Food insecurity in military families

“How can you focus on carrying out the mission and defending our democracy if you’re worried about whether or not your kids get dinner tonight?” Sen. Tammy Duckworth

Military families in the United States of America regularly struggle for food. An Associated Press article says food insecurity in military families is a hidden crisis that has existed for years inside one of the most well-funded institutions on the planet, and has only worsened during the pandemic. As many as 160,000 active duty military members are having trouble feeding their families.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture defines food insecurity as the lack of consistent access to enough food for an active, healthy lifestyle. A more colloquial way to say it is not knowing where your next meal is coming from. Prior to the pandemic, experts estimated one in eight military families across the country meet the federal definition of food insecurity. By the end of 2021, the Military Family Advisory Network reported that one in five military families was food insecure.

According to MAZON, a national organization formed to respond to hunger in America, almost every single military base across the country has a nearby food pantry to assist military families. At Camp Pendleton alone, there are four food pantries serving the military community. It’s not as though the military isn’t aware of this situation. The Associated Press article reports the Navy literally owns the San Diego property where food distribution takes place.

In April 2000, former Senator and war hero, John McCain, said on the Senate floor: “I will not stand by and watch as our military is permitted to erode to the breaking point due to the President’s lack of foresight and the Congress’ lack of compassion. These military men and women on food stamps — our soldiers, sailors, airmen, and Marines — are the very same Americans that the President and Congress have sent into harm’s way in recent years in Somalia, Bosnia, Haiti, Kosovo, and East Timor. They deserve our continuing respect, our unwavering support, and a living wage.” Senator McCain made that statement when Bill Clinton was president. Since then, we have had four other presidents. It was the 106th Congress in 2000 and we have the 117th Congress now. Yet many service members still don’t know how they are going to feed their families.

One of the fundamental, and pretty obvious causes of food insecurity in military families is too little compensation – especially for lower ranking service members. The Economic Policy Institute says a two-parent household with two children needs to earn more than $97,000 a year to live in San Diego County. But an enlisted service member with less than two years in the service earns an annual pay between $23,310 and $26,500. It is no wonder volunteer food pantries abound in areas where military families live. In an atmosphere where self-reliance is deeply ingrained, these proud families have to undergo the shame and stigma of standing in line for free food.

Instead of giving service members a living wage, Congress has experimented with various programs.

Around the time Sen. McCain made the above statement in 2000, Congress created the Family Subsistence Supplemental Allowance program, FSSA, for the express purpose of transitioning military families off food stamps. But qualifications for FSSA assistance failed to exclude the Basic Allowance for Housing, BAH, from a service member’s income. As a result, many hungry military families did not qualify for FSSA food assistance because their income was artificially inflated.

Even when service members could financially qualify for FSSA, however, they faced another obstacle. In order to even apply for FSSA benefits, the service member had to go through the chain of command. Besides the embarrassment and humiliation involved in disclosing the family was hungry, the service member was required to get command approval to apply for FSSA benefits. This acted as a deterrence because some commanders viewed an admission that a family was struggling financially as a reason for negative treatment. A service member might end up losing a security clearance or having career prospects damaged, depending on a commander’s personal viewpoint regarding a service member’s financial management abilities.

At the end of 2015, Congress ended the FSSA program except for overseas personnel and directed military families to the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, SNAP, formerly known as food stamps. Once again, however, military families often didn’t qualify under SNAP because, despite the fact their BAH is not considered income for income tax purposes, it is added on to their income when service members apply for SNAP, giving the appearance of a higher income.

In 2016, the Government Accountability Office, Congress’s watchdog, issued a report stating: “Active-duty servicemembers and their families have access to food assistance through various government and charitable programs, but use of these programs varies, in part, on their ability to meet specific eligibility criteria.”

Military families are required to move frequently, usually every two to three years. Relocating is particularly difficult for the spouses of service members. If spouses were able to take off running when the service member is transferred to another state, the family could enjoy two incomes during the transition. However, military spouses have a hard time finding long term employment. If the spouse works in an occupation that requires a license or certification it is especially difficult as each state has different requirements. The testing and time lag between applying for and receiving a license or certification usually involves trying to survive on one salary. Plus, the spouse is not able to accrue enough time with employers to get many raises, so their wages are depressed.

To make matters worse, military spouses are often required to forego career advancement because they can’t afford childcare. Childcare challenges all families, but especially military families. Besides the high cost of childcare, they don’t have family support networks to help them.

Travis Air Force Base’s newsletter states that California hosts approximately 62,000 military spouses, the highest in the nation. The California Legislature has tried to help these military families by enacting AB 107, which will go into effect on July 1, 2023. The bill amends several sections of the Business and Professions Code. It will provide expedited, albeit temporary, authorization to practice in a field while the state’s licensing and certification requirements are being processed. The new laws will cover licensing for accountancy, architecture, pharmacy, physical therapy, psychology, veterinary, real estate, barbering and cosmetology.

Conspicuously absent from the new legislation is licensing for military spouses who are attorneys licensed to practice in some other state, and who move to California when the service member is transferred here. California’s requirements for these attorneys make it almost impossible for them to practice here for the short term. It requires military spouse lawyers to be supervised by an attorney who assumes professional responsibility for any work performed by the military spouse attorney. The supervising attorney must provide a declaration of responsibility to the State Bar, and thereafter directly supervise the military spouse attorney, approve in writing any appearance in court or any deposition or any arbitration or any proceeding and then review such activities with the supervised attorney. In addition to assuming professional responsibility for the lawyer, the supervising lawyer must also “read and approve any documents prepared by the registered military spouse before their submission to any other party.” That means a military spouse can’t even send an email to another party’s lawyer without supervision and approval. Thus, a military spouse attorney awaiting licensing, must compete with others who have a license in hand and do not require such State Bar-required supervision. The State Bar rules are found in Rules of the State Bar, Title 3, sections 3.350-3.356, and the Judicial Council’s rule is California Rules of Court, rule 9.41.1.

In many locations, the military housing allowance is not nearly adequate to actually pay for housing. MAZON says our country’s military pay structure is not designed to support junior-enlisted service members and their families, particularly those living in high-cost areas. Of course, if the family has to pay more than the allowance for housing, there’s less money for food.

When on-base housing is available, it is almost always owned and maintained by private companies. The military family is required to sign over its rights to a housing allowance to that company. However, around the country military families have undergone a lot of problems because those properties are not properly maintained. The Military Times reported that Army housing has had recurring problems with mold and rodent infestation. In Hawaii, a leaking fuel storage facility contaminated base housing water. The families’ alternatives were slim since off-base housing close to work is so expensive.

There’s not much the courts can do for military families living in privatized housing. A military family living in California sued a privatized military housing owner for water leaks and mold in a California court. The property owner removed the case to federal court and then moved to dismiss, asserting it was a government contractor acting at the direction of the federal government. Citing derivative sovereign immunity, a federal court dismissed the case last January. 2022 WL 129140

We all depend on these service members to protect us with their lives. Yet we don’t pay them enough to feed their families. They are moved around so often, their spouses can’t keep steady employment.

Military budgets are meant for more than buying another airplane or missile. They are also supposed to provide for the well-being of our armed forces. We are no longer in the days when junior enlisted personnel were 18-year-olds without families. Today’s military promises careers for those who want to serve and protect their country. People pursuing careers often have spouses and children. These service members deserve to live with the dignity of knowing their families are not hungry.