During the COVID-19 pandemic, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced that free meals would be available to all students during the 2021-2022 school year, regardless of their family’s financial situation. This temporary policy has sparked discussions on whether it should become permanent. Some argue that it has made a sizable dent in child hunger rates and may have even promoted academic achievement. Others see it as a new entitlement creeping up in place of a targeted poverty-reduction program.

Supporters of free lunch for all students in public schools argue that it will reduce hunger. They note that before the pandemic, millions of students could hardly pay for a full-price school lunch. A pre-pandemic survey conducted by the School Nutrition Association revealed that up to 75% of school districts in the US had unsettled student meal debt. It is believed that a free school meal also plays a role in enhancing academic performance.

Opponents of free meals for all students often address the significant cost of such a program. The temporary pandemic-related policy that allowed schools to offer free lunch to all students notwithstanding their household income cost the nation $11 billion to extend it to an additional year. Opponents recognize that not all students need free meals. Offering free lunches to all students would imply that even students who don't need them would benefit from it. They see the other competing government priorities that require funding, and argue that the government should focus on that instead of providing free school meals.

The question for debate, should school lunches be free for all students in public schools, regardless of their family’s income?