Newsmaker Q&A: SNAP challenge not just hunger games

Last month, state Sen. John Kefalas, D-Fort Collins, and his wife, Beth Kefalas, took the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program challenge, in which they fed themselves for five days on $4.50 – the average allowance for SNAP, the electronic benefits transfer program formerly known as food stamps. As chairman of Colorado’s interim Economic Opportunity Reduction Task Force, the senator’s endeavor was a way to focus on the quality of life of those living in poverty by personally experiencing one of the challenges they face daily.

We caught up with him to ask what the experience was like.

Question: What inspired you both to participate in the SNAP challenge?

Answer: I saw this as a great opportunity to raise awareness about food insecurity and hunger in our community, and how the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program helps address this problem. I was inspired to play a part because I understand that many of our marginalized neighbors struggle to make ends meet, even while working, and I wanted to personally experience, to a small extent, the real challenges that families face trying to make ends meet while on food stamps. Beth, my wife, wanted to support me, and she enjoys challenges. She felt that we spend too much on food, and this would be a reality check.

Q: Did you develop any new insights into what it means to be hungry in our community? If so, what were they?

A: The most significant and new insight for me was how being hungry affects your normal functions and activities. Being hungry impacts your life, and if you are living on a limited food budget you have to plan and give a lot of thought to what and how much you will eat. Invariably your portions are smaller and your diet is simpler. Families with children and elders on fixed incomes use SNAP resources to adapt and survive, and being hungry forces you to be creative.

Hungry means spending a lot of time thinking about food. Hungry means worrying about how not having enough might negatively affect work performance, and a bit of shame that it should be so. Hungry means not always being able to fully participate in celebrations, but watching from the sidelines as others indulge. Hungry means seeing good food go to waste and being powerless to do anything about it. Hungry means seeing junk food offered when a bit of fresh fruit is craved.

Q: What was the most difficult part of living on $4.50 a day? Was it easier or harder than you expected?

A: We had to make serious lifestyle adjustments and let go of things that we often take for granted. We did not eat out. We drank less coffee and no adult beverages for the entire week, and when we attended work-related events we did not consume what was offered, which was not easy. There was much planning and greater emphasis on comparison shopping to purchase our food items for the week, and we had to stick to our budget of $45 for five days. We made a big pot of lentils, ate less fresh fruit (that was hard) and more oatmeal and had smaller potions. All of this required greater discipline, and at the end of the week each of us lost four pounds.

Our participation in the SNAP challenge was harder than we expected, but this was OK. We do not make a lot of money, but as empty-nesters with little debt and a great vegetable garden, we were blessed with options and luxuries that many families do not have. We learned that having a garden makes a big difference in addressing hunger and making ends meet. Having a garden is an example of social capital that helps families and individuals be more resilient and able to adapt in trying times. For those on fixed income, such as elders and persons with disabilities, or children living in poverty, resiliency is critical to be able to thrive.

When it comes down to it, eating off of $4.50 a day doesn’t actually solve any hunger problems.

Q: That being the case, what was the purpose of this sacrifice?

A: From my perspective, I agree that going five days on a $45 food budget does not solve any hunger problems. However, the purpose of this small sacrifice was to be in solidarity with those families and individuals who live paycheck to paycheck, and who experience hunger and food insecurity. As a state senator, this experience helps inform my decision-making concerning public policy. As the chair of Colorado Economic Opportunity Poverty Reduction Task Force, my legislative colleagues and I are examining various issues that can impact the quality of life for middle-class families and those living in poverty, including nutrition and hunger, affordable housing, job training, tax policy and child care.

From Beth’s perspective, it wasn’t a sacrifice. It was a challenge. We knew it would end after five days. We had the luxury of using produce from our garden and using our cooking oils and our spices, in addition to the $4.50 a day per person. There was time to plan and comparison shop, and a number of good supermarkets available. As empty-nesters, we had no children to worry about and only our own tastes to please. And we had each other for support. Our experience was only remotely comparable to what those on SNAP face.

But for Beth, the personal insights she gained made it worthwhile. Not since the early years in our marriage have we had to plan and budget so carefully. Under this challenge, she believes she returned to a more creative approach to cooking and a much better stewardship of our resources. She hopes this continues and that others take the challenge and learn what they can from it, including an empathy for those on SNAP.

Q: In a time when cuts are impending, why should the budget for SNAP be preserved, at the expense of funding to another government service?

A. The SNAP budget should be preserved for various reasons. Food is a basic necessity required by all for good health, and we believe that it is a moral issue to help provide some food security to families, children, elders, persons with disabilities and others living in poverty. This is also about helping those who work and play by the rules but still have a heck of a time making ends meet. SNAP assistance helps stretch their limited incomes so they can live their lives with some measure of dignity and meaning as contributing members of society. Preserving the SNAP budget also makes economic sense because these are federal funds that are ultimately spent and invested in local economies, thereby helping small businesses. It is a proper role for government to provide an effective and humane social safety net, and SNAP is one important thread that strengthens families and communities.

Q: What was your first meal post-challenge?

A: We thought about going out to breakfast, but neither of us especially wanted to. Portions would be too big and the food too rich for us, and why spend the money? Instead we had eggs with delicious garden vegetables and the last bit of cheese from the challenge.

– Maggie Shafer

on Facebook on LinkedIn