What Congressman Sorensen’s Food Pantry Visit Tells Us About Hunger - and the Backlash

By Quinn Bluffs

When Congressman Eric Sorensen visited a food pantry in Macomb last week, his goal was simple: to speak out against proposed federal cuts to food assistance programs. But what followed wasn’t just policy discussion, it was a wave of public backlash revealing just how politically charged the issue of hunger has become.

Sorensen, who represents Illinois’ 17th Congressional District, visited Loaves and Fishes food pantry on May 23. There, he warned that proposed budget cuts in Congress could directly harm families, seniors, and children relying on programs like SNAP (formerly known as food stamps), WIC, and local food banks.

"This is about feeding people who need help. Period," Sorensen said.

Online, though, not everyone agreed. Comment sections quickly filled with familiar criticisms: that people who smoke, gamble, own pets, or drive decent cars don’t need help, that poverty exploded under the Biden administration, and that undocumented immigrants are the real cause of any funding issues within food assistance programs.

Let’s unpack that.

First, eligibility for SNAP, WIC, and most food assistance programs is based on income, not lifestyle. Someone smoking a cigarette or owning a dog isn’t proof they can afford groceries. These critiques reflect a deep-rooted stigma: the idea that poor people must be morally spotless to deserve help. But being low-income doesn’t mean you stop being human. It also doesn't take into account the idea that someone can be doing just fine, then fall into poverty without actually doing anything that society could consider "wrong". The constant and distinct dehumanization of someone in need of assistance is disturbing, and very telling of what kind of people those who participate in said dehumanization really are.

Second, the idea that poverty has "tripled" under President Biden is not supported by data. Poverty actually fell in 2021 due to pandemic aid, then rose when those benefits ended, not because of new spending, but because support was pulled back. This was a reality nationwide, and is an ironic complaint given that many who attempt to make this point are the same who fought the idea of pandemic aid in the first place. Additionally, the perceived increase in poverty numbers is threefold: numerous small businesses closed permanently or temporarily, larger businesses cut their workforces, and some parents left the workforce entirely as daycares closed and childcare became inaccessible.

And third, undocumented immigrants are mostly excluded from receiving SNAP, WIC, or most public benefits. While children born in the U.S. may qualify if they’re citizens, their parents’ status doesn’t automatically make them ineligible, nor does it make them the cause of any sort of "run" on the system of public benefits.

Sorensen’s visit wasn’t about politics, at least not directly. It was about need. Loaves and Fishes is seeing more people come through the door, and those numbers reflect a broader trend: food insecurity is growing. Some online voices want to shift the blame. But federal cuts won’t punish fraud or fix misperceptions, they’ll simply mean fewer meals for those who already have too few.

As this debate continues, it’s worth asking: who benefits from making hunger political, and who loses when we let them?

Sources:

• U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA): SNAP and WIC eligibility guidelines – https://www.fns.usda.gov

• National Immigration Law Center: Public benefits and immigrant eligibility – https://www.nilc.org

• Center on Budget and Policy Priorities: Poverty trends and federal assistance impact – https://www.cbpp.org

• U.S. Census Bureau: Official poverty rates and trends – https://www.census.gov

• WGEM News Article (May 23, 2025): "Illinois congressman visits Macomb food pantry, opposes federal cuts to food benefits programs" – https://www.wgem.com/2025/05/23/illinois-congressman-visits-macomb-food-pantry-opposes-federal-cuts-food-benefits-programs