Some states refuse bipartisan aid for school summer lunches; program gives eligible students $40 per month

Some states won't accept aid for summer lunches.
(Photo by Matthew Moloney, Unsplash)

Some states have refused federal support that would be used to provide summer lunch money to families with children who receive free or reduced lunches during the school year.  

"The new $2.5 billion program, known as Summer EBT, passed Congress with bipartisan support. The program will provide families with about $40 a month for every child who receives free or reduced-price meals at school — $120 for the summer," reports Madeline Cass of The New York Times. "The red-state refusals will keep aid from about 10 million children, about a third of those potentially eligible nationwide."

Why would a state governor turn down federal summer lunch money but accept funding while school is in session? Their reasons varied from summer lunches contributing to childhood obesity to insisting that free summer lunches were only part of pandemic aid. Cass writes, "Poor states are especially resistant, though the federal government bears most of the cost. Of the 10 states with the highest levels of children's food insecurity, five rejected Summer EBT: Louisiana, Oklahoma, Mississippi, Alabama and Texas."

In deep-red Arkansas, Republican Gov. Sarah Huckabee Sanders welcomed the federal provision. "'Making sure no Arkansan goes hungry, especially children, is a top concern for my administration,' she said in a news release," Cass reports. "Arkansas officials estimate the program will cost the state about $3 million and deliver $45 million in benefits."

Early this year, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack told The Associated Press: "No child in this country should go hungry. They certainly shouldn't go hungry because they lose access to nutritious school meals during the summer months."

But a look at Summer EBT division doesn't bear that sentiment out. Cass explains, "The outcome illuminates the arbitrary nature of the American safety net, which prioritizes local control. North Dakota and North Carolina are in; South Dakota and South Carolina are out. . . .  In the impoverished Mississippi Delta, eligibility depends on which side of the Mississippi River a child lives."