NJ kids eligible for food stamps aren’t getting them, and that’s inexcusable | Editorial – NJ.com

As we celebrate a holiday weekend fueled largely by consumption, time out for this gut check:

New Jersey is failing to adequately feed its children during the pandemic, there are new numbers that show it, and the state is running out of time to grab federal dollars that will save the kids who face the most urgent need.

Feeding America, the food bank colossus that feeds 46 million people, reports that New Jersey has been among the worst at dealing with food insecurity for kids since the crisis hit. The trend can make your head shake and skin itch: Whereas 11.3 percent of our kids were food insecure in 2018 (roughly 1 out of 9), the Covid-related explosion in unemployment has caused our rate to rise to 19.7 percent (1 in 5) in 2020.

That’s a 75-percent increase, the fourth-highest in the nation in that time period.

Fortunately, our state has an opportunity to address this shameful arithmetic, and this is one time the Gov. Murphy must summon the bile to get the government machinery rolling in order to save newly-impoverished families who need food stamps, after leaving federal money on the table for six weeks.

The feds increased SNAP benefits after COVID hit, so that families could get more purchasing power to compensate for the loss of meals that kids would have otherwise been eating at school. New Jersey seized the free money: The USDA approved its plan on May 8, sending $248 million to 597,000 school children in our state.

But the program, known as “Pandemic-EBT,” was also available to the multitudes who lost jobs and income during the Covid crisis, and were newly eligible. New Jersey left them out because those numbers were too difficult to count. The state says it is working on a new plan. It’s unknown how many thousands were deprived of this extra benefit, as our state’s unemployment rate soared from 3 percent to 16 percent, but they better work quickly, because the program ends on Sept 30.

The greatest barrier is bureaucracy. Three different departments — Human Services, Education, and Agriculture — all play a role in preparing the renewed application they’ll send to the USDA. It also requires data collection from every school system, which in many cases must reach out to eligible families.

That’s just the kind of scenario that lends itself to governmental inertia, and it would be encouraging to see Murphy keep one eye on the calendar as he reaches for the whip. Officially, no timetable is being offered, so we offer this kind reminder:

These are federal dollars. They go right into a state economy desperate for those dollars.

And $461 per child is very meaningful money to these families.

“There is still a window of opportunity for the state to amend its plan, but it will take collaboration between departments with disparate portals,” says Adele LaTourette of Hunger Free New Jersey.

“There is a simple prize here: The prize is feeding kids. That’s it. Whatever hoops you have to jump through, you do it. It’s a partnership: These departments have to be willing and able to come together and make it happen. Families are facing unprecedented economic decline, and I know talking to food pantries across the state, there’s no way they can take up for this kind of benefit.”

For the record, many states have resubmitted their plans after factoring in additional need — California’s second effort resulted in another 80,000 children receiving the benefit — and a USDA spokesperson says the feds are “prepared to work with New Jersey on any such amendment.”

Yes, technology is part of the problem. There are 22 states that have online applications for P-EBT (some in three languages), and ours is not one of them. That direct access would help capture households that have become eligible for the extra benefit since the job crash. Maybe someday we’ll get one, just like the grownup states.

Until then, the clock is ticking and real damage is being done.

The health consequences of food insecurity and chronic nutritional deficiency are well known. They include poor organ development, higher rates of disease, cognitive defects, and a three-fold risk of depression and anxiety.

This is not the legacy we want to leave for New Jersey’s children once this storm passes.

Ask yourself this: What’s the bare-minimum thing a state should be able to do for its kids?

Is it really lower than this bar right here?

Our journalism needs your support. Please subscribe today to NJ.com.

Bookmark NJ.com/Opinion. Follow on Twitter @NJ_Opinion and find NJ.com Opinion on Facebook.

Tell us your coronavirus stories, whether it’s a news tip, a topic you want us to cover, or a personal story you want to share.