AMERICAblog: Cheese sandwiches for "deadbeat" parents
Kevin
· 9 months ago
My district does this here in Arkansas (which shamefully went even redder this past November), but at least the "cold lunch" alternative has meat on it, too. A cheese sandwich? Jesus H....
DisgustedByThis
· 9 months ago
Are you kidding me? There are some sick, fucked up people in this world. How much can they possibly be saving by scarring these poor kids for life? On a marginally related and obviously allegorical note, how many lunches equal a football uniform?
Steve_in_CNJ
· 9 months ago
how many lunches equal a california hate campaign? the megachurches might want to consider funding soup lines for poor school kids.
Roger Bixley
· 9 months ago
Scarred for life?!? Are you fucking kidding me?
I can see the group therapy sessions now...
"I was beaten by my father, why are you here?"
"Raped by my priest. How about you?"
"They gave me a cheese sandwich at lunch! (cries)"
If the WORST THING THAT HAPPENS TO YOU as a child is you get a cheese sandwich, then you're a lucky kid!
DisgustedByThis
· 9 months ago
Your reducto ad absurdum argument is in itself a reduction to absurdity. Of course there is no comparison between a cheese sandwich and rape, but that misses the point. It is not the cheese sandwich itself but the social stigmatization that can have a significant impact on a child's emotional development. No one whose parents can't or won't pay for their lunch at school or at least pack them one is a lucky kid. Of course, you are the same guy who told the woman further up the thread that the cheese sandwich probably taught her kid a lesson in responsibility. Enough said.
eric
· 9 months ago
On this subject i have first hand experience as a teacher. Those lunchrooms end up with so much excess food that the few children who need to pay shouldn't have to pay a cent. Also keeping track of who has to pay however much and for which items is a headache for a teacher to have to keep track of. I think all children should get free lunch unless they decide they don't want it.
akryan
· 9 months ago
WWJD? Take away food from hungry children I guess. How humiliating it must be for a young child to be pulled out of line and singled out like that.
"The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is a federally assisted meal program operating in public and nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions. It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to children each school day. The program was established under the National School Lunch Act, signed by President Harry Truman in 1946."
There is NO REASON why these parents can't and don't apply for this program. It covers both a "partial paid" program with deep discounted charges if you are under one number and 100% free lunches if you are under another. All schools should be able to take applications at any time during the school year.
p
· 9 months ago
If families are poor they are qualified for the federal free or reduced lunch program.
jackb29
· 9 months ago
Ok, I dont want to sound hard hearted, but no kid ever died from having a cheese sandwich for lunch instead of a hot lunch. It also should not scar their poor little psyche to get the alternate rather than the regular lunch. I imagine it probably consists of a cheese sandwich (milk product, protein, bread), a vegetable, piece of fruit, and carton of milk. This is not a Darfur dinner, folks.. If the parents are in trouble, they should either prepare a sack lunch for the child, or apply for the Federal free/reduced cost lunch. I am a liberal, voted for Obama, and am cheering for his success. We need to be compassionate, but parents need to put the needs of their children first and their pride last. Apply for the Free lunch program, dont send your kid to school without his/her meals provided in some form. Let's apply our liberal policies, but one of the polices from the first New Deal was RESPONSIBILITY. Sending your kid day after day with no lunch money or no sack lunch is NOT RESPONSIBLE.
sukabi
· 9 months ago
neither is the school being responsible and PUNISHING / HUMILIATING the kid for the parents failures. And since the meals provided for the free / reduced cost program ARE THE SAME meals as the meals prepared for the paying students, the cheese sandwich route is inexcusable... sets up a completely different standard for the kids whose parents have an unpaid tab.
Ryan
· 9 months ago
Consider the fact that a child's brain works differently. For you, getting a cheese sandwich is getting a cheese sandwich - to a little kid, it's shameful and embarrassing and the end of the world. Their brains aren't fully developed in ways such that minor embarrasments are considered mega disasters and the end of the world by kids. So you may not want to sound "hard hearted," but in reality you are, because there's no changing the way kids' brains work other than them reaching their 20s. The thing is that these cheese sandwiches really are a developmental step back -- for the price of a hot meal, we could be losing a lot of future productivity out of these kids. Stupid, stupid, stupid.
Tysalpha
· 9 months ago
Kids tease and pick on other kids all the time--and part of that is teasing based on what they perceive as signs of "wealth". If it's not the lunch, it'll be what clothes they wear. If it's not the clothes, it'll be how new and nice their school supplies are each fall when the school year starts. How many of us from the 80s had to have a new Trapper Keeper every year? How many of us had to have the 64 box of Craolas, when 16 (or even 8) would have been plenty -- but we didn't want to be seen as one of the "poor kids" by our peers? A reduced lunch is not the beginning or the end of economic-based embarassments.
Older_Wiser
· 9 months ago
Children need to learn to be disappointed in life and that it isn't always "fair." I grew up poorer than most of what I've seen termed "poor" in the current society. Sometimes I never got lunch, even into HS. It didn't destroy me, in fact, it made me even more aware that I had to take care of myself, not squander money, not wish for that which I could not provide myself, and later as a single mother, taught my own kids, who also did without a lot that more affluent kids had. It didn't destroy them, either.
jackb29
· 9 months ago
I agree this would be humiliating to the child. But the child you are talking about would be the elementary kid, his parents had TEN phone calls and at least one and probably 2 letters home TELLING THEM THAT THEY NEEDED TO EITHER GIVE THEIR CHILD LUNCH MONEY OR FIX THEM A SACK LUNCH. ONLY THEN DOES THE KID GET THE CHEESE SANDWICH LUNCH. Even with translation needed, I think a parent that cared could find out what the letter, or phone messages say. The children could and I am sure WOULD tell them.
Do we really want to prove the Right Wingers lies that we just want a huge, money wasting MOMMIE STATE? Parents have a responsibility to feed their children, how in the world do you send your kid to school for ten days in a row with no lunch money or a sack lunch? How much more leeway should bad parents get? If they are poor APPLY for the free lunch program, how hard is that? And just how hard is it for a parent to fix a sack lunch?? Especially how hard is it for them to neglect to do that for TEN days??
I have tons of empathy for poor and downtrodden people. I have little or no empathy for lazy, neglectful parents who would send a child to school ten days in a row without lunch or lunch money.
When you consider the horrors that children go thru in 3rd world countries, yet survive and become successful in later life, you sell children short. We humans are very tough to get to where we are. A cheese sandwich lunch is going to destroy a childs development? Are you serious???
Albuquerque Public Schools students receive a cheese sandwich in lieu of a hot meal if they have exceeded a set amount of meals charged to their account, ranging from two at high schools to 10 at elementary schools. The schools' Web site warns: "Once the charging limit is met, students will be offered an alternate meal consisting of a cheese sandwich and a beverage."
So, it appears the parents have up to TEN lunches given their children, before the "punishment" cheese sandwich lunch if the child is in elementary school, and 2 lunches if the kid is in High School. It seems to me that should be plenty of time to either start the Federal school lunch program, or prepare a sack lunch for the child. Also note this passage from the article:
In Albuquerque, unpaid lunch charges hovered around $55,000 in 2006. That jumped to $130,000 at the end of the 2007-08 school year. It was $140,000 through the first five months of this school year.
Charges were on pace to reach $300,000 by the end of the year. Mary Swift, director of Albuquerque's food and nutrition services, said her department had no way to absorb that debt as it had in the past.
"We can't use any federal lunch program money to pay what they call bad debt. It has to come out of the general budget and of course that takes it from some other department," Swift said.
With the new policy, the school district has collected just over $50,000 from parents since the beginning of the year. It also identified 2,000 students eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunches, and more children in the lunch program means more federal dollars for the district.
School officials said the policy was under consideration for some time and parents were notified last fall. Families with unpaid charges are reminded with an automated phone call each night and notes are sent home with children once a week.
Ok, the parents are called, EVERY NIGHT, and notes are sent home. And this program got 2000 kids added to the Free lunch programs. Plus, this note from the end of the article:
Swift added that the cheese sandwiches — about 80 of the 46,000 meals the district serves daily — can be considered a "courtesy meal," rather than an alternate meal.
It seems to me the Albuquerque School district lunch people are NOT "miserable bastards".. they are trying to act responsibly for their district. They cant absorb 300,000 dollars in unpaid lunches because parents are too lazy to apply for the Free lunch program, or else prepare a sack lunch for their child.
We need to be compassionate, but we need to require some small level of Responsibility, the district seems to be bending over backwards to give the parents plenty of time to react, and it appears most do, since only 80 of these cheese sandwich lunchs are distributed out of 46,000 lunches per day.
Older_Wiser
· 9 months ago
I have to agree with the last 2 posters. There may be other issues here. If the parents don't qualify, then maybe their money is going elsewhere, not on the kids. Frankly, I think this is the kind of parental responsibility Obama is talking about. Times are tough all over, and the last thing I'd want for my kids is to suffer humiliation, and the least these parents could do, even if they don't qualify, is to provide a lunch from home for their kids to take. Sometimes, if you ask them, kids prefer bag lunches. Kids also swap food at the lunch table, I've seen it.
I gotta say, too, that there have been times in my own life I would have been thankful for a cheese sandwich. They had no free lunch programs when I was a kid (nor when my own children went to school, and they always got lunch money from their single mother) and many times I didn't eat lunch until after school. I have to say, too, that I've seen the definition of "poor" change so much that it's almost meaningless these days, such as, can't afford a 42 in. TV? You're poor, meaning your credit card has reached its limit.
The govt can't always intervene, and we shouldn't want that intervention. Another alternative is to just not charge for any meals at all, leaving the cost to families in the form of taxes anyway.
jimfromthefoothills
· 9 months ago
Hey CIP, my kids are in APS. If we are talking normative economics, I would like to have the government pay for lunch for everyone. This is not the case.
The stigma of the courtesy lunch tears into me because children do suffer for their parents irresponsibility. If they don't qualify for a free meal, then I guess I would like the parent punished instead of the child. Alert child services and they will feed their kid.
$300k in APS is 8 teachers. I do not want to fire teachers because there is a culture of "why pay for my kids lunch if i don't have to".
Allocation of scarce resources is a bitch.
Older_Wiser
· 9 months ago
I agree with you. How many parents spend money on tobacco, beer, or other habits rather than a dollar or two a day on school lunches for their kids? In fact, how many parents on free lunches do this? I know they do, because I've known people whose drugs come before their kids. Pitiful.
Mike_in_the_Tundra
· 9 months ago
Yes guys, that makes a lot of sense. Embarrass the children, because the parent may be using the money for drugs or such. That really seems appropriate. If the parents can't apply for free lunches because of a language barrier, they really should go back to their country of origin. And don't listen to their whining about a lack of translators. If they weren't such a drain on society, the jurisdictions could afford translators again. We really need to hurry with that fence along our southern border.
I spent most of my teaching career in economically challenged areas. A lot of the time, elementary teachers will pay for things like that. I don't know about secondary teachers, but I rather imagine they do something similar. The boards of education have very little contact with the children, but the people that do have contact will help. Were these people really poor? Well, I drove many parents to food shelves. Most of them were able to get assistance, but there was always a gap of time between applying and the assistance beginning. Some parents can not apply for assistance. One case that comes to mind is the young mother who would not apply for welfare, food stamps, or free lunches. She was afraid that if she did, her abusive husband would track her down with that information. The faculty really had no choice, but to help until the guidance counselor was able to get them into a shelter for abused women. So yes, the boards of ed. can do their part in keeping taxes down by not helping these kids, because they know that the faculties will often do so. Of course, that is just pushing all the tax liability onto the faculty and staffs. Hey, their salaries are so great, they can afford it.
Older_Wiser
· 9 months ago
Sometimes that kind of attitude comes from personal experience, not from disdain for a particular group of people, so stop generalizing.
cowboyneok
· 9 months ago
That is just OUTRAGEOUS! AND I AGREE with the take its the "compassionate conservative" Republican shits who are calling in to "thank" the school for doing this to the poor kids. Our progressive UCC church has resorted to instituting a "backpack" for kids program where we place backpacks full of food into lockers of kids that have been "identified" as being poor and hungry. I'm sure if those same Republican KKKristians had their way, those children would have their names announced at assemblies. Republicans are true asshats.
cowboyneok
· 9 months ago
I'm with Steve_in_CNJ "how many lunches equal a california hate campaign? the megachurches might want to consider funding soup lines for poor school kids."
Yes, indeed... if all the money churches spend on hating homosexuals by fighting our marriages was used to feed hungry kids then this wouldn't be an issue.
Older_Wiser
· 9 months ago
Maybe schools should offer parenting and budgeting classes at times convenient for the parents, they could even bring the kids if necessary. It would be interesting to see how many showed up.
cereal
· 9 months ago
Cheese sandwiches, by themselves, are no problem. Hell, that's what kids AND ADULTS eat for lunch in Holland all the time. And trust me, they are SMALL sandwiches with like a one measly slice of cheese.
On the other hand, the kids should not be made to suffer for the parents' actions, and certainly not in front of all the other kids - that's a big, big deal to children's psyches. There should be a way to get money directly from the parents instead, or at least provide some cover for the kids whose parent screw up.
Plus, hell, in public school, lunch should be free! Seriously! It's probably MORE important that the kids all eat than almost anything else aside from heat in winter. If that means fewer or simpler hot meals for ALL the kids, then do it. Nobody starved eating a sandwich, hearty salad and bread, bunch of fruit or raw vegetables, or other type of food once in a while. If making big hot meals costs too much, they should consider alternatives for ALL the kids one or two days a week. Hell, avoiding the fryer a couple of days, or the starchy, chemically-fortified, over-salted crap they churn out of most cafeterias, would be good for the kids.
barbarajmay
· 9 months ago
They have been doing that in Minnesota for many years. A cheese sandwich and an apple. My kids tell me that the school does it to embarass kids who forget lunch money. It is a dreaded fear.
jackb29
· 9 months ago
Just to review, and for more info, see my posts below...For elementary age students, the school system in question calls the parents for ten days and sends home a letter at the end of each week to advise the parents of the lack of payment for lunch BEFORE THE DREADED CHEESE SANDWICH LUNCH IS INFLICTED. Just how much time are we suppose to give these parents? What kind of parent sends a child to school ten days in a row without a sack lunch or money to pay for lunch? Even poor immigrant parents feed their children, it would seem to me these parents should be investigated for child neglect..
BlueMatt
· 9 months ago
I still don't get why you would think that it is ok to punish or embarass the children for their parent's action? Will this change anything? How is the child supposed to react to this? Does the child have any chance to change things? I doubt it.
IMO the better approach to this would be to feed the children unconditionally. Send warning letters to the parents, the child doesn't even need to know (much other children in school). If the meals don't get payed after a second (or third, depending on how strict you'd like to be) notice, sick Child Protective Services on their parents asses. The current approach to this stinks.
jackb29
· 9 months ago
Blue Matt, I have a feeling that if a child is sent to school ten days in a row w/o lunch money or a sack lunch, the child has already suffered enormous embarassment from the terrible parenting they are receiving. Getting a cheese sandwich lunch is probably the least of their worries... Children are a lot tougher than we think, and getting a cheese sandwich lunch is not going to kill their development.
I do agree with you that after this kind of abuse, a parent should be investigated by CPS.
The school system is under the gun to pay for part of the lunch programs. They are bending over backwards, IMHO, to try to get these parents to FEED THEIR CHILDREN. They cant afford to absorb a possible $300K loss. You tell me what else they can do? Sending in Child protection helps the child, but it dosnt do anything to get the lunches paid for.
BlueMatt
· 9 months ago
The priority should always be to help the child. Punishing the child will not help to absorb the cost either, won't do anything to get the lunches paid for and adds additional damage to the child. How could you justify this?
Roger Bixley
· 9 months ago
Because having CPS called to your home is MUCH less embarrassing than getting a cheese sandwich. (rolls eyes)
BlueMatt
· 9 months ago
Embarassing for whom? I have no problems if it embarasses the parents. Parents should put priority on their children, and given that there are programs to help with this particular problem, it speaks of some neglect if the children don't get sufficient food at lunch.
caphillprof
· 9 months ago
and we all think that Child Protective Services is going to solve the economic dislocation of the current depression?
Rufus
· 9 months ago
What miserable bastards would do this? Why, Republican miserable bastards of course. Such an easy question.
red_dwarf
· 9 months ago
AZ, the AL of the west.
joanne
· 9 months ago
Orange County schools in Florida have had this policy in effect for several years now. It is horrible for any child, as I saw first hand when I worked in the lunchroom at the school I was emploeyed at, and with hearing it from my son after he was given a sandwich when he ran out of lunch money. In my own defense, my son forgot to give me the notice that his account was empty, and he had been buying extra food, so the account was depleted sooner than I had anticipated... I offered several times to pay for a child's lunch when they were having the dreaded sandwich days in a row, but I was told I was not allowed. guess from a purely budgetary perspective, it does cost money, and when budgets are already stretched so thin anything like this would take away from some other necessary expense, but kids don't get that, all they get is that they are being punished for something that is not their fault. I can only hope that now that we have responsible leadership that will all change for the better.
Roger Bixley
· 9 months ago
Horrible for the child, perhaps, but it sounds like it taught your son a lesson in responsibility.
SCLiberal
· 9 months ago
There are millions of children around the world who would love to have a cheese sandwich.
MNUSA
· 9 months ago
But this is the United States of America, greatest nation on earth!
Webster
· 9 months ago
Nothing quite like the wonder of seeing "compassionate conservatism" at work.
curlytoes79
· 9 months ago
At our elementary school, it was PB&J if you forgot your lunch money. I'm glad APS is making sure that all kids get a lunch, but they need to do it in a sensitive way. I'd suggest pulling the kid aside before he goes into the lunchroom and handing him the alternate lunch in a paper sack, so it looks like he just brought his lunch from home. Sometimes grownups forget how devastating it can be to be embarrassed in front of your friends when you're a little kid...
MNUSA
· 9 months ago
Just what poor kids need: carbohydrates and fat. Do they at least throw in an apple, banana or orange? It's not really like school lunches are gourmet meals. Great policy. Parents don't or can't pay for lunches, so shame the children. Jesus said, "whatsoever you do to the least of these, so you also do to me."
shane
· 9 months ago
"What miserable bastards treat kids like this?" They're called Republicans.
ImpureScience
· 9 months ago
Here in NYC, at least in my son's (K-8) school, kids either bring their own, go out to lunch around the corner, or take a free lunch from the insulated box in the lunchroom. The box is always there. All free lunches are the same, PBJ or cheese, fruit or yogurt, and milk. Most kids prefer homemade or the deli or pizza joint, and complain about the 'horror' of the school lunch, but if you forget the school lunch is always there, uninspiring but relatively nutritious, uniform, and not humiliating.
Chris Plount
· 9 months ago
I am the Treasurer of my local school board. Let me set some things straight about the "embarrased" kids, "picked on" parents and "evil" lunch ladies. Understand that I cannot speak for the district in the article but I know a thing or two about school lunch funding on the state/federal level.
My entire school district has a population of 323 students (k-12) and out of that we are owed 4500 for deliquent school lunch fees. In a school district as small as ours that is a HUGE chunk out of our fund 50 (school lunch).
We send letters. We make phone calls. We try to get the assistance of Social Services. Nothing happens. Chees sandwich is a result.
Sure, its easy to blame the school boards but take this into consideration: At the begining of every school year and 5 times during a form known as "Free and Reduced Lunch Program" is sent out. This form will enable the parents to recieve EXACTLY WHAT THE FORM SAYS. If the form is sent in and approved the lunch magically goes from 1.75 a lunch to .35 cents or free. While private financial info is required to be provided and verified the program is easy to get into. It was designed that way to ease the "shame" of any parent who applies. While I see no shame in applying, 90% of the parents who are deliquent are just too damn stinking proud to do whats right for their kid. The biggest pain in the butt is of every kid who recieves free and reduced lunch actuall subsidized healthy foods for the rest of the kids. Let me expalin: 1. Kid brings form and its approved 2. Kid gets frre or reduced lunch 3. Feds reimnburse district for subsidized food AND tosses extra cash so we can purchase healthy items. 4. District makes around $2.00 profit per subsidized kid on the overall deal 5. District can now afford a salad bar w/fresh veggies/items instead of just feeding fishsticks and apple juice.
Furstration, to say the least. Especially the knee jerk reactions from some of the commenters who ought to know better.
Anybod want more info? Shoot me an e-mail.
Garrett in SF
· 9 months ago
While I fully respect what you do for your school board, I disagree fully with your position. Having been involved in efficiency analysis for over a decade, I'm willing to betyou are spending more by segregating the children with a seperate meal than if you were to treat them equally. On food cost alone you may show a savings, but when you add in the additional labor, lost workflow efficiency, storage space, etc., the savings will be lost. Now this does not address the lost additional funding from subsidized students, which obviously proves the need to get the parents enrolled in the program. However, the current policy is simply unjust and punishes the student for the ills of the parent. (I was such a student-- and I can guarantee you the kids will not easily forget being treated differently.). I hope your Board moves past this and realizes the need to deal with getting parents inboard.
usagi
· 9 months ago
So don't make it optional to enroll. Require the form from parents of all enrolled children, evaluate the applications, notify them of the outcome, and process the eligible ones. No one but the parent ever needs to know who's on the subsidized program, and all your eligible children enroll easing your overall budget problem. Parents don't want to submit the documentation? Fine. Pre-pay lunch for the year and the process can be waived. No? Pick the penalty that will make the parent comply that's least injurious to the child.
Chris Plount
· 9 months ago
Wow. I was a little ticked off. I didn't even spell check.
Yowza.
sparrow
· 9 months ago
Are there no debtor prisons? Are there no work houses?
Damned at Random
· 9 months ago
Modern conservatism seems to be characterized by a total lack of empathy. I understand the school district trying to stay in budget, but the solution is to offer cheese sandwiches to all the kids a few days a month not to isolate the ones with poverty and/or family issues. The people who applaud the district's stigmatizing poor kids are the heart of the conservative movement. Reagan conservatives are all about punishing the parents for their real or imagined shortcomings, and refusing to see the consequences are hungry and homeless children. To them the message of the New Testament is "The poor will be with you always, fuck them"
caphillprof
· 9 months ago
This is what may set this depression apart from the last one, a lack of compassion of Christian charity of Woody Guthrie socialism. I was of an age to hear depression stories, sometimes merely references after funerals. The number of housewives who always would feed any man who showed up at the backdoor "looking for work." In many places school lunch programs were started specifically so the poor kids would be fed and now the descendants of these programs are penalizing the poor kids. Disgusting.
Chris Plount
· 9 months ago
One more thing.
A districts fund 50 (school lunch/breakfast) is not permitted to go red. @ the end of the year the balance must equal $0 even if you have to pull it outta fund 28 (special ed) then reimburse the fund 28 outta fund 10 (think main checkbook).
So to recap:
Shortfall in school lunch Take the money from special ed. Special ed falls short Pull the money from the main checkbook.
Don't like it? Neither do we. Write your congress-critter.
roycommi
· 9 months ago
"What miserable bastards treat kids like this?"
Republicans.
Another episode of simple answers to simple questions.
miss skeptic
· 9 months ago
I've always said if I were in charge of schools, the first thing I would do is make breakfast at school mandatory. Everyone sits down and eats together and it's free, no matter what your income. That's helps the kids get off to a good start every day. And lunch should be free and really cheap, although for some families, it can't be cheap enough. Kids are expected to learn much more and in earlier grades, so they should be compensated with the fuel to help them learn and be at their brightest.
maudgonne
· 9 months ago
Hope you get a powerful job somewhere!!!! The nation needs more people like you!
miss skeptic
· 9 months ago
oops, I meant free OR really cheap.
cwazycajun
· 9 months ago
Hey you so called compasonate CONservitiveslets just hope something doesnt happen to you or yours where you lose your job or a terrible accident happenes to you and you cant go to work and then your kids are in the same perdicament then I guess you would be saying the same dispicable thing...I think not these people are about as much of a christian as I am and Im not in anyway shape or form see I actually have compassion for my fellow man not just those that happen to be white and well off or just plain mean spirited
Ivyfree
· 9 months ago
Yay for the people here who remember the Free and Reduced Lunch program. It's EASY to apply for free or reduced lunches. If you're not doing that, and you're not paying for your kid's lunch, then you're neglecting your kid and should be reported to to CPS, and I could make some remarks about theft, too. I mean, if you're doing it consistently, of course. Our kids' school had a jar of peanut butter and some bread available for the ones who forgot. Heck, in our area, if you don't pay your veterinary bill, it's considered animal neglect and the animal control officers come out and talk to you and explain that charges will be pressed. Parents are told about this at the opening of the school year and every months with the district newsletter as well as information being posted in the office, hallways, classrooms and cafeteria. Exactly how much time do you want the school to spend telling parents to actually do some parenting? Nope, not the most balanced of meals, a cheese sandwich. But it's probably what the district can afford. And a long sight better than going hungry.
Damian
· 9 months ago
I live in the Albuquerque area and work in Albuquerque. My wife teaches in Albuquerque. I'll have to admit that I haven't been following this story much because it has pretty much blown over. So Chris, where's the link that we can check it out ourselves? If you Google "APS" and "cheese Sandwiches" You can get some background, it's not too hard, just try it. Cheese sandwiches sound pretty good to me when you cant trust peanut butter or you don't have food at home. I find it irritating that many of the comments make the same type of blanket condemnation of Republicans that the Republicans make of Democrats and Liberals. But it's what people want to hear here. By the way, I'm a Dem and a liberal but I have enough sense to know that there are very good people with good intentions on the other side too.
juan2kmo
· 9 months ago
I am a teacher that has seen this at school. In our school district it is peanut butter sandwiches they are given. What the author is complaining about is not the fact that they are getting something different to eat, it is the manner in which they are singled out. Pulling a child out of line, singled out as "poor" and not given hot food like the other kids, especially younger kids who do not understand why they are being treated differently can be traumatic. It can haunt them the rest of their lives. Kids can be very sensitive, and adults and bullies can be very insensitive.
maudgonne
· 9 months ago
And I wonder where that peanut butter came from....
Another latest outrage from the party who thinks they own the title of being good Christians. As I can remember from my Catholic school education didn't Jesus say you should feed the poor? Such hypocrisy from the type of people who claim to be good Christians. If there is a hell I hope these people fry some day!
RitornaVincitor
· 9 months ago
There are many different versions of hell. The Catholic version of hell is a great lake of fire where souls burn day in and day out for all eternity, but only seem to complain about never being able to experience the Beatific Vision. The Evangelical version of hell is a huge convention hall in which Evangelicals are forced to watch gay demons swish about dressed in gaudy drag outfits made from American flags. But of course by far the most horrible version of hell is the Episcopalian version which is a five-star French restaurant where whenever an elegant couple orders the blanquette de veau the demon waiter utterly mortifies them by yelling toward the kitchen, "Burn two!"
RitornaVincitor
· 9 months ago
GOP RESPONSE:
So a free cheese sandwich isn't good enough any more? When I was getting my education in a one-room schoolhouse in the prairie town of Tarnation, we'd have been thankful for a free cheese sandwich. We had to make our own cheese! Every morning my nine brothers and I dragged ourselves out of bed at 3:30 to milk the cows while our eight sisters gathered firewood barefoot down by the frozen river so our mother could bake the bread and prepare our breakfast of wood chips and gravy. As we walked to school we'd proudly carry those cheese sandwiches in paper bags that we made ourselves out of tree bark and leaves. The school was built atop the only mountain in eight hundred miles, but we were never late. If the little ones passed out along the way, we'd carry them. You had to sit on your sandwich to keep it from freezing because the school had no heat. Lunch was the only recess all day, so you had just fifteen minutes to pee, eat your sandwich, and make fun of the town's only homosexual. Any kid that didn't bring a sandwich had to wear a hat that said "Lazy Liberal", and had to watch the rest of us eat. Then at the end of a nine-hour school day we'd go home in the dark to chores and homework until 11 at night so that we could get ahead. We all grew up to be successful business owners and tax payers, except the homosexual who opened a pansy flower shop that got burned down. And we resent like hell having to pay taxes so lazy liberals can send their kids to school for a freeload lunch and then complain about it!!
maudgonne
· 9 months ago
Do you have a hungry five year old you can really vent with?
RitornaVincitor
· 9 months ago
We put 'em all to work in our immigrant sweat shops to teach 'em the value of the dollar.
ImpureScience
· 9 months ago
"You were lucky. We lived for three months in a brown paper bag in a septic tank. We used to have to get up at six o'clock in the morning, clean the bag, eat a crust of stale bread, go to work down mill for fourteen hours a day week in-week out. When we got home, out Dad would thrash us to sleep with his belt!"
ImpureScience
· 9 months ago
"Well we had it tough. We used to have to get up out of the shoebox at twelve o'clock at night, and LICK the road clean with our tongues. We had half a handful of freezing cold gravel, worked twenty-four hours a day at the mill for fourpence every six years, and when we got home, our Dad would slice us in two with a bread knife."
RitornaVincitor
· 9 months ago
LOL! At least you got your minerals.
ImpureScience
· 9 months ago
Kept us regular, anyway.
ImpureScience
· 9 months ago
"Luxury. We used to have to get out of the lake at three o'clock in the morning, clean the lake, eat a handful of hot gravel, go to work at the mill every day for tuppence a month, come home, and Dad would beat us around the head and neck with a broken bottle, if we were LUCKY!"
ImpureScience
· 9 months ago
"Right. I had to get up in the morning at ten o'clock at night, half an hour before I went to bed, (pause for laughter), eat a lump of cold poison, work twenty-nine hours a day down mill, and pay mill owner for permission to come to work, and when we got home, our Dad would kill us, and dance about on our graves singing "Hallelujah.""
DisgustedByThis
· 9 months ago
Ok, so I may have overreacted a bit last night. I was drunk, and tired. But a few key points should be noted here. In all the discussion of this issue, there seem to be two patterns of thought: 1. The district should not be singling out poor kids over their parents irresponsibility, no matter what, and 2. The kids are a legitimate target because they are the only target, and the money is most important. The ideological basis for each of these threads is obvious. While a cheese sandwich might not scar a kid for life in the most extreme sense, being singled out in this way can have a serious emotional impact on a child. The most interesting comment I read was from the guy who said to the woman whose son had been cheese sandwiched that it probably taught him a lesson in responsibility. I will leave that for the evaluation of the reader. As a final note, from some of the statistics posted here, it would seem that the district had no choice. A projected 300,000 debt for lunches!! (actual debt is less than half of that) What else could they do? Then I noticed that the district actually serves 46,000 lunches per day. Figure a dollar a lunch, and the debt is like a week's worth of lunches!! One week. The school could have a "pack your child's lunch" week, or just cheap out on everyone's lunches for one day a week for like three months, or a million other alternatives to singling out the poor kids with drunk loser parents. Or, and this has got to be a big part of it since we are talking about Albuquerque, NM, singling out the kids whose parents don't speak English. A call every night? What if they don't have a phone. A letter from the school? Good luck reading that. And if you are in the country illegally, the free lunch program is obviously out. So what is the solution? Ideally, a fat check from the FEDS and equal lunches for all. Alternatively, how about cutting some of the waste out of the school lunch process, maybe cutting funding for some sports programs before they go after special ed, etc... Just remember, 46000 lunches a day. Do they really need to single out the 80 kids whose parents suck. Social Services would be one option, but not necessarily the best. Finally, the school doesn't actually pay for the lunches what the parents owe for them, because the school makes the lunches for less than they sell them for. The ultimate problem thus seems to be one of whether capitalism belongs in every facet of American life, or whether sometimes, principles of fairness and equality should win out. Our public school system should be among the latter group.
jimfromthefoothills
· 9 months ago
If a child shows up for school with no shoes, should the district purchase the kid some shoes?
If the district gives lunches and does not make people pay then why would anyone pay? Free riders are a problem in economics. Until the government steps in and gives all kids free lunch APS is making the correct decision.
Cutting sports programs and other fun activities like art and music could be a way to pay for lunch, but why should the quality of education diminish because parents who do not qualify for the free lunch program refuse to pay?
maudgonne
· 9 months ago
And this from the by-far richest country on the face of the earth.... Instead of treating this as an opportunity to feed kids, who may have an empty larder at home, the same people who re-wrote the bankruptcy laws are in charge. What happened to "there but for the grace of God, go I..." or MY kids? Is this one of those faith-based initiatives where no one has figured out how to make a profit? Where is calvinism when you really need it?
RitornaVincitor
· 9 months ago
I still occasionally shake my head when I think how Bush ran in 2000 as a "compassionate conservative." And somehow he managed to get only half-a-million fewer votes than Gore.
Nezzie
· 9 months ago
Black children did not even get that. It angers sometime that people feel that the rules should be different for some over others. Unfortunatelay, the children have to suffer for the sins of the parent. I know in the past we did not have all of the new Liberal support.
I was allergic to cheese, still am, so I guess I would have just been hungry. My mother had 7 girls, my father died in Nam, I was one. She educated us and raised us we each received 64.00 a month and she got $112.00 for the support of the widow from our government. No welfare, no school voucher, after all we were American citizens whose father died in a war and we had to make it the best way we could. People we have been overrun with illegal immigrants, Maryland is going to be called Marylanfornia real soon. You really must decide if you care about your country, the law, and our Constitution, or do you just want to throw open the flood gates to the world, we already have.
teammarty
· 9 months ago
It's all a matter of "Family Values".
How valuable is your family?
yagi
· 9 months ago
I remember being on the cheese sandwich diet at my elementary school in the early 80s. We survived on food stamps at home and cheese sandwiches at school. I didn't feel particularly singled out, but I developed a distaste for processed cheese and mayonnaise. Sorry to hear the policy has returned though.
ElDuderino
· 9 months ago
This happens in other school districts also and odds are high that the school boards making these rules are full of more Democrats than Republicans.
KM
· 9 months ago
"Yay for the people here who remember the Free and Reduced Lunch program. It's EASY to apply for free or reduced lunches. If you're not doing that, and you're not paying for your kid's lunch, then you're neglecting your kid and should be reported to to CPS, and I could make some remarks about theft, too. I mean, if you're doing it consistently, of course."
I completely agree with this. And I consider myself a pretty liberal democrat...with a strong belief in personal responsibility. Here in our WA district (where one school is doing this) the cost of a reduced lunch is 40 cents per day. 40 cents per day. K through 3rd grade get free lunch period if the family is eligible for reduced prices. And as the article said, most of the parents who were so delinquent in paying qualified for free/reduced lunch prices....but had not bothered to find out if they were eligible. Seriously...just sending your child/ren off to school hoping that someone will feed them? It's unfathomable to me, as a parent. And then have the audacity to scream from the rooftops about how unfair it is that they only got cheese sandwiches, a carton of milk, and a piece of fresh fruit? They should be THANKING them for feeding their children when they themselves didn't have the means to do so. Especially with the funding problems that public schools have period.
mhhd
· 9 months ago
Lunch programs that are part of the subsidized lunch program receive some reimbursement even for children who pay "all" of their meal cost. Is this school requesting the full reimbursement from the government even if they aren't providing what they say they are providing? Might be a problem there.
Is it too late for the parents to fill out free and reduced lunch applications? Has the school given them that option? Does the school really care about the kids? Are they working with social service agencies to make sure the kids have enough to eat at home too? If there is this much increase in the number of kids who aren't paying for their meals there are greater underlying problems.
Our government has handed out so much money to the wealthy lately that I have absolutely have no problem with the cost of meals that so-called "deadbeat" parents haven't paid for being picked up as well by local, state, or federal governments. I'd much rather buy food for people who are hungry than pay for another over-the-top party for some bank.
maudgonne
· 9 months ago
By ALICE WATERS and KATRINA HERON Berkeley, Calif.
This new era of government bailouts and widespread concern over wasteful spending offers an opportunity to take a hard look at the National School Lunch Program. Launched in 1946 as a public safety net, it has turned out to be a poor investment. It should be redesigned to make our children healthier. Under the program, the United States Department of Agriculture gives public schools cash for every meal they serve — $2.57 for a free lunch, $2.17 for a reduced-price lunch and 24 cents for a paid lunch. In 2007, the program cost around $9 billion, a figure widely acknowledged as inadequate to cover food costs. But what most people don’t realize is that very little of this money even goes toward food. Schools have to use it to pay for everything from custodial services to heating in the cafeteria. http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/opinion/20wat...
All Comments
I can see the group therapy sessions now...
"I was beaten by my father, why are you here?"
"Raped by my priest. How about you?"
"They gave me a cheese sandwich at lunch! (cries)"
If the WORST THING THAT HAPPENS TO YOU as a child is you get a cheese sandwich, then you're a lucky kid!
"The National School Lunch Program (NSLP) is a federally assisted meal program operating in public and nonprofit private schools and residential child care institutions. It provides nutritionally balanced, low-cost or free lunches to children each school day. The program was established under the National School Lunch Act, signed by President Harry Truman in 1946."
There is NO REASON why these parents can't and don't apply for this program. It covers both a "partial paid" program with deep discounted charges if you are under one number and 100% free lunches if you are under another. All schools should be able to take applications at any time during the school year.
If the parents are in trouble, they should either prepare a sack lunch for the child, or apply for the Federal free/reduced cost lunch.
I am a liberal, voted for Obama, and am cheering for his success. We need to be compassionate, but parents need to put the needs of their children first and their pride last. Apply for the Free lunch program, dont send your kid to school without his/her meals provided in some form. Let's apply our liberal policies, but one of the polices from the first New Deal was RESPONSIBILITY. Sending your kid day after day with no lunch money or no sack lunch is NOT RESPONSIBLE.
Do we really want to prove the Right Wingers lies that we just want a huge, money wasting MOMMIE STATE? Parents have a responsibility to feed their children, how in the world do you send your kid to school for ten days in a row with no lunch money or a sack lunch? How much more leeway should bad parents get? If they are poor APPLY for the free lunch program, how hard is that? And just how hard is it for a parent to fix a sack lunch?? Especially how hard is it for them to neglect to do that for TEN days??
I have tons of empathy for poor and downtrodden people. I have little or no empathy for lazy, neglectful parents who would send a child to school ten days in a row without lunch or lunch money.
When you consider the horrors that children go thru in 3rd world countries, yet survive and become successful in later life, you sell children short. We humans are very tough to get to where we are. A cheese sandwich lunch is going to destroy a childs development? Are you serious???
(from yahoonews: http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090225/ap_on_re_us...
Albuquerque Public Schools students receive a cheese sandwich in lieu of a hot meal if they have exceeded a set amount of meals charged to their account, ranging from two at high schools to 10 at elementary schools. The schools' Web site warns: "Once the charging limit is met, students will be offered an alternate meal consisting of a cheese sandwich and a beverage."
So, it appears the parents have up to TEN lunches given their children, before the "punishment" cheese sandwich lunch if the child is in elementary school, and 2 lunches if the kid is in High School.
It seems to me that should be plenty of time to either start the Federal school lunch program, or prepare a sack lunch for the child. Also note this passage from the article:
In Albuquerque, unpaid lunch charges hovered around $55,000 in 2006. That jumped to $130,000 at the end of the 2007-08 school year. It was $140,000 through the first five months of this school year.
Charges were on pace to reach $300,000 by the end of the year. Mary Swift, director of Albuquerque's food and nutrition services, said her department had no way to absorb that debt as it had in the past.
"We can't use any federal lunch program money to pay what they call bad debt. It has to come out of the general budget and of course that takes it from some other department," Swift said.
With the new policy, the school district has collected just over $50,000 from parents since the beginning of the year. It also identified 2,000 students eligible to receive free or reduced-price lunches, and more children in the lunch program means more federal dollars for the district.
School officials said the policy was under consideration for some time and parents were notified last fall. Families with unpaid charges are reminded with an automated phone call each night and notes are sent home with children once a week.
Ok, the parents are called, EVERY NIGHT, and notes are sent home. And this program got 2000 kids added to the Free lunch programs. Plus, this note from the end of the article:
Swift added that the cheese sandwiches — about 80 of the 46,000 meals the district serves daily — can be considered a "courtesy meal," rather than an alternate meal.
It seems to me the Albuquerque School district lunch people are NOT "miserable bastards".. they are trying to act responsibly for their district. They cant absorb 300,000 dollars in unpaid lunches because parents are too lazy to apply for the Free lunch program, or else prepare a sack lunch for their child.
We need to be compassionate, but we need to require some small level of Responsibility, the district seems to be bending over backwards to give the parents plenty of time to react, and it appears most do, since only 80 of these cheese sandwich lunchs are distributed out of 46,000 lunches per day.
I gotta say, too, that there have been times in my own life I would have been thankful for a cheese sandwich. They had no free lunch programs when I was a kid (nor when my own children went to school, and they always got lunch money from their single mother) and many times I didn't eat lunch until after school. I have to say, too, that I've seen the definition of "poor" change so much that it's almost meaningless these days, such as, can't afford a 42 in. TV? You're poor, meaning your credit card has reached its limit.
The govt can't always intervene, and we shouldn't want that intervention. Another alternative is to just not charge for any meals at all, leaving the cost to families in the form of taxes anyway.
The stigma of the courtesy lunch tears into me because children do suffer for their parents irresponsibility. If they don't qualify for a free meal, then I guess I would like the parent punished instead of the child. Alert child services and they will feed their kid.
$300k in APS is 8 teachers. I do not want to fire teachers because there is a culture of "why pay for my kids lunch if i don't have to".
Allocation of scarce resources is a bitch.
I spent most of my teaching career in economically challenged areas. A lot of the time, elementary teachers will pay for things like that. I don't know about secondary teachers, but I rather imagine they do something similar. The boards of education have very little contact with the children, but the people that do have contact will help. Were these people really poor? Well, I drove many parents to food shelves. Most of them were able to get assistance, but there was always a gap of time between applying and the assistance beginning. Some parents can not apply for assistance. One case that comes to mind is the young mother who would not apply for welfare, food stamps, or free lunches. She was afraid that if she did, her abusive husband would track her down with that information. The faculty really had no choice, but to help until the guidance counselor was able to get them into a shelter for abused women. So yes, the boards of ed. can do their part in keeping taxes down by not helping these kids, because they know that the faculties will often do so. Of course, that is just pushing all the tax liability onto the faculty and staffs. Hey, their salaries are so great, they can afford it.
Yes, indeed... if all the money churches spend on hating homosexuals by fighting our marriages was used to feed hungry kids then this wouldn't be an issue.
On the other hand, the kids should not be made to suffer for the parents' actions, and certainly not in front of all the other kids - that's a big, big deal to children's psyches. There should be a way to get money directly from the parents instead, or at least provide some cover for the kids whose parent screw up.
Plus, hell, in public school, lunch should be free! Seriously! It's probably MORE important that the kids all eat than almost anything else aside from heat in winter. If that means fewer or simpler hot meals for ALL the kids, then do it. Nobody starved eating a sandwich, hearty salad and bread, bunch of fruit or raw vegetables, or other type of food once in a while. If making big hot meals costs too much, they should consider alternatives for ALL the kids one or two days a week. Hell, avoiding the fryer a couple of days, or the starchy, chemically-fortified, over-salted crap they churn out of most cafeterias, would be good for the kids.
IMO the better approach to this would be to feed the children unconditionally. Send warning letters to the parents, the child doesn't even need to know (much other children in school). If the meals don't get payed after a second (or third, depending on how strict you'd like to be) notice, sick Child Protective Services on their parents asses. The current approach to this stinks.
I do agree with you that after this kind of abuse, a parent should be investigated by CPS.
The school system is under the gun to pay for part of the lunch programs. They are bending over backwards, IMHO, to try to get these parents to FEED THEIR CHILDREN. They cant afford to absorb a possible $300K loss. You tell me what else they can do? Sending in Child protection helps the child, but it dosnt do anything to get the lunches paid for.
I offered several times to pay for a child's lunch when they were having the dreaded sandwich days in a row, but I was told I was not allowed. guess from a purely budgetary perspective, it does cost money, and when budgets are already stretched so thin anything like this would take away from some other necessary expense, but kids don't get that, all they get is that they are being punished for something that is not their fault. I can only hope that now that we have responsible leadership that will all change for the better.
Let me set some things straight about the "embarrased" kids, "picked on" parents and "evil" lunch ladies. Understand that I cannot speak for the district in the article but I know a thing or two about school lunch funding on the state/federal level.
My entire school district has a population of 323 students (k-12) and out of that we are owed 4500 for deliquent school lunch fees. In a school district as small as ours that is a HUGE chunk out of our fund 50 (school lunch).
We send letters.
We make phone calls.
We try to get the assistance of Social Services.
Nothing happens.
Chees sandwich is a result.
Sure, its easy to blame the school boards but take this into consideration: At the begining of every school year and 5 times during a form known as "Free and Reduced Lunch Program" is sent out. This form will enable the parents to recieve EXACTLY WHAT THE FORM SAYS. If the form is sent in and approved the lunch magically goes from 1.75 a lunch to .35 cents or free.
While private financial info is required to be provided and verified the program is easy to get into. It was designed that way to ease the "shame" of any parent who applies.
While I see no shame in applying, 90% of the parents who are deliquent are just too damn stinking proud to do whats right for their kid.
The biggest pain in the butt is of every kid who recieves free and reduced lunch actuall subsidized healthy foods for the rest of the kids.
Let me expalin:
1. Kid brings form and its approved
2. Kid gets frre or reduced lunch
3. Feds reimnburse district for subsidized food AND tosses extra cash so we can purchase healthy items.
4. District makes around $2.00 profit per subsidized kid on the overall deal
5. District can now afford a salad bar w/fresh veggies/items instead of just feeding fishsticks and apple juice.
Furstration, to say the least. Especially the knee jerk reactions from some of the commenters who ought to know better.
Anybod want more info? Shoot me an e-mail.
Parents don't want to submit the documentation? Fine. Pre-pay lunch for the year and the process can be waived. No? Pick the penalty that will make the parent comply that's least injurious to the child.
Yowza.
A districts fund 50 (school lunch/breakfast) is not permitted to go red.
@ the end of the year the balance must equal $0 even if you have to pull it outta fund 28 (special ed) then reimburse the fund 28 outta fund 10 (think main checkbook).
So to recap:
Shortfall in school lunch
Take the money from special ed.
Special ed falls short
Pull the money from the main checkbook.
Don't like it? Neither do we. Write your congress-critter.
Republicans.
Another episode of simple answers to simple questions.
The nation needs more people like you!
So Chris, where's the link that we can check it out ourselves? If you Google "APS" and "cheese Sandwiches" You can get some background, it's not too hard, just try it. Cheese sandwiches sound pretty good to me when you cant trust peanut butter or you don't have food at home. I find it irritating that many of the comments make the same type of blanket condemnation of Republicans that the Republicans make of Democrats and Liberals. But it's what people want to hear here. By the way, I'm a Dem and a liberal but I have enough sense to know that there are very good people with good intentions on the other side too.
So a free cheese sandwich isn't good enough any more? When I was getting my education in a one-room schoolhouse in the prairie town of Tarnation, we'd have been thankful for a free cheese sandwich. We had to make our own cheese! Every morning my nine brothers and I dragged ourselves out of bed at 3:30 to milk the cows while our eight sisters gathered firewood barefoot down by the frozen river so our mother could bake the bread and prepare our breakfast of wood chips and gravy. As we walked to school we'd proudly carry those cheese sandwiches in paper bags that we made ourselves out of tree bark and leaves. The school was built atop the only mountain in eight hundred miles, but we were never late. If the little ones passed out along the way, we'd carry them. You had to sit on your sandwich to keep it from freezing because the school had no heat. Lunch was the only recess all day, so you had just fifteen minutes to pee, eat your sandwich, and make fun of the town's only homosexual. Any kid that didn't bring a sandwich had to wear a hat that said "Lazy Liberal", and had to watch the rest of us eat. Then at the end of a nine-hour school day we'd go home in the dark to chores and homework until 11 at night so that we could get ahead. We all grew up to be successful business owners and tax payers, except the homosexual who opened a pansy flower shop that got burned down. And we resent like hell having to pay taxes so lazy liberals can send their kids to school for a freeload lunch and then complain about it!!
If the district gives lunches and does not make people pay then why would anyone pay? Free riders are a problem in economics. Until the government steps in and gives all kids free lunch APS is making the correct decision.
Cutting sports programs and other fun activities like art and music could be a way to pay for lunch, but why should the quality of education diminish because parents who do not qualify for the free lunch program refuse to pay?
What happened to "there but for the grace of God, go I..." or MY kids?
Is this one of those faith-based initiatives where no one has figured out how to make a profit?
Where is calvinism when you really need it?
I was allergic to cheese, still am, so I guess I would have just been hungry. My mother had 7 girls, my father died in Nam, I was one. She educated us and raised us we each received 64.00 a month and she got $112.00 for the support of the widow from our government. No welfare, no school voucher, after all we were American citizens whose father died in a war and we had to make it the best way we could. People we have been overrun with illegal immigrants, Maryland is going to be called Marylanfornia real soon. You really must decide if you care about your country, the law, and our Constitution, or do you just want to throw open the flood gates to the world, we already have.
How valuable is your family?
I completely agree with this. And I consider myself a pretty liberal democrat...with a strong belief in personal responsibility. Here in our WA district (where one school is doing this) the cost of a reduced lunch is 40 cents per day. 40 cents per day. K through 3rd grade get free lunch period if the family is eligible for reduced prices. And as the article said, most of the parents who were so delinquent in paying qualified for free/reduced lunch prices....but had not bothered to find out if they were eligible. Seriously...just sending your child/ren off to school hoping that someone will feed them? It's unfathomable to me, as a parent. And then have the audacity to scream from the rooftops about how unfair it is that they only got cheese sandwiches, a carton of milk, and a piece of fresh fruit? They should be THANKING them for feeding their children when they themselves didn't have the means to do so. Especially with the funding problems that public schools have period.
Is it too late for the parents to fill out free and reduced lunch applications? Has the school given them that option? Does the school really care about the kids? Are they working with social service agencies to make sure the kids have enough to eat at home too? If there is this much increase in the number of kids who aren't paying for their meals there are greater underlying problems.
Our government has handed out so much money to the wealthy lately that I have absolutely have no problem with the cost of meals that so-called "deadbeat" parents haven't paid for being picked up as well by local, state, or federal governments. I'd much rather buy food for people who are hungry than pay for another over-the-top party for some bank.
Berkeley, Calif.
This new era of government bailouts and widespread concern over wasteful spending offers an opportunity to take a hard look at the National School Lunch Program. Launched in 1946 as a public safety net, it has turned out to be a poor investment. It should be redesigned to make our children healthier. Under the program, the United States Department of Agriculture gives public schools cash for every meal they serve — $2.57 for a free lunch, $2.17 for a reduced-price lunch and 24 cents for a paid lunch. In 2007, the program cost around $9 billion, a figure widely acknowledged as inadequate to cover food costs. But what most people don’t realize is that very little of this money even goes toward food. Schools have to use it to pay for everything from custodial services to heating in the cafeteria.
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/opinion/20wat...
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/02/27/opinion/l27lu...