(From Press Release) – Sen. Bill Dodd, D-Napa, introduced legislation today ensuring low-income college students have reliable access to food through the Cal Fresh program.
“Students shouldn’t be forced to make the heartbreaking choice between getting an education and eating,” Sen. Dodd said. “Hunger is a serious problem on college campuses across the state and my bill takes an important step toward putting food on the table.”
Food insecurity among college students is, in fact, a national issue. A recent Government Accountability Office report shows a third of all college student are struggling to afford food and basic nutrition. It recommends the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service take steps to enroll people in federal food assistance programs.
Senate Bill 173 addresses the problem on a state level by removing barriers to students to get subsidies under Cal Fresh, in part by streamlining the application process. More than 50,000 California college students could be enrolled in food assistance thanks to the senator’s legislation.
Support is expected from the California Welfare Directors Association, the County of Yolo and student groups.
“Food insecurity is a growing crisis on our college campuses,” said Don Saylor, chairman of the Yolo County Board of Supervisors. “This bill will help combat student hunger by ensuring students have the necessary documentation to verify their potential eligibility to receive federally funded Cal Fresh benefits.”
Still think everyone is missing the fact that cost of housing rather than cost of food is driving this problem.
Craig, I don’t think anyone is “missing” the cost of housing issue. That issue exists throughout the length and breadth of California . . . and in virtually every state of the United States. Articles about housing costs appear each and every day somewhere in the media universe in the US. There are ongoing discussions in state governments. Presidential candidates are talking about the housing cost escalation situation. No one is missing anything there.
However, absent a Housing Market collapse like the one that happened after Housing prices peaked in early 2006, despite all the public talk and governmental attention, it an issue that is going to get worse as time goes forward, not better.
So, as I have said many times before, the best way to address this nationwide fiscal issue for University/College students, is by increasing the available financial aid funding available to the universities/colleges for disbursement to students who qualify under a fiscal means test. That is a focused/targeted solution that can actually provide help to the specific demographic niche in question. It is also a much more nimble solution that can provide the help much sooner than a broad, encompassing effort to address statewide and /or nationwide housing costs.
Craig, with the above said, here’s a three-part question for you that very directly engages the point you have made. Specifically,
Part A — How much of a decrease in housing prices do you believe is needed in order to eliminate the “driver” you have described when you say the “cost of housing rather than cost of food is driving this problem”?
Part B — What do you propose as the necessary steps to achieve the housing price decrease you propose?
Part C — How long will it take for your Part B solution to achieve the price decrease you desire?
You’re fixated on this point Matt as though we can quantify it. Given the amount most students spend on food – a savings of $50 to $100 per month would do marvels. Realistically you’re not going to decrease the cost of rent even with more housing. However, you can slow the increase over time.
Craig, you seem to be saying in your first sentence that establishing a measurable goal to be aiming for is not your preference.
However, your second sentence actually does put forward a measurable goal.
If saving $50 to $100 per month would indeed “do marvels,” that amount is attainable immediately for a huge number of students. Specifically, a UCD student who is claimed as a dependent of his/her parents will spend $150 per month for 30/60/25 car insurance as a part of his/her parents’ insurance coverage. A UCD student who is no longer claimed as a dependent of his/her parents will spend $216 per month for 30/60/25 car insurance in insurance coverage under his/her own name.
Add to that a monthly car loan payment of approximately $150 per month, and you can see that the decision to have a car in Davis represents a savings of between $150 and $366 per month … that savings, if realized would (in your words) “do marvels.”
The source of the above information is a student-employee/agent, who answered the telephone when I called my personal insurance carrier. She has been working at that agency for over two years and until this year, when she purchased a car, used Unitrans and her bicycle to get to both her daily UCD classes and to her daily job at the insurance agency.
I wholeheartedly agree with you that “Realistically you’re not going to decrease the cost of rent even with more housing.” However, based on the information I posted above I believe your original statement,
.
would be much more proactive in providing an immediately implementable solution to the problem if it is amended to read as follows: