There’s a huge debate playing out on X and in Congress over school lunch. The basic framing goes like this: the good, caring Democrats want kids to eat and learn, so they argue there must be free, federally funded school lunch for all students. Meanwhile, under the biased narrative, the evil, stingy Republicans supposedly want kids to go hungry, to stay ignorant, and for the money that would have funded school lunches to somehow end up in Elon Musk’s pocket.
As is often the case, about 80% of the people arguing about school lunch don’t even understand what the real issue is, what the Democrats are actually proposing and why the Republicans oppose it. The current debate in Congress, rather than on Twitter, centers on whether school meals should be made universally free for all students or remain limited to low-income children, and, importantly, how “low-income” should be defined.
The current debate is just one more negative consequence of the destructive COVID lockdowns that robbed American children of two years of education and social development. During the pandemic, Congress made school lunches universally free, regardless of family income. That temporary policy expired in 2022, sparking a national debate. Supporters of making free meals permanent argue that universal access removes stigma, supports families struggling with economic hardship, and ensures that children are well-fed and ready to learn.
Opponents, mostly Republicans, argue that universal free school lunch is too expensive, subsidizes meals for those who can afford it, and shifts responsibility for feeding children from parents to the federal government. Additionally, supporters of these programs rarely address basic questions: How were children eating before the COVID-era lunch program? And if that system worked, why can’t we return to it?
Democrats support legislation like the Universal School Meals Program Act of 2023, introduced by Senator Bernie Sanders and Representative Ilhan Omar, and the No Hungry Kids in Schools Act. While these bills sound appealing—who wants hungry kids in school?—they assume a level of need that isn’t supported by data. Were 51 million children really going without lunch before the pandemic? The way Democrats frame the issue, you’d think the U.S. is Calcutta, with malnourished children collapsing on their way to school.
The reality is quite different. The United States has far more of a problem with obesity than hunger. Nearly 20% of American children between the ages of 2 and 19 are classified as obese. Obesity in the U.S. is inversely correlated with wealth. Poorer communities tend to have higher obesity rates. In fact, the U.S. is one of the few countries in the world where the poor are more likely to be overweight than underfed.
Hellbound and Down 