Column for May 31, 2012

Last week, I wrote that I am “hoping to share them [my library] and knowledge with my progeny”.  Interestingly enough, I ended up having one of those conversations with my third grade son just a couple of days after I wrote the column.

My son, being in the third grade, just had his first end of grade (EOG) tests.  I certainly have no objection to having EOG tests.  The concept is nothing new.  I had plenty of tests when I was in school.  The EOG is just one more comprehensive test that is administered.  If a child paid attention in school all year long, taking an EOG test is nothing to be feared.  The way I see it, testing measures achievement, both by the student and by the pedagogical staff.

That, however, is not the point of my rant today.  What came out of the EOG testing that I found curious and led to a discussion about reality, economics, government, and life was the topic of breakfast.  Our nine-year-old informed us that he wanted to eat breakfast at school on the days the tests were being administered.  Not only was it encouraged by the teachers at the school that the students should have a good night’s rest, but also a decent breakfast in the morning.  I am in agreement with both ideas.  The interesting thing was that the school would be offering breakfast to all students, not just those who were “economically disadvantaged” on test days.  I was informed that breakfast was “free”.

Personally, I understand the need to serve a cafeteria style lunch at large schools.  At Selma Elementary School, 90% of students get either free or reduced price lunch.  We don’t qualify for free or reduced pricing on lunch, nor would we accept it if we did.  A full priced lunch is only $2.  If you can’t afford $2 a day for lunch, you either need to rethink the priorities of your budget or you probably should not be having children.  When I was in elementary school, I remember taking a metal lunch box with a simple peanut butter and jelly sandwich, some cheese puffs, and a bit of milk in a thermos.  I was happy with that, and it was what my family could afford sometimes.  We send our son with a home packed lunch every day, not out of necessity, but out of choice.

School lunch is heavily subsidized by the federal government.  The average school lunch costs $2.66 to prepare, according to the research I just did (and those are outdated figures).  Add to that the costs of running a cafeteria, staff, electricity, and water (and I am sure there are many other costs) and it is a significant amount of money.  The federal government subsidized $2.47 for every free lunch (again, probably an outdated number).  Ironically, full priced lunches are only subsidized $1.90, so schools get more federal funds for free or reduced lunches.  Besides tying the amounts of free and reduced lunches to Title 1 federal funds, you can now see why schools push so hard for as many students to get on the free and reduced lunch programs at your local public schools.  In 2011, the federal government spent $14.3 billion just on the school lunch program, not that the Constitution allows for such expenditures.  Politicians, however, never let that stand in their way.

Obviously, free lunches are not free.  Someone has to pay for them, and that is the US taxpayer.  We pay for the school lunch program at the federal level, the state level, and the local level, so we are on the hook for the cost one way or another.  If I pay full cost, we pay more at the local levels of government for lunch.  If we get reduced or “free” cost lunch, we pay more at the federal level.

A gallon of milk costs approximately $3.50 right now.  A box of Wal-Mart store brand cereal can be as cheap as $1, maybe $2 if you get a larger box of a more popular variety.  I know, since I do my own shopping.  A box of cereal will certainly last at least a week for one child.  That means breakfast will cost as low as $4.50 per week.  At less than $5 a week, I still cannot fathom the need for a regular school breakfast program in addition to a school lunch program.  If you can’t afford $5 a week for your child to eat breakfast at home, you need to either rethink the priorities of your budget or you probably should not be reproducing.
I had the discussion with my nine-year-old that the breakfast was not actually free.  Taxpayers are picking up the tab for his newly found breakfast.  Regardless of how many times he insisted that the meal was free, I corrected him on that concept.  I am paying for his breakfast one way or another, and I hope that he grasped the concept.

We all love our children, but there are no guarantees of equality of outcome in either one’s ability to provide meals or even in test scores.  Children can still live on a simple, home provided meal, and be happy.  To be honest, I wish that more parents took the personal responsibility to provide for their own children more seriously and the school cafeteria trash cans were overflowing with brown paper bags from home packed lunches and even breakfast items rather than letting the taxpayers pick up the cost.