The Grant County Beat published the article, Heinrich, Sanders, Omar, and Gillibrand Seek to Expand and Make Permanent Universal School Meals (https://www.grantcountybeat.com/news/non-local-news-releases/78237-heinrich-sanders-omar-and-gillibrand-seek-to-expand-and-make-permanent-universal-school-meals) on Sunday, May 14, 2023. It was subtitled, "Legislation would save New Mexico nearly $40 million annually." Despite not having much time or energy, I felt compelled to respond.
Who would argue with the statement, "Every child deserves to eat?" That statement closes the first paragraph of the "Bill Summary" of the "Universal School Meals Program Act" (https://www.sanders.senate.gov/wp-content/uploads/school-meals-summary-pdf.pdf). If you haven't heard of this legislation sponsored by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ilhan Omar, the legislation proposes to provide "free breakfast, lunch, dinner, and a snack to all school children."
According to a March 28, 2023 press release from the governor's office, New Mexico is one of five states that offers a form of universal school meals. Governor Michelle Lujan Grisham signed Senate Bill 4- Healthy Universal School Meals, which states, among other things, that "Public school districts and charter schools operating the national school lunch program and the school breakfast program shall establish a program to offer high-quality meals at no charge to all students" (https://www.nmlegis.gov/Sessions/23%20Regular/final/SB0004.pdf).
Sound good? Sounds good to me too…except for the fact that it doesn't matter if students' parents earn nothing or millions. One underpinning of this legislature is the notion of "shaming." According to the summary, "…as the USDA reported, nearly half of all school districts shamed students in the lunch line." You can read more about "lunch shaming" here: https://www.publicschoolreview.com/blog/what-parents-need-to-know-about-lunch-
shaming#:~:text=Disposing%20of%20perfectly%20good%20food,or%20stamps%20to%20shame%20them.
Why is it that children whose parents can easily afford to pay for their children's meals are getting free meals? Here's one rationale: "Parents will not be troubled with redundant paperwork…" Yes, as a parent, I don't want the hassle of completing paperwork so my child can have the food she needs (that's a bit of sarcasm in case you missed it). Is this yet another reflection of a society in which we want things, but we don't want to do what we need to do to have them?
I'm not a fan of the "Get as much as you can without doing anything for it" mentality. I'm also not a fan of using the public coffers to support those who don't need public support. Sure! Make meals available to every student. Perhaps some of the students who can afford to bypass those free school meals will actually eat those meals…at least sometimes. Or maybe they and others who really need the meals will bypass eating school meals as a means of showing they really don't need "charity."
Or…maybe we should be offering free clothing to all students as well, because I remember clothing being more of a means of "shaming" than school lunches. Maybe it's different now, but back in the day, if you weren't wearing Converse Allstars, Pro Keds, or some other prestigious brand of sneakers on your feet, everyone knew you were "poor." You may not have heard the following lyrics in your school yard, but I certainly did:
"Rejects, they make your feet feel fine
Rejects, they cost a dollar ninety-nine."
I don't remember any such school lunch songs, but I remember not liking those lyrics one little bit as I shamefully wore my "rejects" to school. Somehow, I survived.
It might be unrealistic, and it certainly goes against the current societal ethos, but it would seem to make more long-term sense to address the psychology and practice of "shaming" and feeling "shamed" due to economic status than to engage in costly deception. Spending millions to pretend that we are all equal, to hide the fact that there are many "have-nots" in our society is mere cover-up that does little to rectify the reality. You can use concealer or foundation to hide your blemishes, but such use doesn't make the blemishes go away, does it?
Just like the myriad "isms" in our society (sexism, racism, ageism, etc.), It seems, as usual, that we would rather cover up and hide our blemishes, apply temporary "fixes" that do not address the root causes of our issues. Our societal (perhaps species-wide) desire to be- or at least appear- better than the other, to engage in displays to make the other seem less than we are, reflect our lack of psycho-emotional development as a species. Are we not capable of more than that? Or is that we are unwilling to advance?
The bottom line is that "shaming," in some form or another, will continue unless we address the root causes, and should people who can pay for school meals be draining the public coffers. How to address both?
Dismantle the Foundation of Shaming
• Begin instilling in children the notion that different doesn't equal better or worse. Comparison need not be accompanied by evaluations of better or worse.
- Begin dismantling the value system that places material possessions above humanitarian sensibilities and behavior (sharing, caring, concern for the whole).
- Begin developing a societal ethos that elevates connectedness above divisiveness.
- Replace the "us and them" mentality with one a "we are all us" perspective.
Reinforce Parental Responsibility
Although I am no accountant and haven't thought much about the logistics, the idea is that if there were free meals available to all children attending schools that receive federal funding, there'd be a section on the tax return that asks if the family or individual filing a return has children attending a school that receives federal funding (public or charter school). If the answer is yes, and adjusted gross income is at a designated level, then the amount for school meals (or a percentage thereof) would be subtracted from the deduction the taxpayer receives for each child that receives free meals.
If the above or some variation thereof were implemented, at least a portion of what comes out of the public chest could be recovered without schools (and therefore students) being any the wiser. No shaming. Yes, it would require another line or two on tax forms and more fiddling with the tax code, but that seems like a relatively small price to pay for the millions drained from public coffers to assume a primary parental responsibility: feeding your children.
Yes, help those who are in need, but we have so many needs that expending valuable resources on those who do not need that help seems awfully wasteful.
T.A. Niles
Mimbres/San Lorenzo, NM