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

As Colorado moves to bar Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program participants from using benefits to buy soda and other sugar sweetened beverages, a new report spotlights how restrictions on benefits actually harm people the program is meant to help.

Joel McClurg, executive director of systems for Colorado Blueprint to End Hunger, said restricting what people can or can't purchase with SNAP dollars deepens existing racial and economic inequality.

He said it also opens the door for policymakers to cut already low benefits.

"Now since you can only purchase a fraction of that, can't we have benefits at a much lower level? Which is $6 a day on average right now, it's not a lot," said McClurg. "So, decreasing that would have very negative implications for people on the program."

Improving public health by eating better is central to U.S. Health and Human Services Secretary Robert F. Kennedy, Jr.'s "Make America Healthy Again" agenda.

Colorado joins Arkansas, Idaho, Indiana and West Virginia in applying for a U.S. Department of Agriculture waiver to allow restrictions on items such as candy, soda and foods considered unhealthy.

Colorado's waiver won't restrict food items, and would allow participants -- many of whom can't access a kitchen -- to purchase prepared foods.

McClurg said SNAP participants eat the same kinds of foods, including junk foods and soda, as nonparticipants. The main reason SNAP families can't eat better is because they can't afford it.

McClurg pointed to a successful rebate pilot that boosted fresh produce intake for SNAP families by more than 25%.

"If you really want to change what people are consuming and make diets more healthy," said McClurg, "then you need to look at the data that show that by creating these additional incentives for these foods that cost more -- healthy produce and lean proteins -- that's really how you are going to move the needle."

McClurg said restrictions on SNAP purchases won't solve the nation's food system shortfalls, including food deserts in low income neighborhoods, and transportation challenges for rural families.

"You can't just magically manifest healthier foods in your local corner store," said McClurg, "or have a box of fresh foods show up on somebody's doorstep when they live 60 miles away from the nearest grocery store in rural Colorado."

By Reyna Revelle for WISH-TV.
Broadcast version by Joe Ulery for Indiana News Service reporting for the WISH-TV-Free Press Indiana-Public News Service Collaboration

Indiana state government has canceled a summer groceries program for families with kids.

The decision has raised concerns about food security for families.

Last summer, some Hoosier families a crucial boost of $120 per child for grocery assistance while schools were closed. It benefited around 669,000 children.

Kate Howe, executive director for Indy Hunger Network, spoke with News 8 on Wednesday about the U.S. Department of Agriculture summer grocery service program, known as SUN Bucks. “We’re not really sure why Indiana decided not to participate. The information we’ve been hearing is that it’s expensive for the state to administer. But, it’s actually relatively cheap compared to some other things, and most of the cost is covered by the federal government.”

Groceries purchased with SUN Bucks could be paired with free summer meals and meal-to-go options to help ensure kids do not go hungry while schools aren’t in session for the summer. However, Indiana has cut the federal program after just one year, and, for many, the only remaining option is meal sites.

Howe said, “Some counties don’t have very many sites. Kids might have to walk a really long way to get to a meal site. I’ve heard of some counties where the closest meals might be 15 miles away. You don’t always know that the food that will be available is food that you like or can eat, based on allergies, dietary restrictions, etc. Those free meal sites are only for the kids as well, only for kids who are under 18.”

“There are a lot of cuts happening that could really impact Hoosiers and food access. We’re really nervous about what we’re seeing. We’re already seeing record lines at food pantries across the city.”

Gov. Mike Braun’s office and the Indiana Department of Agriculture did not immediately reply to News 8 requests to find out why the program was cut and what was the cost to operate it. The Department of Education shared a statement.

“While Sunbucks will be discontinued for 2025, students in low-income areas of the state can still receive free summer meals at approximately 1,000 locations (schools and other organizations) through the USDA’s Summer Food Service Program,” said Molly Williams, a spokeswoman for Indiana Department of Education.

Throughout the summer, families can find Summer Food Service Program locations through the Site Finder Map or through the Hunger Hotline. The Hunger Hotline can be reached from 7 a.m.-10 p.m. ET weekdays at 866-348-6479 for English language or 877-842-6273 for Spanish language.


Reyna Revelle wrote this article for WISH-TV.


get more stories like this via email

Families gathered at the Oregon State Capitol for what they called a "snack-in" last week to call attention to child hunger across Oregon.

Participants handed out snacks while urging lawmakers to pass the Food for All Oregonians bill.

The bill would extend food benefits to all children under the age of six living in the state, including immigrants and refugees.

Rachael Lucille, network communication strategist with Oregon Food Bank, said state lawmakers need to respond to rising hunger and possible cuts to food stamps by the Trump administration.

"Seeing kids at the Capitol building was really powerful to show these are the people that we're advocating for," said Lucille, "and it shouldn't matter where you were born, every child deserves nourishing, familiar food."

Research shows one in six children in Oregon don't have enough food, with visits to the food bank increasing over 30% last year.

Opponents of the bill worry about the added cost, but supporters argue data shows every purchase made with food stamps generates $1.50 for Oregon's economy.

Lucille said many parents across the state are having to choose between paying rent and putting food on the table, and she said she knows first-hand what that feels like.

"And now that I am not in that situation," said Lucille, "I still want to make sure that all of my neighbors and everybody across the state of Oregon is also not having to make those really hard decisions."

Andrea Williams is also with Oregon Food Bank, serving as president.

She said during the pandemic, rates of hunger fell thanks to government supports, and have since increased since the funding stopped. She said feeding the hungry is a policy decision.

"It is a choice that decision-makers, lawmakers can make," said Williams, "whether or not kids should have access to enough food to eat."

Williams said the fate of the Food for All Oregonians bill hinges on an upcoming Ways and Means Committee decision.