By Matt Underwood The Trump Administration Cancels Annual Hunger Survey
The news that the Trump administration decided to cancel the annual hunger survey is definitely something to unpack. It’s been a staple for tracking food insecurity in the US since the mid-90s, but now, suddenly, it’s deemed “overly politicized.” You can’t help but wonder, what’s really going on here?
The immediate thought that pops into mind is a rather cynical one. It’s easy to see this as a move to bury bad news. If you don’t measure something, it doesn’t exist, right? Economic policies, tariffs, and cuts to government agencies can create real consequences for everyday Americans. Maybe the administration doesn’t want to see the data reflecting these consequences. It’s a bit like the old “if we stop testing, we’ll have fewer cases” approach we saw during the pandemic. This whole thing feels like a way to avoid accountability and maintain a carefully crafted narrative, no matter the reality.
It’s not just about the government, either. This decision also means that nonprofits, aid agencies, and state governments won’t get this critical data. This lack of information can compound suffering because the ability to address the issue is hindered, which is concerning. One can’t help but wonder if this is about protecting someone’s image rather than actually helping people.
And the justifications? “Overly politicized?” It just seems like a convenient excuse. Everything seems “overly politicized” if it reflects poorly on the current administration. The situation appears to be a clear example of the “The Man Tapping Head” meme come to life – eliminating the gathering of data to obscure the actual situation. We are disabling our ability to respond to problems and crises because of the fragile ego of a narcissist.
This could be part of a larger pattern, a pattern of obscuring the reality of the nation. They’ve been known to scrap data they don’t like. Weather and climate data? Gone. The jobs report director fired? Check. Cuts to SNAP and Medicaid? Unfortunately, yes. It is a concerning trend, the refusal to gather or share information that reflects poorly on their actions.
There’s a sense of foreboding that comes with this, too. If we don’t track hunger, then the administration can claim there’s no hunger. It’s like the administration is setting the stage to declare victory over food insecurity, even if it’s a hollow one. This could be a prelude to a claim that things are fantastic and that anyone who suggests otherwise is an enemy of the state, or something similar.
It’s also hard not to see the hypocrisy. Actions speak louder than words, and it seems like the administration doesn’t care about people who are struggling. The administration’s actions seem to suggest that those who do not see the hungry, are not truly concerned about hunger. It’s the “MAGA way,” as someone mentioned.
There’s a real risk here of a downward spiral. If we don’t see the problem, we can’t address it. If we can’t address it, the problem gets worse. It’s like the administration is building a golden ballroom while ignoring the people struggling on the outside. It feels like we’re heading into a reality where the administration can simply declare whatever reality they want, regardless of what is happening on the ground.
And let’s be honest, this is not a new thing. It is the same tactic used during the pandemic – if you don’t test, there are no cases. It is clear the administration is more concerned with projecting a favorable image, even if it is based on a false reality. This is a trend, and it does not bode well for the next decade.
This decision is not just about the data. It’s about the people who rely on that data – the families, the aid organizations, the policymakers. It’s a betrayal of their trust and a disservice to the nation. It’s important to remember that without the data, the problems do not magically disappear. In fact, they often get a lot worse.