A Farewell from Berry Friesen

With only a few weeks remaining in my time with the Pennsylvania Hunger Action Center, I’m in the process of discarding old files and making room for my successor. As you can imagine, it’s a bittersweet experience. Those old files trigger powerful memories of victories won, defeats endured and friendships forged along the way.

I began working for Hunger Action in December, 1997 and my first out-of-office meeting later that month was a PA NEN meeting led by Mary-Jo Langston at the Department of Agriculture. Back then, thirty-nine states had Food Stamp Nutrition Education (FSNE) programs, but Pennsylvania was not one of them. The PA NEN was committed to bringing FSNE to our state and it was the driving force behind development of a nutrition education plan. Now, of course, Pennsylvania has a large and highly regarded nutrition education program. I’m proud to have been a member of the organization that achieved this success.

Yes, there have been failures along the way, including the loss of nutrition education programming in many food pantries. That loss was triggered by a change in federal policy, which was conveyed to the PA NEN in February 2004. Many of us have worked to restore pantry-based education. We met with USDA Under-secretary Eric Bost and engaged our United States senators. So far, we haven’t finished the job but we’re still working on it. As recently as November 15 I spoke to staff for senators Specter and Casey about using the 2007 Farm Bill toward that end.

To me, as an anti-hunger advocate, it has made sense to align myself with nutrition educators. Sure, income is the most important factor in whether or not people have access to enough nutritious food for an active and healthy life. But participation in programs such as food stamps and school breakfast is important too. And knowledge and skills related to nutrition is a third key component. When these last two elements are present in a low-income household, it has a fighting chance. Remember that among households with below poverty-level incomes, the USDA found 74 percent manage to be food secure. This means we can make progress against hunger even though the poverty rate remains stubbornly high.

This alliance between anti-hunger advocacy and nutrition education has also made good strategic sense. Everywhere we look—government, the foundations, private business—we see concern about the growing cost of health care. This naturally leads to consideration of what we are eating and how our eating patterns can be shaped to improve our health outcomes. Policy makers are especially concerned about low-income households, which are at highest risk of chronic disease due to their comparative inability to purchase a balanced diet.

Congress is acutely aware of this problem. Perhaps the most significant change in the debate around the current Farm Bill (as compared to the debate around the 2002 Farm Bill) concerns the relationship between diet and chronic disease. Now more than ever before, Congress wants its food policy to support public health objectives. True, the forces of reform don’t yet have the strength to overturn the subsidies for corn, soybeans and sugar. But it has become clear that the tide is turning. More and more, this concern for health will drive national food (including anti-hunger) policies.

Here in Pennsylvania, I hope nutrition educators and anti-hunger activists will continue to work closely together. That has been my experience and it has been a good one. Thanks to each of you who helped make that possible.