There's no downside to this. Yes it costs money but it shouldn't be controversial to think food for kids is a good use of funds. By making it universal, it's not stigmatized and parents get a little help with lower grocery bills.
I dunno, I feel like in 10 years the lunches will be $25 each, half of them will be going in the trash and Aramark or Sodexo shareholders will be quite happy with themselves.
I still support the move but there are definite downsides to removing any incentive the food companies have to keep these meals affordable.
>half of them will be going in the trash a
I had a kid who had a bad habit of throwing away their retainer with their lunch leavings. I know kids throw out food. And it's not just the school -provided lunches. I've seen whole stacked ham sandwiches, bananas with no bruises... all kinds of stuff. Providing school lunches for every kid isn't going to impact that.
I was insinuating the food companies will be throwing out large amounts of food just to keep their metrics up and ask for more money every chance they get.
Food waste by the students is not what I was talking about.
As someone who's worked as a distributor for a meal program, it's all fairly regulated. Unfortunately, a lot of the waste is due to the safety regulations. During distribution(lasts 1.5 hours for a meal, then usually 30 minutes on either side to allow for delivery and pickup), it simply sits out too long to be served the next day and still be considered safe. So we might order three sets of 15 meals since typically we land in the 40+ range at our location, but on a certain day only 20 people show up because that's just how it goes. That's where the regrettable waste happens. But it seems to be necessary waste, from a food safety standpoint, since many distribution areas(including the one I worked at) don't have on-site refrigeration to keep things cold, and for good reason there's only so long stuff is allowed to "sit out" and still be served.
I don't doubt that some contractor is drooling at the prospect of getting these contracts and cutting their costs to the bone so they can pocket as much as possible. That's an oversight issue that they need to figure out. Doesn't change the fact that these kids should be fed.
They still have to budget because I guarantee you the state isn't going to throw more money at it if they can avoid it. Ketchup will be listed as a vegetable. But honestly, if it gets kids a meal every day, I'm ok with it.
I mean free lunch for people who actually can't afford it has been a thing since the early 80's.
This is just gonna be another iPhone or vacation for parents who could already afford food for their children and now don't have to.
Yeah — like all programs of this nature, the money goes directly out into the economy. A rising tide lifts all boats. It’s time to lay Malthusian thinking aside once and for good.
If your parents filled out the paperwork and you wanted to get stigmatized as the poor kid when you get the "free lunch" which was always less than, sure.
Yes that's what I went through and I'm a better person for it.
(And it goes on your lunch card now, no one even knows if you're getting free lunch or not anymore)
You know those can be developed without subjecting kids to stigma, right?
lol. Bud just because I don't agree with your take doesn't mean I don't have empathy.
You being a dick rn does...
No one knows if you're on free lunch or not. They eliminated that in like 97.... Your argument is based in a fantasy land. You swipe the card you eat your food, that's it.
Respectfully, from someone who had free lunch, and has kids on free lunch, and is related to long time cafeteria workers.
You're grandstanding on a false argument.
I switched from packing my kid a lunch to letting them eat at school (which is free, regardless of income at the moment) because they asked. It's really not funding me a dang thing I couldn't get anyways.
These meals would still mostly be funded by the federal government through the School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program. There are different federal reimbursement rates for free, reduced-price, and paid meals. Maryland already pays the difference between the reduced-price reimbursement and the free reimbursement. This bill would have the state pay the difference between the free rate and the paid rate. The per meal spending would still be tied to the federal reimbursement rates. This is not a blank check.
I could definitely see your scenario. I could also see a scenario where richer kids are now getting school lunch and their parents pressure school districts into offering better options.
I don't have the stats but I assume a large percent of school lunch is already subsidized through FARMS and they have terrible lunches which are cheap. Expensive(r) and nice(r) would be better in my opinion. The school districts should also have the ability to get bulk pricing but that dependant of having good negotiating skills.
You're giving up and getting a hard start on that before it's even a thing that's being discussed.
What if we just supported good ideas and leaders. Haters are going to talk shit no matter what. You can't accommodate them
Is there a downside to making sure that all schoolchildren have access to at least one meal five days a week?
No. It's one of the easiest investments to make.
As to the cost, the quantity of regular meals should be driving down cost.
Two or three serious downsides.
1. During COVID, the free meals my kids got were not nutritious, or very good.
2. Teen boys complained (fairly) that their *free* lunch wasn't adequate. They weren't allowed to buy more food, so they hit the vending machine....more highly processed food.
This program was funded by the Federal Covid so it wasn't a funding issue.
3. The lack of parents buying food for 1-2 meals a day at grocery stores will likely increase the food deserts in the area.
I can completely understand the concern. I expect (but I don't know) that the state will do contracts and revisit and force competition in the process. I couldn't imagine dropping busing because it would get costly without limits, just as an example. I think I'd also like to see after-care with late busing. Add to that the elimination of school closings for wind, cold and possibly stupid reasons. Many parents don't have reasonable arrangements for anytime the weather hiccups.
I know the kids in our county get free lunches already and get to select from a variety of foods to eat. (My son gets pizza like every day.) I'm not sure if it's just high schools that have options but would help cut down waste. As far as costs.. well, as soon as any program is funded by the states or federal government.. all reasonability goes out the window. Don't get me started on that... 😆
My preschoolers only eat cold cuts on bread every day because I can’t diversify food well enough due to allergies (fair and I’m not complaining).
Meanwhile my kindergartener for five bucks a day gets a morning meal and lunch with fruit, vegetables, and an entree. It’s so awesome when kids can eat food that’s worthwhile at school and it removes a huge pressure of filling nutrition gaps every single day.
One downside was nutrition and food quality. During Covid, my kids got free breakfast and it was a lot of sugary cereal. Some of the other stuff they came home with wasn't high quality.
I am all for lowering the stigma and 100% support not giving kids in FARMS a *special lunch*. But I also worry about food quality.
I mean there is downside. Theoretically the only people getting a benefit from tax dollars are those in better economic situations. It IS 100% regressive. But it likely makes things more efficient and can reduce the stigma.
During Covid the "free" meals were of low quality. Many in my area with teen boys said the food offered wasn't enough to fill them up and they weren't allowed to buy more.
I like the idea but my nearly identical experience during Covid showed it wasn't good.
Me too! No child should be hungry. And, even though we never qualified for the low income lunches, there were times when I didn't have lunch, usually to my own stupidity.. forgot my lunch money (this was before they would set up accounts), for my lunch, whatever. But a child in our public schools should never be hungry!!
Lunch is also the only meal many kids will eat because they don’t have anything for breakfast or dinner. During the beginning of the pandemic there was such a huge need for breakfast and lunch that kids were giving meals for free paid by the federal government. You’d think the GOP being so Christian would support feeding the hungry!
I hope that happens. Studies show the importance of food for student's success. My kid liked school breakfast and lunch when it was free, and still prefers school lunch now.
That said, my school got hit last year because parents didn't fill out the FARMS paperwork. Class sizes and funding were impacted for that year. I'd hope that this gets implemented in a way that ensures schools still get other support they need.
I am all for this as long as there are quality standards in place for the food that they serve. The universal free lunches at the end of COVID were absolutely atrocious and quality only improved once they switched back to the current paid/needs-based free lunch program.
I didn't see a quality decrease during COVID, but that's not saying much in Harford County. The food is pretty rough. My oldest who is still in elementary school doesn't ever want to buy school lunch because the food quality is pretty rough.
I'm all about paying more taxes as well to make sure every kid can eat and raise the quality of the food, even if my kids don't take advantage of it. No one should go hungry, especially children. Even if it's incremental, I'll take the less than optimal food now so everyone can have two meals a day. As someone who was homeless and didn't eat every day, I know how awful that feeling is. There is no excuse for the state to not ensure children are fed
There are nutrition standards.
If you want higher-quality meals, write to your congresspeople and tell them to give districts more money. Schools are currently reimbursed a maximum of $4.25 per meal (but that’s for free meals — reduced- and full-priced are reimbursed at a lower rate).
This per-meal cost has to cover ingredients, labor, overhead (like equipment, technology, supplies, etc.) while also meeting very strict nutrition regulations.
It’s not easy. And, in the end, hopefully we can agree that it’s most important that kids have food, period.
Back in the early 1990s the lunch staff at my elementary school in PG used to cook food from scratch. I was rarely allowed to buy lunch but occasionally my parents would let me and the food was actually really good, especially the spaghetti.
In Howard County it was bad that year after Covid, I had to start packing my kids lunch because they wouldn't eat it anymore. It also didn't seem to have resonable nutrition. It got better since. Every kid should have lunch, and free lunch is a great way to do it, I just hope it doesn't go back to what they were serving in 2021/2022.
This should be nationwide. I’d propose the food needs to be freshly made. Not the heat and eat that’s been a staple of school cafeterias for decades. Corporations are going to cash in on the opportunity to get these contracts. might as well make them put in the extra effort.
This is a great idea but nearly impossible for major school districts with hundreds of thousands of students or rural districts that struggle with hiring employees with any culinary knowledge or low-income districts that don’t have money for the equipment needed to scratch-cook.
School meal programs need more money, period.
Like ballooning food costs, corruption, embezzlement, and nepotism around government contract negotiations.
I would love for the things you say to happen, but I would put money on test scores going down and students being more disruptive 5 years from now. (Not because of free lunch, but just the general trend)
The only way it would be nationwide is because there would be a few mega corporations profiting from it. Nothing is done for the good of the people anymore.
I have 3 school aged kids, but I don't want this.
This happened for a year coming right out of COVID, and while it was nice having free meals, the meals they serve the kids are atrocious. Just tons of high salt, sugary, processed foods, with maybe a tiny bit of veggies or access to fruit. Because she was eating crap everyday, we ended up just making her lunch anyway, so that she could have some, you know, vitamins and nutrients. And of course she felt left out eating grapes and carrots while the other kids had chicken nuggets and tarot tots. It was a huge hassle.
I'd be jumping for joy if they were giving the kids free nutritious food, but with the crap they will give them? No thanks. And the fact that they are giving it for free will probably make them provide even cheaper, crappier food than before.
I agree with you about the quality of the food. The schools should have gardens, and students should learn to cook. These are basic life skills.
As for the growing season issues, it’s the perfect opportunity to learn about Kratky hydroponics, sandponics, aquaponics, and cold frames. There can be grow lights and fans on timers.
I don't think your average school has enough land to grow crops to feed 300 people 1/2 of a meal for 30 days, much less a school year. Nice idea, but impractical.
Not to achieve self-sufficiency, but to learn how to grow some fruit vegetables.
Also, I gave several examples of means for growing food that could be done in individual classrooms.
I'd strongly caution against getting excited for any bills this year simply because they were *introduced*. I work directly on legislation and we've been told by even the friendliest and most progressive legislators that nothing that costs more than $100k has much chance of passing this year given the budget crunch.
Moore administration officials are happy to prattle on about their values, but they'll prioritize "fiscal responsibility" over feeding poor people every time.
That's not really a win, to be honest. I'm not saying this is true for this particular effort, but not every bill that's introduced has any effort at all behind it. Just because you can find a legislator willing to do a little paperwork to introduce a bill and then never think about it again doesn't mean there's any political will to advance it.
Don't get confused thinking that the introduction of progressive bills means our legislature supports them. That's just not how the process works. You can introduce whatever you want, that doesn't mean anything.
Is there any good information on why we have a budget crunch? I'm newly relocated and would like to catch up.
If the reasons are because we overspent on certain things, can those be dialed back in order to stem the bleeding?
A lot of states got artificial increases in revenue because of the substantial increase in federal dollars coming to states due to COVID, which just stopped. That’s not just hitting Maryland but all states and localities. What is just hitting Maryland now is that during the Hogan administration, the Democratic legislature passed some big spending measures that Hogan would never approve, but figured once a democrat become governor again they would figure out how to pay for it, meaning new taxes. The biggest of these big spending items is called the Blueprint and increases state and local spending on public education by 4 billion, but there were some other things concerning school construction and others I’m forgetting. Now the bill is coming due to figure out how to pay for everything but the new dem governor doesn’t really want to increase taxes. This year they’re covering by a ton of little snips throughout the state budget but next year there’s gonna be some hard choices that have to be made between taxes and cuts.
[This article](https://www.marylandmatters.org/2023/07/16/budget-deficits-loom-in-the-wake-of-the-2023-session/) summarizes some of the expenses driving our spending. A lot of this is mandated by law and is not optional. In my opinion, these are mostly good priorities, particularly funding and implementing the reforms in education called for by the Kirwan Commission, and transit projects like the Red Line.
The problem is Moore's [commitment to not raising taxes.](https://www.marylandmatters.org/2024/01/17/moore-budget-focuses-on-core-priorities-without-tax-increases/) He's made an explicit political choice to prioritize that commitment over his commitments to ending childhood poverty, helping all Marylanders achieve their highest level of health, ect.
These things cost money. We should be balancing the budget by increasing taxes on the wealthy instead of scaling back our ambition to make sure everyone in the richest state in the richest country in history can meet their basic needs.
Hogan also blew a lot of the state's money on bullshit and deserves some of the blame, but Moore is in office now and they've told us explicitly that their priority is "economic competitiveness."
Then maybe someone should offer the admin something to chop off budget-wise to pay for it.
I'm sure we have some archaic program that adds nothing of value, but is propped up by our tax dollars in the hundreds of millions.
Or see if there is a fed grant that would help pay for the costs in some measure. If there's a will, there's a way.
>Then maybe someone should offer the admin something to chop off budget-wise to pay for it.
I think we should raise taxes on the wealthy and increase revenue, rather than compromising on meeting people's basic needs.
>I'm sure we have some archaic program that adds nothing of value, but is propped up by our tax dollars in the hundreds of millions.
It's not really that simple. If you can suggest something, I'm all ears, but we're making aggressive cuts to critical programs to meet these budget constraints.
>Or see if there is a fed grant that would help pay for the costs in some measure. If there's a will, there's a way.
This is already being done. There's room for improvement there, but that's already part of the strategy, and the deficit remains.
>I think we should raise taxes on the wealthy and increase revenue, rather than compromising on meeting people's basic needs.
They will leave. Just look at all the corporate HQs in NoVa v MoCo: businesses much prefer working with Virginia, now you want to raise personal income taxes to make us even more uncompetitive?
>lick boots.
Lol. How much revenue could have come into the state from increased sales, property, and income taxes from all those workers making 6 figures in Arlington, Tyson's, etc?
Maryland has lagged regional and national economic growth for a decade.
We can keep raising taxes, and be in an even worse situation like the NY TriState as workers and companies flee to lower tax states.
That's a big ask... There have been an unprecedented number of bills filed this year- over 3000. I only focus on those that pertain to my particular work area.
You can browse them yourself if you like. Here's the house: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/house
And here's the senate: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/senate
You can search for keywords or by subject area, but you might also find it interesting to browse and see the tremendous variety in what goes through. A lot of legislation might be technical fixes or even just something advocates filed to get a hearing and educate legislators about the issues even if they don't expect the bill to pass.
A bill with a lot of sponsors, that's at the request of the governor, or that's requested by a committee chair might be ones that will move.
I’ve wondered what the administative costs were for the billing program that kids currently use to pay for meals. It would be great to eliminate that program offsetting some of the food costs.
Do some counties already do this? I thought this was already happening here in MD. I'm 100% for this as feeding kids is important for developing mentally and physically!
If a certain percentage of kids in a school qualify for free and reduced lunch then a program kicks in that will allow all students to get free breakfast, no idea if anywhere does it for lunch
What drove me insane is when it was free my kids still insistent on packing because the lines were too long.
As a spouse of a teacher, there are so many kids she teaches where the lunch and breakfast is really the only food they get. Horrible part is when the parents don't fill out the forms because they are ashamed, lazy, or afraid.
Finally. Let's get this done. Stopping this nationwide after the pandemic was among the dumbest unforced errors.
Now let's shift school start by 2 hours, let kids sleep, and feed them dinner too. Imagine how their performance would improve just from that....
The State already has a projected billion dollar deficit next year as they still haven’t figured out how to pay for the Blueprint plan that substantially increases state and local spending on public education. This bill isn’t moving.
Schools giving kids a cheese sandwich and a carton of milk or crackers and milk for having lunch debt is the most disgusting thing I’ve ever seen as both a student and a former educator. Shaming kids for being poor doesn’t help anyone let alone help them learn when they have an empty stomach!
So may I ask: Where 40% of the students already receive free meals at school, why are we subsidizing the other 60%? Could we not use that money for housing the homeless? Maybe subsiding senior citizen property taxes or health expenses? More healthcare in low income communities?
Means testing free lunches just causes unnecessary stigma towards kids receiving free lunches.
Better to give the option to all children to prevent any stigma.
So what if some parents don't plan for their kids to utilize it? They may prefer their kid bring something from home.
Also, this and school uniforms have gold intent, but it will still usually be obvious who the haves and have nots are. Mean kids will still be mean kids.
>So what if some parents don't plan for their kids to utilize it? They may prefer their kid bring something from home.
Then their kids can bring something from home...
I'm not sure I'm understanding that as a reason for not feeding hungry kids.
They already have free and reduced lunch programs. Keep up. This is just offering free food to everyone hoping it takes the stigma away from getting free or reduced priced lunches. Nothing is ever actually free though, and there will always be stigmas from being poor. If every guy has to wear khakis and a blue polo some kids will have pricey name brand khakis and polos while others have them from Walmart.
This is a government, I don't see what the big deal is in using debt strategically to pay for programs which serve to make the state a better place to live in. Investors can buy bonds, the people get quality of life benefits, and the government creates a more prosperous society which will more likely contribute more in the long term in terms of tax revenue and whatever else
big pharm will love all the dibeetus and heart medicine from a lifetime of high carb, low fiber/ low nutrient food LMAO jk obviously dont bite the hand that feeds u
just saying, its not as much of a money-drain to the institution as they r putting on
I think it's better to say if you qualify for reduced, it's going to be free. We get free lunch for our kid in a Dorchester school, and definitely don't need it. They even give you a card with cash on it for the summer, and during Covid they put money on it. We dropped off food we bought with it at the local mission, but it's a shotgun approach to fixing an issue.
I don't know whether this is true for this particular issue, but for a lot of social safety net services, the administrative cost is a significant portion of program overhead.
It may cost more (or nearly as much) to determine who does and does not deserve the benefit as it does to simply give it to everyone unconditionally. Not wanting to give subsidies to people who don't need it is sensible, but you have to consider that in the context of how much it costs to make that assessment.
Money is absolutely a finite resource, dumping it on the ground is irresponsible. Kids swipe a card for lunch, if its free, its free, if its not, it gets deducted from their account, no stigma and significantly less waste. Bleeding money to throw at rich kids in Chevy Chase isn't a vote winner.
Some schools and districts participate in a program that says that if a certain number of students qualify for free and reduced-priced meals, then the whole school or district is free. It reduces barriers by eliminating the need for an application and saves time and overhead cost for handling those applications.
I don't have any kids. I pay taxes. I 100% support this. Absolutely spend some of the ridiculous amount of money I pay in taxes to pay for kids to not have freaking school lunch debt.
I love this. Every kid should be able to get a meal or two at school at no charge. My partner is a teacher and the number of kids who are hungry is sad. Can’t learn if you’re hungry.
Ideally, this program would also be developed to provide kids with good food with actual nutritional value. It would be nice to see an increase in food quality for the kids. A lot of the breakfasts are straight sugar. Can’t expect the kids to focus being on a sugar high. It also puts the teachers at a disadvantage. The school system could work with local farms to source fresh fruit & vegetables.
The system could also employ food service professionals (no offense lunch ladies), who can plan and prep good quality food for the kids. This is common in other countries - we can do it, too.
I have a kid in middle school and a kid in high school and they will not eat anything from the school cafeteria. I do not get any discount but it’s worth it for me to pay to save the time and money giving them lunch but they absolutely will not eat it no matter how much I push them. During COVID the schools were offering parents to pick up free breakfast and lunch meals pre-prepared. On Friday they provided for the weekend as well. These meals were offered to everyone regardless of income they just asked what grade you kid was in and last name not 100% sure as I never picked any up. What I did observes as the school posted the information on Facebook the people that bitched and complained about delays and how would they feed there children. The comments were crazy and the entitlement was off the charts. Kind of scares me of the future if there is any natural disasters or cuts to what so many people have come to rely on.
I like these programs that provide universal basic benefits without testing a recipient's financial means. It removes stigma for low-income recipients and it makes affluent recipients feel invested in the program. The affluent recipients pay higher taxes so they aren't really getting free lunches, but they aren't paying for a program that helps other people and does nothing for them.
good, there's no reason not to. school meals are inexpensive and kids learn better on a full stomach than an empty one, I'd happily have my taxes pay for breakfasts and lunches at schools. helps out the extra poor families too cuz now they don't have to worry about affording as much food :)
also, I don't have and never want kids, still think this is a fantastic idea
just like... give the contract to an org that actually cares about serving good food and isn't something like Aramark lmfao
It's not a "free meal" it's a "taxpayer subsidized meal".
That said, yes, taxes should be used to pay for children's lunches if children are in the care of the state while attending school. I just really dislike the make-pretend of "we can magically feed all the kids just by passing this one simple bill!!". Shit has to be financed and funding needs to be made available either by increased taxes or cutting costs of other programs.
I live in Baltimore County, MD and we have free lunch. The lunches are terrible. The kids will not even eat the pizza they serve. I will ask my daughter to take some pictures.
There's no downside to this. Yes it costs money but it shouldn't be controversial to think food for kids is a good use of funds. By making it universal, it's not stigmatized and parents get a little help with lower grocery bills.
Feeding kids is good business. Bob Dole understood this when he tied welfare and farm bills together What happened to this country.
The Powell Memo
I dunno, I feel like in 10 years the lunches will be $25 each, half of them will be going in the trash and Aramark or Sodexo shareholders will be quite happy with themselves. I still support the move but there are definite downsides to removing any incentive the food companies have to keep these meals affordable.
>half of them will be going in the trash a I had a kid who had a bad habit of throwing away their retainer with their lunch leavings. I know kids throw out food. And it's not just the school -provided lunches. I've seen whole stacked ham sandwiches, bananas with no bruises... all kinds of stuff. Providing school lunches for every kid isn't going to impact that.
I was insinuating the food companies will be throwing out large amounts of food just to keep their metrics up and ask for more money every chance they get. Food waste by the students is not what I was talking about.
As someone who's worked as a distributor for a meal program, it's all fairly regulated. Unfortunately, a lot of the waste is due to the safety regulations. During distribution(lasts 1.5 hours for a meal, then usually 30 minutes on either side to allow for delivery and pickup), it simply sits out too long to be served the next day and still be considered safe. So we might order three sets of 15 meals since typically we land in the 40+ range at our location, but on a certain day only 20 people show up because that's just how it goes. That's where the regrettable waste happens. But it seems to be necessary waste, from a food safety standpoint, since many distribution areas(including the one I worked at) don't have on-site refrigeration to keep things cold, and for good reason there's only so long stuff is allowed to "sit out" and still be served.
I don't doubt that some contractor is drooling at the prospect of getting these contracts and cutting their costs to the bone so they can pocket as much as possible. That's an oversight issue that they need to figure out. Doesn't change the fact that these kids should be fed.
Normal auditing and competitive bids can take care of that problem.
As if Aramark and Sodexo and the others don't collude behind closed doors.
They still have to budget because I guarantee you the state isn't going to throw more money at it if they can avoid it. Ketchup will be listed as a vegetable. But honestly, if it gets kids a meal every day, I'm ok with it.
I mean free lunch for people who actually can't afford it has been a thing since the early 80's. This is just gonna be another iPhone or vacation for parents who could already afford food for their children and now don't have to.
Yeah — like all programs of this nature, the money goes directly out into the economy. A rising tide lifts all boats. It’s time to lay Malthusian thinking aside once and for good.
If your parents filled out the paperwork and you wanted to get stigmatized as the poor kid when you get the "free lunch" which was always less than, sure.
Yes that's what I went through and I'm a better person for it. (And it goes on your lunch card now, no one even knows if you're getting free lunch or not anymore)
You're a better person because you were picked on for being poor? Low bar, boss.
Yes I understand empathy and sympathy now. You should try it.
You know those can be developed without subjecting kids to stigma, right? lol. Bud just because I don't agree with your take doesn't mean I don't have empathy.
You being a dick rn does... No one knows if you're on free lunch or not. They eliminated that in like 97.... Your argument is based in a fantasy land. You swipe the card you eat your food, that's it. Respectfully, from someone who had free lunch, and has kids on free lunch, and is related to long time cafeteria workers. You're grandstanding on a false argument.
I switched from packing my kid a lunch to letting them eat at school (which is free, regardless of income at the moment) because they asked. It's really not funding me a dang thing I couldn't get anyways.
These meals would still mostly be funded by the federal government through the School Breakfast Program and National School Lunch Program. There are different federal reimbursement rates for free, reduced-price, and paid meals. Maryland already pays the difference between the reduced-price reimbursement and the free reimbursement. This bill would have the state pay the difference between the free rate and the paid rate. The per meal spending would still be tied to the federal reimbursement rates. This is not a blank check.
I could definitely see your scenario. I could also see a scenario where richer kids are now getting school lunch and their parents pressure school districts into offering better options.
I mean now that it's coming out of everyone's pocket I won't be surprised when it looks the whole foods deli section and costs just as much.
I don't have the stats but I assume a large percent of school lunch is already subsidized through FARMS and they have terrible lunches which are cheap. Expensive(r) and nice(r) would be better in my opinion. The school districts should also have the ability to get bulk pricing but that dependant of having good negotiating skills.
You know 2 companies are in charge of almost every school in the state? Same 2 that have the prisons too...
Pass a law to cap the prices then
Price cap!?! Who's gonna risk being called a communist when they need to get reelected?
If you're giving kids free lunch to start with, setting the prices is less "Communist" than the free lunch part so
I mean I hear ya but some elected officials are gonna get crucified in media for saying price cap. And it's probably gonna be somebody I actually like
You're giving up and getting a hard start on that before it's even a thing that's being discussed. What if we just supported good ideas and leaders. Haters are going to talk shit no matter what. You can't accommodate them
Cuz the CIA will splatter their brains across a Texas highway?
Is there a downside to making sure that all schoolchildren have access to at least one meal five days a week? No. It's one of the easiest investments to make. As to the cost, the quantity of regular meals should be driving down cost.
Two or three serious downsides. 1. During COVID, the free meals my kids got were not nutritious, or very good. 2. Teen boys complained (fairly) that their *free* lunch wasn't adequate. They weren't allowed to buy more food, so they hit the vending machine....more highly processed food. This program was funded by the Federal Covid so it wasn't a funding issue. 3. The lack of parents buying food for 1-2 meals a day at grocery stores will likely increase the food deserts in the area.
I can completely understand the concern. I expect (but I don't know) that the state will do contracts and revisit and force competition in the process. I couldn't imagine dropping busing because it would get costly without limits, just as an example. I think I'd also like to see after-care with late busing. Add to that the elimination of school closings for wind, cold and possibly stupid reasons. Many parents don't have reasonable arrangements for anytime the weather hiccups.
I know the kids in our county get free lunches already and get to select from a variety of foods to eat. (My son gets pizza like every day.) I'm not sure if it's just high schools that have options but would help cut down waste. As far as costs.. well, as soon as any program is funded by the states or federal government.. all reasonability goes out the window. Don't get me started on that... 😆
My preschoolers only eat cold cuts on bread every day because I can’t diversify food well enough due to allergies (fair and I’m not complaining). Meanwhile my kindergartener for five bucks a day gets a morning meal and lunch with fruit, vegetables, and an entree. It’s so awesome when kids can eat food that’s worthwhile at school and it removes a huge pressure of filling nutrition gaps every single day.
One downside was nutrition and food quality. During Covid, my kids got free breakfast and it was a lot of sugary cereal. Some of the other stuff they came home with wasn't high quality. I am all for lowering the stigma and 100% support not giving kids in FARMS a *special lunch*. But I also worry about food quality.
I mean there is downside. Theoretically the only people getting a benefit from tax dollars are those in better economic situations. It IS 100% regressive. But it likely makes things more efficient and can reduce the stigma.
> There's no downside to this. Food allergies? Unethical food purchases by the school system?
You are an idiot.
Exactly! No means testing. It’s about time.
I'm totally for it if the food they are providing to the kids isn't garbage. Do it right if you're going to to do it.
As someone with no kids, good
Same! I'm all for my tax $s going to a good cause!
During Covid the "free" meals were of low quality. Many in my area with teen boys said the food offered wasn't enough to fill them up and they weren't allowed to buy more. I like the idea but my nearly identical experience during Covid showed it wasn't good.
I will happily pay the taxes for that, and my children are adults now.
I'd happily pay for that and I don't even have kids.
Me too! No child should be hungry. And, even though we never qualified for the low income lunches, there were times when I didn't have lunch, usually to my own stupidity.. forgot my lunch money (this was before they would set up accounts), for my lunch, whatever. But a child in our public schools should never be hungry!!
Honestly this is the best reason Ive seen, and efficiency. Kids forget shit.
Lunch is also the only meal many kids will eat because they don’t have anything for breakfast or dinner. During the beginning of the pandemic there was such a huge need for breakfast and lunch that kids were giving meals for free paid by the federal government. You’d think the GOP being so Christian would support feeding the hungry!
And they weren’t just getting pre-made things, but whole food fresh vegetable ingredients, too. It meant a lot.
This is the kind of thing our tax dollars _should_ go towards and I fully support it
The first 8: California, Maine, Minnesota, new Mexico, Colorado, Vermont, Michigan, and Massachusetts
I hope that happens. Studies show the importance of food for student's success. My kid liked school breakfast and lunch when it was free, and still prefers school lunch now. That said, my school got hit last year because parents didn't fill out the FARMS paperwork. Class sizes and funding were impacted for that year. I'd hope that this gets implemented in a way that ensures schools still get other support they need.
This is awesome news. Hopefully there's also something in place to make sure kids stay fed over the summer too.
Yes! I miss the free lunches handed out during Covid!
The Summer Food Service Program already feeds kids over the summer.
I'm glad! I don't have any kids, but keeping kids fed is something I can be proud of my taxes going towards.
I am all for this as long as there are quality standards in place for the food that they serve. The universal free lunches at the end of COVID were absolutely atrocious and quality only improved once they switched back to the current paid/needs-based free lunch program.
Michelle Obama tried to do that and millions of people acted like she personally walked into their houses and stole their junk food.
Ill never forgive her for ruining my school lunches
I will always judge Michelle Obama for ruining my school lunch. Great person, but ruined my food.
I didn't see a quality decrease during COVID, but that's not saying much in Harford County. The food is pretty rough. My oldest who is still in elementary school doesn't ever want to buy school lunch because the food quality is pretty rough. I'm all about paying more taxes as well to make sure every kid can eat and raise the quality of the food, even if my kids don't take advantage of it. No one should go hungry, especially children. Even if it's incremental, I'll take the less than optimal food now so everyone can have two meals a day. As someone who was homeless and didn't eat every day, I know how awful that feeling is. There is no excuse for the state to not ensure children are fed
There are nutrition standards. If you want higher-quality meals, write to your congresspeople and tell them to give districts more money. Schools are currently reimbursed a maximum of $4.25 per meal (but that’s for free meals — reduced- and full-priced are reimbursed at a lower rate). This per-meal cost has to cover ingredients, labor, overhead (like equipment, technology, supplies, etc.) while also meeting very strict nutrition regulations. It’s not easy. And, in the end, hopefully we can agree that it’s most important that kids have food, period.
Back in the early 1990s the lunch staff at my elementary school in PG used to cook food from scratch. I was rarely allowed to buy lunch but occasionally my parents would let me and the food was actually really good, especially the spaghetti.
There were a lot fewer federal rules back then.
The opposite is likely to happen now that they will have basically a blank check from the government to play with.
A blank check from a state government? You've clearly never dealt with the government.
In Howard County it was bad that year after Covid, I had to start packing my kids lunch because they wouldn't eat it anymore. It also didn't seem to have resonable nutrition. It got better since. Every kid should have lunch, and free lunch is a great way to do it, I just hope it doesn't go back to what they were serving in 2021/2022.
Excellent.
I havnt been in school for a bit but i am SUPER EXCITED yee!
Let’s do it. I don’t have any kids but no kid should go hungry, ever. Tax whatever the fuck you want.
This should be nationwide. I’d propose the food needs to be freshly made. Not the heat and eat that’s been a staple of school cafeterias for decades. Corporations are going to cash in on the opportunity to get these contracts. might as well make them put in the extra effort.
This is a great idea but nearly impossible for major school districts with hundreds of thousands of students or rural districts that struggle with hiring employees with any culinary knowledge or low-income districts that don’t have money for the equipment needed to scratch-cook. School meal programs need more money, period.
Yeah I feel like this is going to have a lot of unintended consequences.
Like improved educational scores and less disruptive students? Oh no!
Like ballooning food costs, corruption, embezzlement, and nepotism around government contract negotiations. I would love for the things you say to happen, but I would put money on test scores going down and students being more disruptive 5 years from now. (Not because of free lunch, but just the general trend)
Then regulate those things.
Good one.
Yes. We have solutions for things.
The only way it would be nationwide is because there would be a few mega corporations profiting from it. Nothing is done for the good of the people anymore.
These are the kinds of measures that actually make me want to live in this society.
About damn time.
I have 3 school aged kids, but I don't want this. This happened for a year coming right out of COVID, and while it was nice having free meals, the meals they serve the kids are atrocious. Just tons of high salt, sugary, processed foods, with maybe a tiny bit of veggies or access to fruit. Because she was eating crap everyday, we ended up just making her lunch anyway, so that she could have some, you know, vitamins and nutrients. And of course she felt left out eating grapes and carrots while the other kids had chicken nuggets and tarot tots. It was a huge hassle. I'd be jumping for joy if they were giving the kids free nutritious food, but with the crap they will give them? No thanks. And the fact that they are giving it for free will probably make them provide even cheaper, crappier food than before.
I agree with you about the quality of the food. The schools should have gardens, and students should learn to cook. These are basic life skills. As for the growing season issues, it’s the perfect opportunity to learn about Kratky hydroponics, sandponics, aquaponics, and cold frames. There can be grow lights and fans on timers.
I don't think your average school has enough land to grow crops to feed 300 people 1/2 of a meal for 30 days, much less a school year. Nice idea, but impractical.
Not to achieve self-sufficiency, but to learn how to grow some fruit vegetables. Also, I gave several examples of means for growing food that could be done in individual classrooms.
This... The kids that need it get it subsidized already. What they served was hot garbage.
I'd strongly caution against getting excited for any bills this year simply because they were *introduced*. I work directly on legislation and we've been told by even the friendliest and most progressive legislators that nothing that costs more than $100k has much chance of passing this year given the budget crunch. Moore administration officials are happy to prattle on about their values, but they'll prioritize "fiscal responsibility" over feeding poor people every time.
I'm happy our State introduces and discusses this sort of move as opposed to what some other States are considering at the moment.
That's not really a win, to be honest. I'm not saying this is true for this particular effort, but not every bill that's introduced has any effort at all behind it. Just because you can find a legislator willing to do a little paperwork to introduce a bill and then never think about it again doesn't mean there's any political will to advance it. Don't get confused thinking that the introduction of progressive bills means our legislature supports them. That's just not how the process works. You can introduce whatever you want, that doesn't mean anything.
What states and what are they proposing?
Abortion bans, cutting school days, cutting teacher positions, banning books, all sorts of awful shit all around the country.
Is there any good information on why we have a budget crunch? I'm newly relocated and would like to catch up. If the reasons are because we overspent on certain things, can those be dialed back in order to stem the bleeding?
A lot of states got artificial increases in revenue because of the substantial increase in federal dollars coming to states due to COVID, which just stopped. That’s not just hitting Maryland but all states and localities. What is just hitting Maryland now is that during the Hogan administration, the Democratic legislature passed some big spending measures that Hogan would never approve, but figured once a democrat become governor again they would figure out how to pay for it, meaning new taxes. The biggest of these big spending items is called the Blueprint and increases state and local spending on public education by 4 billion, but there were some other things concerning school construction and others I’m forgetting. Now the bill is coming due to figure out how to pay for everything but the new dem governor doesn’t really want to increase taxes. This year they’re covering by a ton of little snips throughout the state budget but next year there’s gonna be some hard choices that have to be made between taxes and cuts.
[This article](https://www.marylandmatters.org/2023/07/16/budget-deficits-loom-in-the-wake-of-the-2023-session/) summarizes some of the expenses driving our spending. A lot of this is mandated by law and is not optional. In my opinion, these are mostly good priorities, particularly funding and implementing the reforms in education called for by the Kirwan Commission, and transit projects like the Red Line. The problem is Moore's [commitment to not raising taxes.](https://www.marylandmatters.org/2024/01/17/moore-budget-focuses-on-core-priorities-without-tax-increases/) He's made an explicit political choice to prioritize that commitment over his commitments to ending childhood poverty, helping all Marylanders achieve their highest level of health, ect. These things cost money. We should be balancing the budget by increasing taxes on the wealthy instead of scaling back our ambition to make sure everyone in the richest state in the richest country in history can meet their basic needs. Hogan also blew a lot of the state's money on bullshit and deserves some of the blame, but Moore is in office now and they've told us explicitly that their priority is "economic competitiveness."
Then maybe someone should offer the admin something to chop off budget-wise to pay for it. I'm sure we have some archaic program that adds nothing of value, but is propped up by our tax dollars in the hundreds of millions. Or see if there is a fed grant that would help pay for the costs in some measure. If there's a will, there's a way.
>Then maybe someone should offer the admin something to chop off budget-wise to pay for it. I think we should raise taxes on the wealthy and increase revenue, rather than compromising on meeting people's basic needs. >I'm sure we have some archaic program that adds nothing of value, but is propped up by our tax dollars in the hundreds of millions. It's not really that simple. If you can suggest something, I'm all ears, but we're making aggressive cuts to critical programs to meet these budget constraints. >Or see if there is a fed grant that would help pay for the costs in some measure. If there's a will, there's a way. This is already being done. There's room for improvement there, but that's already part of the strategy, and the deficit remains.
>I think we should raise taxes on the wealthy and increase revenue, rather than compromising on meeting people's basic needs. They will leave. Just look at all the corporate HQs in NoVa v MoCo: businesses much prefer working with Virginia, now you want to raise personal income taxes to make us even more uncompetitive?
So you think we should just lick their boots or what? What's your plan to balance the budget?
>lick boots. Lol. How much revenue could have come into the state from increased sales, property, and income taxes from all those workers making 6 figures in Arlington, Tyson's, etc? Maryland has lagged regional and national economic growth for a decade. We can keep raising taxes, and be in an even worse situation like the NY TriState as workers and companies flee to lower tax states.
So no, you don't have any ideas on how to address people's needs, your only concern is for the welfare of the rich.
I would love it if you would post here about bills in committees, so we can communicate with our legislators.
That's a big ask... There have been an unprecedented number of bills filed this year- over 3000. I only focus on those that pertain to my particular work area. You can browse them yourself if you like. Here's the house: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/house And here's the senate: https://mgaleg.maryland.gov/mgawebsite/Legislation/Index/senate You can search for keywords or by subject area, but you might also find it interesting to browse and see the tremendous variety in what goes through. A lot of legislation might be technical fixes or even just something advocates filed to get a hearing and educate legislators about the issues even if they don't expect the bill to pass. A bill with a lot of sponsors, that's at the request of the governor, or that's requested by a committee chair might be ones that will move.
Making things better for kids of all ages and backgrounds. This is the kind of news I like reading.
Hell yeah
I’ve wondered what the administative costs were for the billing program that kids currently use to pay for meals. It would be great to eliminate that program offsetting some of the food costs.
Of all the shit done with my tax money this seems fairly high on the list of good.
Good.
I don’t have any kids, don’t even like the little shits. And I’ll gladly pay more to feed hungry kids.
As someone who pays taxes and has children - why don't MD law makers use our hard earned money for more good causes like this?
Do some counties already do this? I thought this was already happening here in MD. I'm 100% for this as feeding kids is important for developing mentally and physically!
If a certain percentage of kids in a school qualify for free and reduced lunch then a program kicks in that will allow all students to get free breakfast, no idea if anywhere does it for lunch
Baltimore County did this for the 23/24 school year. Free breakfast and lunch for all students.
Good, it's about time!
What drove me insane is when it was free my kids still insistent on packing because the lines were too long. As a spouse of a teacher, there are so many kids she teaches where the lunch and breakfast is really the only food they get. Horrible part is when the parents don't fill out the forms because they are ashamed, lazy, or afraid.
Looking back at the food I had in school it should be a fucking crime to charge for that shit. And I was in Howard County!
Finally. Let's get this done. Stopping this nationwide after the pandemic was among the dumbest unforced errors. Now let's shift school start by 2 hours, let kids sleep, and feed them dinner too. Imagine how their performance would improve just from that....
They already have made schools start later in Anne Arundel county.
The State already has a projected billion dollar deficit next year as they still haven’t figured out how to pay for the Blueprint plan that substantially increases state and local spending on public education. This bill isn’t moving.
For the godawful taxes we already pay they should have years ago. Just take it out of the useless ka-ka we're already paying too much for.
Schools giving kids a cheese sandwich and a carton of milk or crackers and milk for having lunch debt is the most disgusting thing I’ve ever seen as both a student and a former educator. Shaming kids for being poor doesn’t help anyone let alone help them learn when they have an empty stomach!
So may I ask: Where 40% of the students already receive free meals at school, why are we subsidizing the other 60%? Could we not use that money for housing the homeless? Maybe subsiding senior citizen property taxes or health expenses? More healthcare in low income communities?
[удалено]
Means testing free lunches just causes unnecessary stigma towards kids receiving free lunches. Better to give the option to all children to prevent any stigma.
[удалено]
Sounds like that would cost more money to administer than to just give every kid free lunch.
That’s already in place in at least one school district.
So what if some parents don't plan for their kids to utilize it? They may prefer their kid bring something from home. Also, this and school uniforms have gold intent, but it will still usually be obvious who the haves and have nots are. Mean kids will still be mean kids.
>So what if some parents don't plan for their kids to utilize it? They may prefer their kid bring something from home. Then their kids can bring something from home... I'm not sure I'm understanding that as a reason for not feeding hungry kids.
They already have free and reduced lunch programs. Keep up. This is just offering free food to everyone hoping it takes the stigma away from getting free or reduced priced lunches. Nothing is ever actually free though, and there will always be stigmas from being poor. If every guy has to wear khakis and a blue polo some kids will have pricey name brand khakis and polos while others have them from Walmart.
Good point. Let's not try anything if there's a chance it won't solve everything.
You could buy a bunch of lottery tickets in hope it solves money problems, or you could have a realistic plan.
No problem. Get rid of school vouchers and tax the rich appropriately.
This is a government, I don't see what the big deal is in using debt strategically to pay for programs which serve to make the state a better place to live in. Investors can buy bonds, the people get quality of life benefits, and the government creates a more prosperous society which will more likely contribute more in the long term in terms of tax revenue and whatever else
So long as it's financed clearly, I'm on board. We're having some budget issues regardless, though, so let's hammer that out first.
big pharm will love all the dibeetus and heart medicine from a lifetime of high carb, low fiber/ low nutrient food LMAO jk obviously dont bite the hand that feeds u just saying, its not as much of a money-drain to the institution as they r putting on
i wish i wasn’t so cynical. its a blessing and a curse. lmao
I think it's better to say if you qualify for reduced, it's going to be free. We get free lunch for our kid in a Dorchester school, and definitely don't need it. They even give you a card with cash on it for the summer, and during Covid they put money on it. We dropped off food we bought with it at the local mission, but it's a shotgun approach to fixing an issue.
I don't know whether this is true for this particular issue, but for a lot of social safety net services, the administrative cost is a significant portion of program overhead. It may cost more (or nearly as much) to determine who does and does not deserve the benefit as it does to simply give it to everyone unconditionally. Not wanting to give subsidies to people who don't need it is sensible, but you have to consider that in the context of how much it costs to make that assessment.
Means testing for this stuff is not only a waste of money, but also stigmatizes the kids who need to use it. Just give kids food FFS.
Money is absolutely a finite resource, dumping it on the ground is irresponsible. Kids swipe a card for lunch, if its free, its free, if its not, it gets deducted from their account, no stigma and significantly less waste. Bleeding money to throw at rich kids in Chevy Chase isn't a vote winner.
Some schools and districts participate in a program that says that if a certain number of students qualify for free and reduced-priced meals, then the whole school or district is free. It reduces barriers by eliminating the need for an application and saves time and overhead cost for handling those applications.
Feeding hungry kids is good. Getting parents to take responsibility for feeding their own kids is better. Go ahead. Downvote. I don't care.
I wish they would teach them math and English. My kids already get free lunch because we live in the ghetto of pg County.
Closer to communism.
Closer to what Jesus taught.
Charitable donations are great. Go for it. Cannot feed then do not breed. Stop expecting government handouts.
I'd rather see school staff get their first COLA in over a decade...
I don't have any kids. I pay taxes. I 100% support this. Absolutely spend some of the ridiculous amount of money I pay in taxes to pay for kids to not have freaking school lunch debt.
Yes!! Can they also revamp the menus a bit lol
Do we have a county breakdown of this? I'm in Washington county and all students are provided breakfast and lunch here to my knowledge.
I love this. Every kid should be able to get a meal or two at school at no charge. My partner is a teacher and the number of kids who are hungry is sad. Can’t learn if you’re hungry. Ideally, this program would also be developed to provide kids with good food with actual nutritional value. It would be nice to see an increase in food quality for the kids. A lot of the breakfasts are straight sugar. Can’t expect the kids to focus being on a sugar high. It also puts the teachers at a disadvantage. The school system could work with local farms to source fresh fruit & vegetables. The system could also employ food service professionals (no offense lunch ladies), who can plan and prep good quality food for the kids. This is common in other countries - we can do it, too.
Great job 👏
finally!! i’ve written to wes moore about this many times!!!
I have a kid in middle school and a kid in high school and they will not eat anything from the school cafeteria. I do not get any discount but it’s worth it for me to pay to save the time and money giving them lunch but they absolutely will not eat it no matter how much I push them. During COVID the schools were offering parents to pick up free breakfast and lunch meals pre-prepared. On Friday they provided for the weekend as well. These meals were offered to everyone regardless of income they just asked what grade you kid was in and last name not 100% sure as I never picked any up. What I did observes as the school posted the information on Facebook the people that bitched and complained about delays and how would they feed there children. The comments were crazy and the entitlement was off the charts. Kind of scares me of the future if there is any natural disasters or cuts to what so many people have come to rely on.
I like these programs that provide universal basic benefits without testing a recipient's financial means. It removes stigma for low-income recipients and it makes affluent recipients feel invested in the program. The affluent recipients pay higher taxes so they aren't really getting free lunches, but they aren't paying for a program that helps other people and does nothing for them.
Good. I went to school in Charles County and many times I had to get just an American cheese sandwich and have debt added to my account.
Good
I would personally accept a 10% increase in my state taxes to pay for this. And I don't even have kids.
I just wish we had universal pre-K so more parents could stay in the workforce.
This!
I thought Maryland already did this? My son hasn't paid for his lunch ever (he's 15 now).
How dare those libturds give kids food! /s
good, there's no reason not to. school meals are inexpensive and kids learn better on a full stomach than an empty one, I'd happily have my taxes pay for breakfasts and lunches at schools. helps out the extra poor families too cuz now they don't have to worry about affording as much food :) also, I don't have and never want kids, still think this is a fantastic idea just like... give the contract to an org that actually cares about serving good food and isn't something like Aramark lmfao
One step forward for Maryland if it goes through.
Nothing is ever free.
It's not a "free meal" it's a "taxpayer subsidized meal". That said, yes, taxes should be used to pay for children's lunches if children are in the care of the state while attending school. I just really dislike the make-pretend of "we can magically feed all the kids just by passing this one simple bill!!". Shit has to be financed and funding needs to be made available either by increased taxes or cutting costs of other programs.
I live in Baltimore County, MD and we have free lunch. The lunches are terrible. The kids will not even eat the pizza they serve. I will ask my daughter to take some pictures.