This paper (and thanks, Kimberley, for sending it) from the National Bureau of Economic Research says a little boost in family income has an amazing effect on children in that family. That’s especially true for children facing behavioral or mental health challenges.
You can read more here.
From the New York Times:
Fewer than four hundred families are responsible for almost half the money raised in the 2016 presidential campaign, a concentration of political donors that is unprecedented in the modern era.
And you can read more here.
While the Super Committee discusses how to lower the federal budget by $1.2 trillion over the next 10 years, a new report “Food Choices: Families or Corporations” from the Praxis Project and the Alliance for a Just Society, shows just what role the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s family nutrition programs (like SNAP, the former food stamp program) play in feeding 16 percent of America — or 48.8 million people.
That makes the Farm Bill — the main policy tool for the government when it comes to food — even more precious.
The report also covers the $95 billion in federal subsidies and contracts the federal government gives to Big Agriculture. Some highlights are:
Riceland Foods, Inc., a transnational corporation with revenues of $1.3 billion in 2009,
received $554 million in subsidies in 1995-2010.
In 2005, Tyson Foods, the largest meat producer in the U.S. with revenues of $26 billion,
received $46 million in USDA commodity contracts.
Smithfield Foods, the fourth-largest meat producer, with $11 billion in revenues, received
$18.2 million in contracts.
The report, along with a petition you can sign here, will be delivered to the Super Committee prior to its Nov. 23 deadline for making recommendations.