Jackson Beckerley

There is an old American saying that “there is no such thing as a free lunch,” indicating that people need to work for their food and necessities. Right now as we speak, students across the country are starting school, are hungry in class, can’t pay for school lunch or are in lunch debt. They also come from families that have food insecurity. 

Some districts have taken harsh measures such as preventing seniors from graduating until the debt is paid or refusing outside money to clear a student’s lunch debt. Some schools are offering free lunch and breakfast because if students are hungry, they can’t focus in the classroom. 

Bernie Sanders has proposed in his platform to fully subsidize school lunches in K-12 and I fully agree this should be policy. This is not the first time a student need was addressed; the Child Health Insurance Programs (CHIP) gives low- income kids free glasses after coming to the shocking revelation that because certain kids could not see the board, they could not perform well in class. Likewise, this problem is similar in that a basic necessity such as food is lacking for many students and income is a barrier to fulfilling this need.

To me, the concept of a “free lunch” — or more accurately, a subsidized school lunch for primary education students — is a personal one. I 100 percent agree that school lunches should be fully subsidized. When the economy crashed in 2008, people often forget that the collateral on the middle and lower class lasted for years and is still dragging on. 

For a little less than two years, I was on a government school lunch assistance program when my family fell on hard times financially. This program was a godsend because if I lived in a different place with a different school district, I might not have qualified or gone into lunch debt, and some idiotic and heartless administrators would have decided it was the right thing to punish me for being poor. That the recent case for an Ohio student who was subjected to the humiliation of his lunch being thrown out by faculty due to outstanding lunch debt. My academic performance would have also been worse as [hunger] pangs would have prevented me from focusing.

We should be giving students the tools they need to succeed — not just books, calculators and pencils — but the necessities like a meal in their stomachs so they do not have to worry about things like food security. [Instead, kids should worry about] acing an exam, focusing in class, socializing and reading. 

Sanders’ plan — wiping out lunch debt and giving every American student in primary school a meal to ensure that they can focus —will not cost that much money and will do wonders to improve many students’ academic circumstances and it is morally the right thing to do. We should feed the hungry as the richest and most agriculturally fertile nation on earth. This is also a practical investment in our future to nourish our kids minds and stomachs. We need to secure the necessities for students struggling with basic needs so they can excel.