[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"doc-seo-583133-105":3,"detail-sidebar-cat-0-en-105":80,"doc-detail-583133-en":130},{"code":4,"msg":5,"data":6},0,"ok",{"site_id":7,"language":8,"slug":9,"title":10,"keywords":11,"description":12,"schema_data":13,"social_meta":73,"head_meta":75,"extra_data":77,"updated_unix":79},105,"en","cutting-school-food-subsidies-executive-summary-and-policy-analysis","Cutting School Food Subsidies - Executive Summary and Policy Analysis","","Policy analysis of the US school lunch and breakfast subsidy system led by the Department of Agriculture. It outlines the scale and federal cost of school food benefits, the intended goal of addressing hunger, and the argument that today’s child nutrition challenge is driven more by unhealthy food consumption and obesity than by insufficient calories. It discusses how programs have increasingly subsidized higher-income households, traces historical origins, and evaluates whether centralized federal programs should be reduced or replaced by state-led approaches.",{"@graph":14,"@context":72},[15,34,55],{"@type":16,"itemListElement":17},"BreadcrumbList",[18,23,27,31],{"item":19,"name":20,"@type":21,"position":22},"https://docshare.wps.com","Home","ListItem",1,{"item":24,"name":25,"@type":21,"position":26},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/","Document",2,{"item":28,"name":29,"@type":21,"position":30},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/research-report/","Research & Report",3,{"item":32,"name":10,"@type":21,"position":33},"https://docshare.wps.com/document/cutting-school-food-subsidies-executive-summary-and-policy-analysis/583133/",4,{"url":32,"name":10,"@type":35,"image":36,"author":41,"headline":10,"publisher":44,"fileFormat":47,"inLanguage":8,"description":12,"dateModified":48,"datePublished":49,"encodingFormat":47,"isAccessibleForFree":50,"interactionStatistic":51},"DigitalDocument",{"url":37,"@type":38,"width":39,"height":40},"https://docshare.wps.com/thumbnails/cutting-school-food-subsidies-executive-summary-and-policy-analysis/583133.png","ImageObject",300,407,{"name":42,"@type":43},"\tJames","Person",{"url":19,"name":45,"@type":46},"DocShare","Organization","application/pdf","2026-10-19","2026-10-15",true,{"@type":52,"interactionType":53,"userInteractionCount":30},"InteractionCounter",{"@type":54},"ViewAction",{"@type":56,"mainEntity":57},"FAQPage",[58,64,68],{"name":59,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":61},"What is the estimated federal cost and coverage of school lunch and breakfast programs in the analysis?","Question",{"text":62,"@type":63},"The analysis estimates about $35 billion in 2025 for school lunch, breakfast, and related school food programs, with roughly 30 million children (about 58% of public school students) receiving benefits.","Answer",{"name":65,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":66},"Why does the analysis argue that subsidizing school food is outdated?",{"text":67,"@type":63},"It argues the main nutrition issue is not inadequate calories but excessive consumption of unhealthy foods and obesity, making federal subsidies a less appropriate use of funds.",{"name":69,"@type":60,"acceptedAnswer":70},"What historical developments does the analysis describe about how the programs expanded?",{"text":71,"@type":63},"It traces early local efforts in the early 20th century, describes federal involvement connected to Great Depression farm-aid schemes, and outlines the modern program’s start with the 1946 National School Lunch Act, followed by the breakfast program’s later permanence and later policy changes.","https://schema.org",{"og:url":32,"og:type":74,"og:title":10,"og:site_name":45,"og:description":12},"article",{"robots":76,"canonical":32},"index,follow",{"doc_id":78,"site_id":7},583133,1792210822,{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":82},"success",[83,87,91,95,100,105,110,114,119,122,126],{"id":22,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":84,"show_sort_weight":85,"slug":86},"Story & Novel",90,"story-novel",{"id":26,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":88,"show_sort_weight":89,"slug":90},"Literature",80,"literature",{"id":33,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":92,"show_sort_weight":93,"slug":94},"Exam",70,"exam",{"id":96,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":97,"show_sort_weight":98,"slug":99},5,"Comic",60,"comic",{"id":101,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":102,"show_sort_weight":103,"slug":104},6,"Technology",50,"technology",{"id":106,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":107,"show_sort_weight":108,"slug":109},7,"Healthcare",40,"healthcare",{"id":111,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":29,"show_sort_weight":112,"slug":113},8,30,"research-report",{"id":115,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":116,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":118},9,"Religion & Spirituality",20,"religion-spirituality",{"id":117,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":120,"show_sort_weight":117,"slug":121},"World Cup","world-cup",{"id":123,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":124,"show_sort_weight":123,"slug":125},10,"Lifestyle","lifestyle",{"id":127,"doc_module":4,"doc_module_name":25,"category_name":128,"show_sort_weight":96,"slug":129},19,"General","general",{"code":4,"msg":81,"data":131},{"doc_id":78,"user_id":132,"nickname":42,"user_avatar":133,"doc_module":4,"category_id":111,"category_name":29,"doc_title":10,"doc_description":12,"doc_content":134,"file_id":135,"file_url":136,"file_type":137,"file_size":138,"view_count":30,"is_deleted":4,"is_public":22,"is_downloadable":22,"audit_status":22,"page_count":139,"language":140,"language_code":8,"site_id":7,"html_lang":8,"table_of_contents":141,"faqs":142,"seo_title":143,"seo_description":12,"update_tm":144,"read_time":112,"preview_page_count":4},2336474466412,"https://ap-avatar.wpscdn.com/davatar_155a257f0dc6eb9ab79c44ca47cae57d","|  |  |\n| --- | --- |\n| |  |\n| P O L I C Y |  |\n| A N A L Y S I S |  |\n| March 25 , 2 02 5 | NuMber 9 93 |\n\nCutting School Food Subsidies  \nBy Chris Edwards  \nEXECUTIVE SUMMARY  \nT  \nhe US Department of Agriculture runs a large array offarm and food subsidy programs. The school lunch and breakfast programs are two of the largest, which together with related school  \nfood programs will cost federal taxpayers an estimated $35 billion in 2025. Thirty million children, about 58 percent of students in public schools, receive school food benefits. The original goal of the school lunch and breakfast  \nprograms was to tackle hunger, but the main nutrition problem for children today is not inadequate calories but excessive consumption of unhealthy foods and obesity. Hence, subsidizing school food is an outdated use of federal dollars. Congress should repeal school food programs to reduce budget deficits and hand power back to the states. State and local governments should decide what sort of school food policies to adopt for their own residents.  \nCHRIS EDWARDS is the Kilts Family Chair in Fiscal Studies at the Cato Institute.  \nINTRODUCTION  \nThe US Department of Agriculture (USDA) runs the nation’s school lunch and breakfast programs, which together with related school food programs will cost federal taxpayers an estimated $35 billion in 2025.1 Thirty million children, which is about 58 percent of students in public schools, received school food benefits in 2024.2  \nCongress created the school food programs to help lowerincome households, but the programs increasingly subsidize higher-income households. The share of school lunches provided free or at a reduced price increased from 15 percent in 1969 to 72 percent in 2024.3  \nThe original goal of the school lunch and breakfast programs was to tackle hunger, but the main nutrition problem for children today is not inadequate calories but excessive consumption of unhealthy foods and obesity. The obesity rate for all children has risen from 5 percent in the 1970s to 21 percent in 2023, and the obesity rate forchildren from poor households is substantially higher than for other children.4  \nSubsidizing school food is an outdated use of federal dollars. With the government facing large budget deficits, the USDA’s school food aid should be phased out. The running of top-down school food programs is also out of step with the diverse and decentralized education approaches under state-led school choice reforms.  \nThe nutrition and obesity problems experienced by many schoolchildren are complex. As such, those problems would be better handled by innovative state policies and families than by one-size-fits-all federal programs. Freed from federal control, the states could adopt more efficient policies customized to local needs.  \nCongress should repeal school food programs to reduce budget deficits and hand power back to the states. State and local governments should decide what sort of school food policies to adopt for their own residents.  \nORIGIN S OF T HE SCHOOL  \nFOOD PROGRAMS  \nIn the early 20th century, local governments and private charities provided food to needy schoolchildren in many cities. The Congressional Research Service noted,“When the first federal aid for school lunches was provided in  \nthe 1930s, local school lunch programs were already operational in many cities and localities across the United States.”5 As the federal government expanded its school food programs in subsequent decades, it displaced these local and private efforts.  \nFederal involvement in school lunches stemmed from counterproductive schemes to aid farmers during the Great Depression. The government purchased meat, dairy, and grain products from farmers to distribute to the needy, including schoolchildren. A USDA history says the government aimed“to remove price-depressing surplus foods from the market”and thus tried to increase prices. Yet the same USDA history says that “many needy school children could n","cbCaihf04hBPMgif","https://ap.wps.com/l/cbCaihf04hBPMgif","pdf",394809,12,"English","# Executive Summary\n# Introduction\n# Origins of the School Food Programs\n# School Food Programs Today","[{\"question\":\"What is the estimated federal cost and coverage of school lunch and breakfast programs in the analysis?\",\"answer\":\"The analysis estimates about $35 billion in 2025 for school lunch, breakfast, and related school food programs, with roughly 30 million children (about 58% of public school students) receiving benefits.\"},{\"question\":\"Why does the analysis argue that subsidizing school food is outdated?\",\"answer\":\"It argues the main nutrition issue is not inadequate calories but excessive consumption of unhealthy foods and obesity, making federal subsidies a less appropriate use of funds.\"},{\"question\":\"What historical developments does the analysis describe about how the programs expanded?\",\"answer\":\"It traces early local efforts in the early 20th century, describes federal involvement connected to Great Depression farm-aid schemes, and outlines the modern program’s start with the 1946 National School Lunch Act, followed by the breakfast program’s later permanence and later policy changes.\"}]","Cutting School Food Subsidies - Executive Summary and Policy Analysis | PDF",1792045967]