COLOMBIA – Legislation to ensure that poor students are not ashamed of receiving a different lunch at school has advanced unanimously in the South Carolina House.
The bill sent to the House plenary on March 16 would prevent schools from treating students who have not paid differently, once the federal government stops covering all student meals in the midst of the pandemic.
Some schools offer an alternative meal, such as a peanut butter sandwich and an apple, after a student has not paid for a week or two. Before the pandemic, at least one school district handed over school lunch debts to a collection agency, Rep. Raye Felder, R-Fort Mill, told the House Education Committee ahead of the 18-0 vote.
But the reason for the debt is usually that the child’s parents have not completed the paperwork that allows the student to eat for free – or almost free, depending on the level of poverty – and allows the school to be reimbursed by the federal government.
Requiring the same meal independently should encourage schools to work with parents to complete these forms, said Felder, chairman of the K-12 subcommittee in the House.
Representative Gil Gatch, R-Summerville, said that the resulting shame is what “touched him”.
“Everyone knows that this lunch means something because I am poor,” he said of the alternative meal. “We are leveling the playing field between who can afford it and who cannot, so that children do not feel horribly ashamed.”
The measure also prevents schools from punishing students with lunch debts by not allowing them to participate in field trips, graduation ceremonies or other activities.
Representative Mark Smith, R-Charleston, said he worries some parents who can and should be paying and will decide not to do so, resulting in a burden for the district.
Smith, a former president of the Lowcountry Food Bank, stressed that he knows that students cannot pay attention and learn when their stomachs are empty and said that no child should go without food.
“I just want to make sure that we are holding people financially accountable when they have the ability to pay,” he said.
In response, Felder said it is possible that some astute students could pocket the money instead of paying for lunch.
But if they do, “the districts will be creative in letting Mom know that little Johnny hasn’t handed over his money this week. But in the meantime, little Johnny can eat,” she said.
The bill was first introduced in December 2018 after its sponsor, Representative John King, said he heard of students not only “embarrassed about food” but also intimidated because of their obvious inability to pay.
“This ensures that all children are treated fairly by the end of the lunch line,” said Democrat Rock Hill. “For children to be treated differently with a snack is not acceptable, not in this day and time.”
The bill applies to the service of food schools that are refundable by the federal government, not to the food or drinks that some schools offer for sale separately. The measure specifies that students cannot accumulate debts for these items, which must instead be purchased in cash or by withdrawing a prepaid balance.
If the bill becomes law, it will probably be up to the Senate. It is almost certain that it will pass the House again, as it did last year in a unanimous vote, before the pandemic abbreviated the regular session.
The pandemic has also lifted the problem, at least temporarily.
Since schools were forced to close last March, tens of millions of meals have been provided to students across the state through collection arrangements at schools and delivered by bus to communities without transportation. The federal government exemption that allows all students access to free school meals, regardless of their income, was recently extended until September 30, to ensure that students continue to receive a nutritious meal during the summer.
follow Seanna Adcox on Twitter at @seannaadcox_pc.