logo
Bill would fund school meals for families who can't pay

Bill would fund school meals for families who can't pay

Yahoo20-03-2025
School lunch illustration by Getty Images.
Rep. Melissa Romano still remembers a fourth grader who started acting out in her classroom about a decade ago.
At the time, Romano, D-Helena, said her school district used to have teachers put slips of paper in students' mailboxes that served as their lunch bills.
One day, the little boy showed her a bunch of the slips crumpled at the bottom of his backpack, and he started crying — 'for fourth grade boys to cry, that takes quite a bit,' Romano said.
'He said, 'I want to go home. I can't be here in school because my parents can't pay these bills,'' Romano recalled.
The boy had two other siblings, the bill had reached $343, and Romano walked to the school office to pay it before the family got sent to collections — a practice in her district at the time.
This week, Romano told the House Education Committee the situation inspired her interest in nutrition for children. She said House Bill 551 would fill an important gap, ensuring children have enough to eat at school.
Some children qualify for free meals at school. Others qualify for discounts, so breakfast and lunch cost them around 30 cents or 40 cents each, Romano said.
But even with the discount, Romano said families still struggle to pay those bills, and it means children skip meals and go hungry.
HB 551 would cover the cost of those meals with an estimated $600,000 a year, Romano said. In Montana, she said, one in six children live in a food insecure household.
No one testified against the bill, but Romano said she has presented similar legislation before, and it hasn't been adopted.
Proponents of the bill said undernourished children don't learn, and Kim Popham, with the Montana Federation of Public Employees, said the legislation would support another interest of committee members.
'In this committee, many of you often bring up the fact that our test scores are low, but let me remind you that if students don't have enough to eat, they cannot learn,' Popham said.
Supporters also said in some districts, school administrators have to double as collections agents, and the phone calls about unpaid bills destroy the trust between schools and families.
Tobin Novasio, superintendent of Hardin Public Schools, said he was one of the children Romano talked about, who skipped meals as a child.
'Oftentimes, I would tell my teachers I was going home for lunch but would just walk around the neighborhood, not eat,' Novasio said.
With help in part from great teachers and role models — he pointed to a committee member, long-time educator Rep. Lee Deming, R-Laurel, as one — Novasio said he escaped poverty.
However, he knows when families get a $40 or $50 bill for meals, it can be 'a huge amount.'
Novasio said he doesn't want school administrators to have to call families and blur the line of the school's role — schools should support families, not be the enemy.
'I don't ever want any student under my care to have that type of feeling of anxiety or to go without a meal,' Novasio said.
Popham, with the Montana Federation of Public Employees, said she left the classroom just a couple of years ago as a biology teacher, and her students often referred to her as a 'science geek.'
Once a month, on payday, she would buy healthy snacks at Costco because she knew students needed them, and she told the committee the science behind her approach.
Organs need energy, energy comes from food, the brain is an organ, and it consumes about 20% of the energy humans take in, Popham said — and growing children need a lot more of that energy.
Representatives from the Montana Quality Education Coalition, American Heart Association in Montana, the Blackfeet Nation, Fort Belknap Indian Community, Chippewa Cree Tribe of Rocky Boy's Reservation, the Helena School District, and the Bigfork Food Bank were among proponents of the bill.
In response to a question from Rep. Jamie Isaly, D-Livingston, about whether the unpaid meal accounts push schools into the red, Doug Reisig, with the Montana Quality Education Coalition, said yes.
Reisig said some philanthropic people will volunteer to pay outstanding bills, and school districts do 'creative things' to try to collect the money.
'Turning to collections is probably the last straw,' Reisig said. 'I've had to do that as well, and you don't ever want to have to do that, but you try to make sure that when you end the year, that your food service program is not in arrears.'
A former superintendent from Culbertson said that his district had ended up $10,000 or $15,000 in the hole because of unpaid meal accounts.
Rep. Sherry Essmann, R-Billings, wanted to know the actual cost of a school meal, and Rep. Mark Thane, D-Missoula, a former superintendent, said elementary school lunch cost $3.00 in Missoula in 2025, and it cost $3.25 in middle and high schools.
In response to questions from Essmann, Romano said the $600,000 annual price is an estimate, one she said she believes is on the high end, and any leftover dollars would return to the general fund.
A handout from the Montana Food Bank Network said 21,000 students currently qualify for a reduced price meal in Montana, and the bill would make those meals free — which Rep. Pete Elverum, D-Helena, calculated meant that for about $28.50 per student, HB 551 would feed 21,000 children breakfast and lunch for an entire year
The committee did not take immediate action on the bill. However, Romano said the $300 for that fourth grader she once taught was insurmountable, and removing that burden for the family was life changing.
'I think that this bill is far beyond an act of compassion,' Romano said. 'I think that it's really a commitment to ensuring that every child in Montana has the opportunity to reach their full potential.'
Orange background

Try Our AI Features

Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:

Comments

No comments yet...

Related Articles

Trump Has a Chance To Stop Putin—But He Can't Do It Alone
Trump Has a Chance To Stop Putin—But He Can't Do It Alone

Newsweek

time22 minutes ago

  • Newsweek

Trump Has a Chance To Stop Putin—But He Can't Do It Alone

Donald Trump's second-term foreign policies are turning out to be a string of disasters—alienating allies, driving India towards Russia, sowing uncertainties with whipsaw tariff changes that rattle markets, zeroing out foreign development aid, and continuing to supply an Israeli prime minister who has descended into a frenzy of revenge killing and destruction. Now Trump's latest bid to end the long war of attrition in Ukraine, parts of which Russia has occupied since the annexation of Crimea in 2014, appears only to have strengthened Vladimir Putin's hand. Before meeting the Russian president in Alaska, Trump had for weeks threatened new sanctions on Russia if Putin did not agree to a ceasefire and the start of peace talks. Instead, Putin got validation, refused to stop his total war on Ukraine's civilian infrastructure, and Trump has backed off the sanctions threat, right when Russia's economy is starting to falter. Worse, Trump now looks likely to press Ukrainian leaders to give up not just Crimea, but the country's eastern provinces of Donetsk and Luhansk, where Putin ginned up separatist movements before his February 2022 invasion. And worse still, Trump may pressure Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to yield most of Ukraine's vital southeastern provinces on the Black Sea as well. Such an outcome would reward the greatest violations of international law in Europe since Adolf Hitler's occupation of Poland. That would be a catastrophe of epic proportions that is sure to enourage dictators worldwide. In exchange, Trump's foreign envoy Steve Witkoff is talking about a "security guarantee" that would promise Ukraine direct military intervention by the U.S., Britain, and France if Russia tries to bite off more Ukrainian lands in future. But Witkoff and Trump appear not to know that Ukraine already received such supposed protection at the end of the Cold War in exchange for giving up its nuclear weapons: Russia promised to respect Ukraine's new borders, and the U.S., U.K., France, and China promised to enforce this deal. TOPSHOT - Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump participate in a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 18, 2025. TOPSHOT - Ukraine President Volodymyr Zelensky and US President Donald Trump participate in a meeting in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on August 18, 2025. MANDEL NGAN/AFP/Getty Images Putin proved that 1994 guarantee to be hollow, just as Hitler's meeting with Neville Chamberlain taught the "Fuhrer" that he could get away with seizing part of Czechoslovakia. So it's no wonder Putin is willing to trade another such Western "guarantee" in exchange for total triumph in Ukraine's east and southeast. In his eyes, that is a lot of something for nothing. But Trump's instincts, if naive, are not entirely wrong: a tighter economic vise could move Putin to concessions. Direct and secondary sanctions, like tariffs, can be used as effective tools of pressure under the right conditions. Trump's fundamental error lies in not realizing that these tools would be far stronger when wielded not by the U.S. alone, but by a global alliance of democracies of the kind that John McCain had the foresight to advocate in 2008. Such a league of democratic states has to be broader than Europe. It must include Asian and potentially southern hemisphere partners that are not part of NATO. While we should try to coordinate with our European partners on any new sanctions against Russia, U.S. leaders must also be realistic: the EU is not going to mount a credible challenge to Putin's mass-murdering depravity, which has violated all the most sacred principles of international law. Europe's paper tigers could have placed forces from their own nations into eastern Ukraine in January 2022 to enforce the 1994 treaty, thereby preventing the entire war. Instead they dithered, wrung their hands, and eventually imposed largely ineffective sanctions, while delaying shipments of tanks, long-range missiles, anti-missile defenses, and fighter aircraft to Ukraine. And as usual, they shamelessly waited for the United States to take the lead against yet another assault on democracy and human rights on their own continent. About this, Trump's instincts have been correct: weakness, cowardice, and appeasement has been the EU's policy against tyranny since the 1990s—and this has weakened NATO as well. Even with the strong resolve of British Prime Minister Sir Keir Starmer to get European members to rebuild credible offensive armed forces and do their share within the NATO alliance, it will take time for them to catch up—time that Ukraine does not have. But imagine a broader alliance that includes most of NATO and the EU, along with South Korea, Japan, Australia, the Philippines, and potentially also India. Imagine that all the governments within this new bloc collectively imposed new sanctions banning commerce of all kinds coming from Russia (including natural gas)—and combined this with 50 percent extra tariffs on goods coming from any country that trades with Russia. That would put China in danger of losing over half of its export markets unless it cut economic ties with Putin. If Trump could manage this feat, he might actually end Russia's total war on Ukraine's people, and force Putin to abandon most of the stolen territory. Trump needs to learn that a united front of many large-economy nations is far more powerful than the U.S. acting alone. Imagine how much stronger the free world would be as a result. Trump could offer to make such a new alliance into a free trade bloc with mutual economic protections, which would bring nations into an economic alliance of all democracies in the OECD. Instead, he has returned to the unilateralist strategy that failed under George W. Bush, which led McCain to his landmark proposal. Such a global democratic alliance would be the sort of institution that, like NATO, can give a real security guarantee. With inspiring leadership, it could endure the stress that enforcing a total global embargo on Russia would mean. Its allied leaders would have to explain to their peoples that we have reached a critical moment: it is now or never to break Putin's tyrannical empire. This would also require a massive new effort to supply Europe with natural gas from non-Russian sources and to supply India with oil, which would cut off Russia's main revenue stream. It would be a bit like the Berlin airlift, an act of shared sacrifice and determination to return the arc of history to its proper trajectory—towards freedom, democracy, and hope for all peoples on Earth. Then we, rather than Putin, would be "holding all the cards." John Davenport is professor of philosophy and director of peace and justice studies at Fordham University. The views expressed in this article are the writer's own.

Putin's biggest demand involves Ukraine surrendering Donetsk, its most fortified region
Putin's biggest demand involves Ukraine surrendering Donetsk, its most fortified region

New York Post

time11 hours ago

  • New York Post

Putin's biggest demand involves Ukraine surrendering Donetsk, its most fortified region

Ukraine's most heavily fortified region has become the center-point for peace talks to end the war with Russian leader Vladimir Putin reportedly demanding that Kyiv cede the entire territory to Moscow. But the Donestk oblast — which is smaller than Massachusetts and home to about 4 million people — has been at the center of some of the most brutal fighting of the war, and the Kremlin has not been able to take the entire region after more than three and a half years. A source familiar with Friday's meeting between Putin and President Trump described negotiations over the fate of Donetsk as 'the ball game.' 'Every issue is an ancillary issue, except Donetsk,' the source previously told The Post. Ukrainian officials and western observers say giving up the territory without a fight should be a nonstarter. George Barros, the Russian team head for the Washington-based Institute for the Study of War think tank, said conceding the land would be playing right into Putin's hands and leave Ukraine susceptible for a future assault. He called such a move a 'foolish proposition.' 4 Russian leader Vladimir Putin reportedly told President Trump he was open to a cease-fire with Ukraine so long as Kyiv gives up the entire Donbas region. POOL/AFP via Getty Images 4 Donbas harbors Donetsk, Ukraine's most heavily fortified region that has repelled Russia's forces for more than a decade. Getty Images Russia has been desperate for full control of the coal and mineral-rich Donetsk border region since Moscow backed a rebellion by Moscow-friendly leaders in the oblast in 2014. The Kremlin's troops currently occupy about 70% of Donetsk. Russian control of other contested regions, including Luhansk, is more complete. Moscow had previously recognized the regions as the 'Donetsk and Luhansk People's Republic' before launching the 2022 invasion. 4 Russia has mounted several assaults to try and conquer all of Donetsk, which has seen some of the most intense fighting of the war. REUTERS Despite its advancements in the frontlines, Russia has found it increasingly difficult to take all of Donetsk, with Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky asserting that his forces still hold the strategic cities of Sloviansk and Kramators, which have served as a 'fortress belt' guarding against Moscow's fighters. Moscow's inability to make proper advances and maintain the territory it's taken so far in Donetsk has revealed clear weaknesses in Putin's army, leading the Russian strongman to wager the whole region for the West's desire for a cease-fire, Barros said. 'Putin wants the territory that he hasn't been able to get in more than three years of fighting, land that would take more than a year of fighting and suffering more losses to get,' he said. 'It makes sense for him to demand something like this.' 4 Russia continues to struggle to keep all the land it has taken in Donetsk, with Ukraine's army regularly pushing back the invaders in a months-long quagmire. REUTERS Putin reportedly told Trump his forces could conquer Donetsk by October if Ukraine didn't give up the land as part of a peace deal — but Kyiv and US observers point out that the Kremlin has failed to take it for more than a decade. 'Even if we're being generous to the Russians and say they can maintain their current advance, which we know they can't keep up and have been pushed back from… It would take about 475 days for Russia to take the entirety of Donetsk, that's December 2026,' Barros said. One American veteran serving in the Ukrainian Armed Services scoffed, 'Donetsk by October? They've been saying that since February of '22.' Not only would conceding Donetsk give Putin the win he's desired for years, but it would also remove Ukraine's critical defense from the battlefield. If Russia's invading army is allowed to stroll through Donetsk, Ukraine would have to 'urgently build up massive defensive fortifications along the Kharkiv and Dnipropetrovsk Oblast border areas, whose terrain is poorly suited to act as a defensive line,' the ISW warned. The think tank ultimately concluded that if Donetsk is lost, Russia would have the perfect launching point to mount its next attack from.

California legislature passes bill that gives interest on insurance payouts to homeowners
California legislature passes bill that gives interest on insurance payouts to homeowners

CNBC

time12 hours ago

  • CNBC

California legislature passes bill that gives interest on insurance payouts to homeowners

The California state legislature passed a bill Monday that ensures homeowners, not lenders, receive at least some of the interest on insurance payouts for homes destroyed or damaged by natural disasters. The legislation comes after thousands of homeowners lost their residences in January's historic wildfires in Southern California. Following such a loss, insurers send checks typically made out jointly to both the homeowner and the mortgage lender or servicer. The lender will then deposit the funds into an escrow account, where it earns interest that the lender could keep. California Assemblymember John Harabedian, D-Pasadena, the author of the bill, said he is fighting to change that after hearing from his constituents about their struggles getting insurance payouts released from their lenders. "If the homeowners are not given their money right away, the interest on that money, which the banks and the mortgage lenders are holding onto and earning [interest on], should be paid to the homeowner, not the banks," Harabedian told CNBC. "The more we looked into this, the more we realized that this was a huge problem across the board." The bill will now head to Gov. Gavin Newsom's desk to be signed into law. After a disaster, insurance settlement checks can often be held in an escrow account by the mortgage servicing company until rebuilding is complete, which can take months or even years. During this time, the funds can accrue significant interest that the servicing company could keep. Now, the homeowner will be guaranteed at least 2% interest on those funds. The bill will apply to both existing insurance payouts that are still being held in escrow accounts and to any new escrow accounts that are opened following a catastrophic event. For any funds already in an escrow account, interest at 2% simple per annum will begin accruing on the bill's effective date. Newsom, who sponsored the state legislation, said homeowners rebuilding after a disaster need all the support they can get. "This is a commonsense solution that ensures that [homeowners] receive every resource available to help them recover and rebuild," Newsom said in a statement in February when the bill was first introduced. California law had already required lenders to pay homeowners interest on escrowed funds for property taxes and insurance, but it didn't explicitly include insurance payments. The bill aims to close that loophole. "It's sad that we have to introduce a bill to make the banks and the mortgage lenders do the right thing, but this is about homeowners getting all the financial help that they can throughout this difficult period," Harabedian said.

DOWNLOAD THE APP

Get Started Now: Download the App

Ready to dive into a world of global content with local flavor? Download Daily8 app today from your preferred app store and start exploring.
app-storeplay-store