In this month's American Prospect, David Moberg writes an exposé on how government contracts are creating poverty-wage jobs. Through the story of New Jersey school cafeteria worker Ada Iglesias, Moberg personalized the connection between the federal dollars and a struggling family.

Here's an excerpt:

"Ada Iglesias relies on her job as a cafeteria worker at Paramus High School in New Jersey to put food on the table for three hungry, preteen children. It's not easy. She makes $8 an hour, works only 24 hours a week, and while out of work over the school's summer recess, does not qualify for unemployment compensation. Her construction-worker husband, out of work for more than six months, also draws no unemployment insurance.

Feeding kids healthy meals is her job as well as her mission as a mother. Iglesias works for a company named Pomptonian, which contracts with the local school district to deliver the free and reduced-price lunches that are provided through the Child Nutrition Act. Federal funding through the Department of Agriculture provides most of Iglesias' paycheck. But like many service workers with poorly paid, precarious jobs, her family still struggles with poverty even as she works for a federal program designed to fight poverty and hunger."

The article goes on to discuss why federal dollars are often outsourced to private companies - usually, to save money. The reason for the savings is generally because of significant cuts in wages and benefits to workers who were previously employed through federal funds:

"But a study from the Rutgers University Center for Women and Work concluded that 'the majority of cost savings derive from the significant cuts in wages and benefits for food service workers who previously were employed by the school district -- as much as $4.00 to $6.00 an hour' plus elimination of health insurance."

The article is definitely worth reading. You can take a look here: http://www.prospect.org/cs/articles?article=which_side_is_government_on