandmother used to tell me that an apple a day keeps the doctor away. I wish she was still alive so I could say, you're right. The bottom line is we have a medical system that is disconnected from nutrition. We need to fix that.
Do you foresee that coming out of September's conference, there will be companion legislation of some kind needed here to improve what you've identified as a lack of communication between departments, federal and state government?
Well, some of the solutions that might come out of this conference may need legislative remedies. Some of them, it may be just better coordination, you know, within agencies or departments, some of them may be, you know, working hand in hand with the private sector. I mean, we have lots of places in this country where people don't have access to nutritious food, because there's no supermarkets anywhere near them. I mean, how do we fix that? Do we need to incentivize markets to go in these areas? How do we better utilize technology? How do we better utilize transportation? There are people in rural areas who can't get to places to get food. So there's a lot of different things that that need to be looked at here. But some may require legislative fixes. Some may require administrative fixes, some may be telling the private sector, look, help us come up with some solutions. And we'll work with you to implement them. So it's like, I think everybody has a role to play here. But it's not just government. And it's not just the private sector and it’s not just the nonprofit sector. It's everybody.
While I have you, I have to ask about your reaction to the leaked opinion that shows the Supreme Court is likely to overturn Roe v. Wade imminently. What do you think?
Well, we now know that it's real. And you know, and I'm disgusted by the fact that a majority of justices would even put their name or draft such a ruling. Look, you know, the overwhelming majority of people in this country, Democrats, Republicans and independents believe that abortion should be safe and legal. I thought it was settled law. Most people think it's settled law, decades of precedent here. And for this kind of radical right wing court to come in and say we're going to take this right away from women, I think is wrong. I think they have they have this kind of twisted view of our future. That is really disturbing. I think they see our future this country is something of “The Handmaid's Tale.” But here's one other thing. If you look at that draft decision, it really goes after the issue of whether or not people have a constitutional right to privacy. I personally believe we all do. But in this opinion, the judges say people really don't. Well, OK, what does that mean, in terms of what how they will decide cases on marriage equality, for example? I mean, is that all of a sudden in danger, as well? So this is really concerning. And, and again, I'm just stunned that, you know, we have people sitting on the Supreme Court who are so narrow-minded, and so out of touch that they would come up with it with an opinion like this.
