Study shows an increase in child food insecurity in Cass County

Like nearly every county in in the United States, Cass County is affected by child food insecurity daily.
According to a study released last week by Feeding America called Map the Meal Gap, about 1 in 6, or 18.1%, of children in Cass County are experiencing food insecurity. The numbers mirror Food Finders Food Bank's overall 16-county service area, which is about 1 in 5 children (20%). The service area includes Cass, Howard, Miami, Carroll, Fulton and Pulaski counties.
'Leveraging the data in this year's study will help us address challenges shared with us by people facing hunger and identify local ways to support our community,' said Kier Crites Muller, president/CEO of Food Finders. 'Hunger remains an urgent crisis throughout our 16-county service area. When we listen to our neighbors facing hunger and use the study's findings, we can unite to create a future where everyone, including children, can access the nutritious food they need to thrive.
'This mission becomes even more critical as threats to vital social safety net programs like SNAP, TEFAP, and Medicaid could worsen food insecurity for our most vulnerable populations, particularly children who rely on these essential services.'
Map the Meal Gap, now in its 15th year, is the only study that provides local-level estimates of food insecurity and food costs for every county and congressional district. The study builds upon USDA's most recent national and state data report, which showed 47 million people, including 14 million children, experienced food insecurity in 2023, the highest rate in over a decade. Map the Meal Gap emphasizes the need for the public to join the movement to end hunger.
'Food Finders is thankful to our agency partners in Cass County for being an essential partner in the fight against hunger,' the press release said. 'Their determination and countless volunteer hours have a tangible impact on our communities.'
Food Finders' partners in Cass County include:
• Emmaus Mission Center (www.logan-emmaus.org/food-pantry/), 19 W. Richardville St., Logansport. Hours: 11 a.m. to 1 p.m. Mon., Wed., Fri.; 4 to 6 p.m. Wed.
• Felix's Pantry, 410 W. Miami Ave., Logansport. Hours: 5:30 to 6:30 p.m. Thurs.
• Logansport Salvation Army (centralusa.salvationarmy.org/logansport/events/food-pantry/), 620 Wilkinson St., Logansport. Hours: 1 to 4 p.m. Tues. and Thurs.
• Trinity Episcopal Church, 319 Seventh St., Logansport. Hours: 3 to 5:30 p.m. on second and fourth Wednesday of month, or call 574-753-2733 for appt.
Other key findings of Map the Meal Gap include:
• Overall, food insecurity rates increased in Cass County, with 15.8%, or 1 in 7 residents experiencing food insecurity.
• Nationally, more than 2 out of 5 people facing hunger may not qualify for SNAP benefits due to income limits. In Cass County, 46% of people facing hunger may not qualify for SNAP.
• Food Finders serves communities with food insecurity ranging from 13% in Clinton County to 16.7% in Miami County.
• Food insecurity also varies for different age groups. Among children, food insecurity in Food Finders 16-county service area ranges from 14.2% in Clinton County to 23.4% in Howard County.
• In Food Finders' 16-county service area, available data by race/ethnicity shows that 14% of white individuals, 33% of Black individuals, and 24% of Latino individuals experienced food insecurity in 2023.
Map the Meal Gap used publicly available data from USDA Economic Research Service, U.S. Census Bureau and Bureau of Labor Statistics to estimate local food insecurity at the county, congressional district and state levels.
The study also estimates local meal costs and food budget shortfalls using food price data from NIQ, based on USDA's Thrifty Food Plan, and grocery sales tax data for every county and state in the country.
To see more information and view the map, visit FeedingAmerica.org/MaptheMealGap. For more information about Food Finders Food Bank, visit www.food-finders.org.

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Learn with AIFact CheckingText to SpeechAI Summary

Related Articles

Yahoo

6 hours ago

• Yahoo

What the business world has to like (and not) in the Senate version of Trump's 'big, beautiful bill'

The business community has some clear wins in a Senate version of President Trump's "big, beautiful bill" but it isn't getting everything it wants. The Senate's Finance Committee's 549-page blueprint contains significant changes, especially on taxes, Medicaid funding, and clean energy. One proposal was quickly embraced by the business community: a Senate-side push to make corporate tax deductions permanent around things like interest payments and new capital investments. But a less popular idea is the survival of the so-called revenge tax that would allow the government to levy new duties on foreign nations and their businesses. That idea was introduced in the House version and sparked fears of reduced foreign investment. The version released last Monday pares back the tax but doesn't eliminate it entirely, as corporate lobbyists had asked. Specific industries also have plenty at stake from Senate changes if they make it into law. Businesses that work in clean energy will have more time to adjust to the phase-out of Biden-era credits. Restaurants and gig economy companies have more limited tax breaks for tips and overtime. Healthcare providers will also have to adjust to even steeper cuts to Medicaid's provider tax structure — perhaps the most surprising and significant overall change in the Senate version. What the Senate version of the bill doesn't appear to have — as Elon Musk and others had pushed for — is a significant change in the final price tag. Both versions are expected to add trillions of dollars to the debt. The Senate version also raises the debt ceiling by $5 trillion, compared with $4 trillion in the House version. The bill does have one clear cost-saving measure: slashing the annual deduction for individual state and local taxes (SALT) from $40,000 to $10,000. But that provision is described even in the bill's official summary as "the subject of continuing negotiations," with defenders of the deduction pledging to restore the full credit forthwith. The Senate version earned a quick flurry of Republican pledges — from fiscal hawks to defenders of those SALT deductions to those who object to the Medicaid cuts — to vote no if the final version isn't changed to their liking. "We're not seriously addressing our long-term deficit and debt," Sen. Ron Johnson of Wisconsin told reporters soon after the unveiling, reiterating that he remains a no. The back and forth comes just weeks ahead of Republicans' self-imposed deadline to get the bill to the president's desk by July 4. Senate Majority Leader John Thune has said sticking to that timeline means Senate passage by the end of this coming week. Ed Mills of Raymond James offered in a note that "we continue to view the July 4 target as ambitious" — suggesting that SALT and Medicaid provisions in particular could be under continued debate in the days ahead. Here is a closer look at some of the major business world changes being proposed by the Senate: A key focus for business owners is a series of tax deductions that will reinstate credits for corporations around things like property depreciation, capital investments, new factory construction, interest expenses, and research and development costs. These provisions were present in the House version but only temporarily. Permanency was a key Senate priority once they took over, even as it is expected to increase the price tag. The bill "powers the economy by permanently extending critical pro-growth provisions and introduces new incentives for domestic investment, providing certainty for American job creators to spur domestic economic activity and invest in their workers," offered Senate Finance Committee Chairman Mike Crapo as he unveiled these provisions. The Senate version also enhances credits for "opportunity zones," which provide tax relief in rural and distressed communities. The bill also includes Trump's campaign promises of no taxes on tips and overtime, but in a more limited form. Employees would be able to deduct up to $25,000 annually for tips and overtime, in contrast to the House's approach of 100% deductibility under certain income limits. The Senate blueprint also includes a rollback of clean energy credits for things like solar panels and electric vehicles. The changes in the Senate would make that phaseout slower — zeroing out some key credits by 2028 — but with a bottom line that Republicans across the spectrum are united in eliminating these benefits entirely. Amy Hanauer, executive director of the left-leaning Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy, reacted to the released proposal by saying that "the emerging clean energy economy will be curtailed and for what?" "Our communities will be worse off as a result of this legislation,' she added. On the fossil fuel side, the Senate bill continues to include changes to make permitting less laborious, open up new lease sales, and reverse a fee on excess methane emissions. The Senate bill also includes a controversial plan to limit the ability of states to regulate artificial intelligence. The Senate's provisions are less airtight, stopping short of the outright ban proposed by the House, but are expected to remain a point of contention and potentially an issue for the Senate parliamentarian, given the Senate's complex reconciliation rules. Other changes in the bill appear to cut against business interests at least slightly. The Senate bill makes permanent the so-called pass-through deduction — formally called a 199A deduction for small businesses — but at the current rate of 20%. The House version also had permanency, but at a higher rate of 23%. Meanwhile, a clear focus of business lobbyist ire has remained in the bill, but in a slightly diminished form: the so-called revenge tax. This idea would allow a president to punish companies and countries if they adhere to foreign laws that policymakers find objectionable. In Trump's case, things like the digital services taxes that often hit tech companies overseas. The Senate version, in a nod to the flurry of concerns, set a maximum rate of 15% and delayed implementation until 2027 but kept the concept intact. In addition to that tax, the SALT and Medicaid changes are likely to be most in focus in the days and weeks ahead. Tobin Marcus of Wolfe Research noted Tuesday morning that "SALT changes underscore the reality that this is another step forward in negotiations, not the final answer." He added that "we still view late July as the real deadline." This story has been updated. Ben Werschkul is a Washington correspondent for Yahoo Finance. Click here for political news related to business and money policies that will shape tomorrow's stock prices Error in retrieving data Sign in to access your portfolio Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data Error in retrieving data

Miami Herald

6 hours ago

• Miami Herald

Donald Trump's SNAP Benefit Cut Plans Suffer Blow

A plan by Republicans to shift a portion of federal food stamp costs to state governments suffered a major setback after the Senate parliamentarian found it would violate chamber rules. The blocked provision was an attempt to reduce federal spending on the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), affecting more than 40 million low-income Americans who rely on food aid. The shift would have transferred major SNAP costs to the states, requiring them to pay at least 5 percent—and potentially more—of benefit costs, which analysts warned could result in significant cuts to nutrition support. The parliamentarian's decision places additional pressure on the bill's champions to find alternative means to fund tax cuts without imperiling food assistance, Medicaid, or other federal support programs. The provision, a cornerstone of Republican efforts to offset the costs of President Donald Trump's multitrillion-dollar tax and spending legislation, has been ruled inadmissible under Senate rules, sending GOP leaders scrambling to revise the mega bill. The ruling, issued by Senate parliamentarian Elizabeth MacDonough, came as the package prepared for a vote. While her opinions are advisory, they are rarely ignored in lawmaking practice. Republican lawmakers are now searching for new savings as they continue to advance Trump's legislative priorities despite the setback. MacDonough declared the SNAP cost-sharing plan noncompliant with the chamber's budget reconciliation rules, specifically the Byrd Rule, which bars certain policy measures from being attached to budget bills. The proposal would have shifted billions of dollars in SNAP costs from the federal government to the states, creating a new fiscal obligation for state governments and threatening coverage for millions. House Passes Bill with GOP SNAP Cuts The House passed the broader tax and spending package along party lines in May 2025, including a provision to require states to fund at least 5 percent of SNAP benefits and more for high error rates. The House-passed measure's SNAP provision was projected to save about $128 billion. Republican leaders had hoped these savings would help offset the bill's $4.5 trillion in tax cuts and new spending. Other Key Provisions Beyond SNAP, the package includes an extension and expansion of individual and business tax cuts, new work requirements for Medicaid recipients, cuts to federal health and nutrition programs, increased military and border security funding, and the elimination of taxes on tips for service workers. GOP Paths Forward Republican leaders, including Senate Agriculture Committee Chair John Boozman of Arkansas, said they were exploring options to keep the legislation on track while still delivering savings elsewhere. Options range from modifying the disputed SNAP provision to removing it entirely or risking a procedural vote requiring 60 votes—an unlikely scenario in the current Senate. Impact on SNAP Recipients The plan would have expanded work requirements to older adults (up to age 65), a component that remains in the bill for now. Democrats and anti-hunger advocates warned of significant harm to those in need, with more than 3 million individuals projected to lose food stamp access based on Congressional Budget Office estimates. Additional Rulings Expected The Senate parliamentarian is also expected to rule on other elements in the bill, including limits on immigrant eligibility for nutrition aid and changes to federal agencies, with further decisions likely to shape the final legislation. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, the top Democrat on the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, said: "We will keep fighting to protect families in need," opposing shifts in SNAP costs to states, which she said would result in significant benefit cuts. Arkansas Senator John Boozman, chair of the Senate Agriculture Committee, said Republicans are "exploring options" to comply with Senate rules, while supporting those reliant on SNAP. Senate Republicans are expected to revise the bill to comply with the parliamentarian's rulings or drop the contested SNAP provisions. Further decisions from the adviser on other elements of the megabill are anticipated before any final Senate vote. This article contains reporting from The Associated Press. Related Articles When Are July 2025 SNAP Payments Coming?Republicans Out Of Step With Voters On Medicaid FundingNew York State Facing Lawsuit Over SNAP BenefitsSNAP Recipients Get Extra Money This Month in California 2025 NEWSWEEK DIGITAL LLC.

Bloomberg

7 hours ago

• Bloomberg

The Issue That Can Damage Republicans the Most

Amid all the news that Donald Trump creates, and there's a lot, one story stands out for its unrivaled potential to damage the president's political standing: the Republican effort to pass a huge budget bill that, among other things, would kick millions of people off Medicaid. Above all else, this is what Democrats should be focused on. The polling on this legislation is terrible, and with good reason. It's one thing to ask for belt-tightening in a spirit of shared sacrifice, but the One Big Beautiful Bill Act doesn't reduce the deficit at all — on the contrary, it adds nearly $3 trillion to the national debt. And that's an underestimate. According to the Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget, if all its changes were made permanent, the bill would add closer to $5 trillion in new debt. Nor can economic growth avert this fiscal catastrophe. The Congressional Budget Office estimates that on a 'dynamic scoring' basis — which usually reduces the cost of legislation — the price tag of the bill actually goes up by nearly $400 billion due to higher interest rates. This upward pressure on interest rates will spread through the economy and slow growth.