Cut deficit but keep food on the table

It is easy enough to say that the government needs to balance the federal budget, but selecting the programs that get cut is proving to be very controversial. Every special interest group has a prepared list of reasons their program is vital for job creation or national security and should not be cut. From eliminating tax breaks for oil companies to reducing agricultural subsidies for agribusiness, powerful lobbies are making sure that their voices are heard.

But what about those that don’t have the means to make their voices heard in Washington? As we decide what programs to cut, we should keep in mind those who struggle to put food on the table each day. Poverty reduction, both in the U.S. and internationally, should remain a priority for our country as an expression of our values. Cutting funding to programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP, formerly called food stamps) and international food aid should not be part of the deficit-reduction strategy.

Alicia Farag

Arlington Heights