Critical Race Theory where you don't expect it--the county extension agent

CRT by any other name is still CRT. And it's in places I didn't expect. This blog essay is about County Extension (your tax dollars flowing from Washington DC to Ohio State to Extension). This is Marion County, Ohio, population ca. 65,000. 90% white, 6% black.

"Since 2017, Marion County has redefined what it means to be a Family and Consumer Sciences Educator. Traditionally focused on building healthy people, residents have called on FCS in Marion County to respond to the conditions that underpin health inequity: racism, ableism, sexism and other forms of injustice that presently and historically exist in the community. The most significant part of my job is to redistribute material and financial resources from the university to support community-led initiatives and programs. For example, most recently I mobilized activists, community residents, artists and community-accountable scholars to participate in collaborative and emergent dreaming, writing and drafting of a new program, Marion Dreamkeepers. The program and research study elevated youth of color as leaders for racial justice and exemplified community responsive, collaborative, creative work in Extension. I (Whitney Gherman) offered a critical and reflexive understanding of theory and young people led the way of implementation, providing insight to their lived realities and perceptions as well as new ways of facilitating Extension programs."

 There's more of this DIE--diversity, inclusion and equity at the OSU extension website, but let's look a bit further.

This grant and proposal is based on a program and theory of Gloria Ladson Billings. I looked her up and . . . "Gloria Ladson-Billings is a Jewish-American teacher and pedagogical theorist who is known for her teachings of diversity and critical race theory."

 
There are 15x more poor whites in that county than poor blacks. I wonder just how inclusive Ms. Whitney Gherman is or if she only sees skin color. Before Whitney worked as an anti-racist and intersectionality specialist (she uses the pronouns she/her/hers), she worked for University of Michigan. In her OSU bio she is identified as a critical race theorist.

What concerns me is, "health equity" is the new buzz word. Public health and behavioral health are related. Smoking, drug use, obesity, lack of exercise and sexual behavior are the big issues in health care costs. They are also related to poverty, and most poor US citizens are white. Who is ever reminded of that when told of "racial and ethnic health disparities?" These problems show up as early as age 2 according to CDC. But with government bureaucrats and racialists chasing racism, where is the concern for the economically disadvantaged white rural or city child? Also, due to the epidemic of drugs (aggravated by our border policies), I believe that is now a bigger problem for whites than blacks. If Extension is looking for problems to solve, perhaps they could do better than telling blacks they are victims, and whites they are oppressors. "Mobilizing activists," unless they are snatching alcohol and cigs out of the hands of obese children, really won't do much for Marion, Ohio, or your city.

All universities engage in research and teaching, and our more than 100 land-grant colleges and universities have a third mission — extension. It was created by the USDA in 1914.

There are thousands, maybe millions, of Whitneys in our education system from kindergarten up. What's in your county system?

Title and wording in the 2018 Farm Bill

Before firing people or putting them in jail for using the wrong pronoun for a guy who's feeling girlish today, or maybe “theyish” tomorrow, I suggest renaming the Farm Bill. 80% of the Farm Bill is food assistance, and it's just silly to call it anything else. The 2 issues aren't related at all--but sloppy language increases confusion during partisan debates. The 2018 Farm Bill (Agricultural Improvement Act of 2018, HR2) is $867 Billion over 10 years. It dwarfs the budgets of the NIH, CDC and FDA, probably because good nutrition does contribute to good health. 42% of low income women are obese, with a higher figure if they use government assistance.

Depending on which expert you read, and how much you hate Trump/Republicans the various cuts are either a savings or a disaster for the poor. Farm Journal reported it was budget neutral, with a possible savings of $7 million over the 10 years.

And speaking of language, it did clean up some unpronounceable acronyms into simply, FOTO. The Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program (BFRDP) and Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged and Veteran Farmers and Ranchers Program ( OASDVFRP or Section 2501) are now the Farming Opportunities Training and Outreach (FOTO) program. That should save some money in printing right there. At least no one should be fired if they mispronounce it.

Note: In reading through the Section 2501 (now called FOTO) previous year's budget and accomplishments I noticed all the money for socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers went to minority farmers and ranchers, even though about 40% of those on government assistance are white. I wonder if this is another example of the government picking winners and losers on the basis of ethnicity and skin color.

Another lie you often hear about our assistance programs (with the intent to increase the Farm Bill) is that you can't feed a family on food stamps (SNAP). Maybe that's because it was never intended for that. But actually, a resourceful Canadian has shown otherwise with her cookbook, "Good and cheap," using a SNAP budget for a healthy diet. And it's free on line, or you can order a paper copy. https://cookbooks.leannebrown.com/good-and-cheap.pdf

What’s wrong with this paragraph?

“It is no longer controversial to say that the United States food system does not support a healthy diet. Junk food is extraordinarily palatable and virtually omnipresent; its advertising is pervasive; many Americans do not live within convenient distance of a grocery store stocking healthy alternatives; and healthier foods are typically perceived as costlier. In this environment, the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) provides 42 million low-income people with financial assistance to purchase food. Most SNAP recipients, because they tend to live in lower-income communities, are exposed to the worst of the US food system: more unhealthy food marketing through traditional and social media, more unhealthy foods in the stores where they regularly shop, and fewer healthy foods that are financially within reach. Although SNAP benefits are intended to provide low-income families with sufficient food-purchasing power to obtain a nutritious diet, there is broad consensus that current benefits are insufficient [1]. The US food system is in urgent need of policies and programs that support and facilitate better dietary habits.”

1.  There is no United States food system.

2.  There is no agreement on what is a healthy diet.

3.  There is no agreement on what is junk food.

4.  What’s the number in a statement like “many Americans?”

5.  What is a healthy alternative?

6.  Are healthy foods really more costly per ounce or per pound?

7.  How many are “most SNAP recipients?”

8.  What broad consensus and who are they?

9.  “Policies and programs” is code for more government.

10. When was it ever controversial to say we Americans didn’t have a healthy diet?  I’ve heard it all my life and I’m 79!

https://journals.plos.org/plosmedicine/article?id=10.1371/journal.pmed.1002662

Feeding America's hungry children

 This charity, Feeding America, suggests donating to them because hungry children can't learn, but 13 million U.S. children get free or reduced cost breakfasts at school, free or reduced cost lunches, and free after school snacks, and special plans for summer time and camps through USDA programs. If you read through Feeding America's programs, none seem to be about breakfast at school.

FA is now 35 years old, a charity (2nd Harvest) begun by one person to distribute food surpluses. However, the government's definition of hunger has expanded and is now "food insecurity," not hunger, and all the programs, both government and charities, have expanded. Low income households are not dumb about their resources. As food programs expand, those households factor that into their budgets, leaving more cash for non-food items such as rent, utilities, clothing, alcohol, cigarettes, gasoline, cell phone contracts, etc. Studies show that even with the lowest unemployment rate since the early 1970s, food pantries are still an important resource for many households, some increasing their visits from occasional to regular.

Although the recession ended in June 2009, participation in SNAP, the government's largest low income food program, has never returned to pre-2008 levels, in part because people were recruited to participate with expanded ARRA money. Yes, it sounds heartless to question why so many people remain on government and charity food programs when we have 123 transfer of wealth programs to assist, however, some questions need to be asked about why parents are not using their resources to feed their children.  A low income family with children can receive about $400/month in just SNAP benefits, plus access to USDA programs at school and church food pantries. And yes, a family can eat very well using just SNAP--there's a cook book on line.

 

A sop to Big Ag--ethanol standards and subsidies

I've read all the excuses from the experts, and I don't care what they say, to make ethanol from food stuffs when people are hungry around the world, just sounds immoral. God gave us fossil fuels for a reason. We don't need to recreate them.

"According to U.S. Department of Agriculture data for 2015, approximately 13.5 million bushels of corn were produced in 2015, with 39% being used for livestock feed, 30% for ethanol, 12.5% for various exports, 8% for distiller's dried grain, about 5-6% for high fructose corn syrup and other sweeteners, and 3% for starches and cereals." (World's healthiest foods newsletter).

http://e360.yale.edu/features/the_case_against_ethanol_bad_for_environment

"Two prices determine its [ethanol] profitability: the price of corn and the price of oil. The higher the price of corn, the more expensive it is to divert from feeding animals or making high-fructose corn syrup and instead distill it as alcohol fuel for cars and trucks. Second, the higher the price of oil, the more economically ethanol can be blended with gasoline. When corn is cheap and oil prices are high, ethanol margins are fat. But when corn prices rise and oil prices fall, ethanol margins are flat."

 It's bad for fuel economy AND the environment.  It only profits the growers who support the legislators who keep this alive.

USDA and SNAP

Although USDA is the acronym for United States Department of Agriculture, its largest expenditure ( two thirds of its budget) is SNAP, formerly known as food stamps.  It should really be called the Department of Food and Nutrition.  Liberals don’t want SNAP reduced even though they admit it fails in so many ways, particularly in allowing recipients to buy soda/pop (5 cents out of every dollar value).  I would add to that the use of SNAP EBT cards at fast food restaurants--a boon to the industry, but not to the health of low income people. You can also use the EBT card at Starbucks--I don’t even buy their overpriced product!  You can fix an entire meal for what a Starbucks latte will cost you.  Twenty million more Americans are using SNAP today than at the start of the 2007 recession, which has been over since June 2009 and now unemployment is at record lows.

https://www.hsph.harvard.edu/news/features/expanding-snap-to-promote-healthy-diets-for-low-income-americans/

 http://dailycaller.com/2014/06/30/11-things-you-didnt-know-you-could-buy-with-food-stamps/

Good and Cheap is a cookbook for people with very tight budgets, particularly those on SNAP/Food Stamp benefits. The PDF is free and has been downloaded more than 1,000,000 times.  It's a myth that cheap processed food is more economical than "real" food.  Just figure the cost per ounce of a 5 lb bag of potatoes against a 12 oz. bag of potato chips.  Or a $2.28 gallon of milk against a liter of Pepsi.

Give locally; know your charity

 No one benefits when you drop your used clothing in a Planet Aid box. And it also gets millions from the U.S. government (that be us).

"Reveal and NBC Washington dug up IRS records showing that Planet Aid makes up to $42 million per year. That money is supposed to be donated to needy communities in places like Malawi and Mozambique. But in an FBI file on Planet Aid’s parent organization also obtained by NBC, investigators wrote that “Little to no money goes to the charities.”

Planet Aid seems to be controlled by a Danish organization known alternately as Tvind or The Teachers Group, which was founded in the 1970s by a man named Mogens Amdi Petersen. According to Danish court documents, Tvind is a kind of secular, ostensibly humanitarian cult, in which members are instructed to live collectively, “transfer all their available income to joint savings,” and “forgo their personal rights, such as the right to start a family to their own wish.” Petersen himself is an internationally wanted man, having allegedly committed fraud and tax evasion and his home country, and the NBC report speculates that he may be hiding out in a $25 million, 494-acre compound in Baja, Mexico."

 http://gawker.com/planet-aids-yellow-clothing-donation-bids-are-part-of-a-1778611205

https://www.charitywatch.org/charitywatch-articles/planet-aid-39-s-34-recycling-34-program-debunked-/88

http://metrovoicenews.com/is-planet-aid-scamming-you/

 http://www.nbcwashington.com/investigations/Behind-the-Bins-What-Did-Planet-Aid-Do-With-Your-Taxpayer-Dollars-380333921.html

I donate to the Discovery Shop (cancer), Volunteers of America, and to our church's resale shop and food pantry.  There are so many scams and non-profits so poorly checked, that you really need to do your own investigation.

Another dumb poster collected from Facebook (the people, not the art)

 

This is an example of how dumb the whiners on the left are (probably feeling the Bern and owing a lot of school debt). Agriculture is the most regulated industry in the country, and it's not capitalists who set the high standards for health, sanitation, weight, labeling, crop insurance, pesticide use, perfection, shipping, distribution, inspection, labor laws, import, export, etc., it's the local, state, and federal governments plus directives and policies. I wonder when the last time was that this poster picked up the wormy and bruised apple or the rotten potato instead of the one that was firm, quality tested and attractive. And no one in the U.S. goes hungry; the main job of the USDA is to distribute food.  For example:

 https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/moa/dairy

 https://www.ams.usda.gov/rules-regulations/paca

https://www.ams.usda.gov/services/sci-contacts 



 “Standards for the Growing, Harvesting, Packing and Holding of Produce for Human Consumption” regulation under the Food Safety Modernization Act (FSMA). The webinar will be led by Leanne Skelton, Biological Science Specialist with the AMS SCP and the USDA’s FDA Liaison, and Dr. Samir Assar, Director of FDA’s Division of Produce Safety.  Just a sample how you can learn about regulations.