Study Says More Immigrants Are Going Hungry

Hunger among immigrant families in two of California’s largest counties has increased at an alarming rate since September 1997, when a federal welfare reform act mandated that noncitizens be cut from government food stamps, a study conducted by a nonprofit group for Los Angeles and San Francisco counties has found.

Even immigrant children, who have been protected from the cuts by a state program that continues to provide food stamps to the young and the elderly, have experienced high rates of hunger when adults in the family lost food assistance, according to the study scheduled for release today.

“To me, the most significant finding is that children are going hungry because their parents have been cut off from food stamps,” said Yvonne Brathwaite Burke, chairwoman of the Los Angeles County Board of Supervisors. “That’s devastating.”

The study, which presents the first assessment of the effect of food stamp cuts in California, provides clear evidence not only that hunger in the immigrant community has increased markedly, but that over time the hunger has become more severe.

Will Lightbourne, executive director of the San Francisco Department of Human Services, said the study confirms what many welfare directors predicted: that the state food stamp program would not be able to prevent immigrant children from experiencing hunger as long as other family members were losing food stamps.

“It bears out our worst fears,” said Assembly Speaker Antonio Villaraigosa (D-Los Angeles). “What’s significant about this study is that the rate of children going hungry has just skyrocketed despite our program.”

Using a research model designed by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, the study surveyed 403 randomly selected immigrant households in Los Angeles in November 1997, then another 376 households in March 1998. Nearly all families selected for the survey had children, with the typical household being composed of a 41-year-old mother with three children.

In San Francisco, 241 households were surveyed in January 1998, with households evenly divided between those that had children and those that did not.

The first survey was conducted in Los Angeles two months after the cuts went into effect. It found that families were experiencing moderate to severe hunger in 40% of the households in which at least one member had lost food stamps. By March, the survey found that that number had risen to 50%, including about 69,000 children in immigrant families.

The study noted that those who lost their food stamps were 30% more likely to be going hungry than those who kept their stamps. The hunger rate in Los Angeles was about 10 times higher than the U.S. Census Bureau had found in a 1995 sampling of California households.

The impact of the food stamp cuts on San Francisco immigrant families was only slightly less severe. The January survey found that 32% of the affected households were experiencing moderate or severe hunger. That means their food intake has been curtailed, and they are experiencing the physical discomfort of hunger.

“We are deeply disturbed that individuals are suffering,” said Sean Walsh, Gov. Pete Wilson’s spokesman. “The federal government should provide adequate services to these individuals by either providing the food services or making their [immigration] sponsors live up to their obligations to take care of their charges.”

The families selected for the study were drawn from Los Angeles and San Francisco counties’ databases, and the interviews for the survey were conducted by eligibility workers for the two county welfare agencies. California Food Policy Advocates, a nonprofit San Francisco-based anti-hunger group, tabulated and analyzed the results.

The findings provide research in an untested and controversial area of welfare reform. Critics have contended the cuts are actually an immigration issue that has little relationship with the central mission of welfare reform, which is to assist and require poor parents with children to get work.

Considered one of the harshest measures in the welfare reform package, the cuts mandated that by September 1997, most poor legal immigrants would lose federal food assistance. For most states, the cuts had little or no effect. But in California, home to about 40% of the nation’s immigrant population, the impact was staggering.

The legislative analyst’s office, a nonpartisan research arm of California government, estimated that 241,000 immigrants lost food stamps. In Los Angeles, the Department of Public Social Services announced that it had cut off 120,366--12% of the national total. The county reports that it continues to deny food stamp benefits each month to about 700 new legal immigrant applicants.

In Orange County, which cut about 15,000 people from its food-stamp program last fall, the anticipated increase in demand for the services of nonprofit agencies providing food has not materialized. That has led county officials to conclude that those affected have found alternatives.

“Perhaps they are getting more help from other family members and friends,” said Sandy Bloore, assistant manager of the county’s food-stamp program. “We have no way of gauging that. Perhaps they are electing to buy lower-cost food products. With the unemployment rate as low as it is in Orange County, maybe more of them got employment or increased their hours.”

The federal food stamp program, operated by the U.S. Department of Agriculture but administered by the state, provides coupons for the poor to supplement their food budgets. In California, the average recipient gets $71 a month in stamps, roughly equivalent to 78 cents a meal.

The new study is expected to boost efforts by officials in both counties to restore food stamp benefits to legal immigrants.

“We’re in a position now where we can take the facts to Washington, we can take the facts to Sacramento and we’ll be able not just to talk about what we think is happening, but to actually show that there are children starving,” said Burke.

In Washington, the U.S. Senate has already passed a measure restoring food stamp benefits to most legal immigrant children, seniors and disabled immigrants and Hmong Vietnam-era veterans and their families. It also extends benefits to refugees from five to seven years. The House is expected to approve the legislation and the president is expected to sign it. The legislation would cover about 30% of the immigrants who lost benefits.

In California, Villaraigosa has sponsored legislation that would expand a state food stamp program to cover adult immigrants ages 18 to 64, and children and adults who came to this country after August 1997. Last year, a compromise measure established a state-financed program to provide food stamps for immigrant children up to age 18 and seniors 65 and older. If the federal measure passes, that part of the state program would be disbanded.

But Villaraigosa’s latest legislative proposal faces stiff opposition from Wilson and other Republicans. “We believe this is solely and wholly a federal responsibility,” Walsh said. “They need to step up to the plate.”

To conduct the study, the counties used a federal survey methodology that measures how households cope when they have income that is inadequate. The study attempts to determine if they have had to cut down on meals or skip meals or go to bed hungry or go without food for an entire day.

It also measures the extent to which families are experiencing the physical sensation of hunger, including pains and loss of weight.

The study compares the experience of immigrant families who have lost food stamps to those who have retained their food stamps. Although it found hunger was evident among all poor immigrant families, the study found that the families without food stamps had significantly higher hunger rates.

Times staff writer David Haldane contributed to this report.