Public Comment

North Dakota voters will consider a constitutional school-meals measure on November 3. It would require public school districts, public schools and public charter schools to offer one free breakfast and one free lunch each school day to enrolled students. Eligible participating schools would receive mandatory state reimbursement after maximizing available federal funding, and if lawmakers could not identify another funding source, reimbursement would come from Legacy Fund earnings. The policy question therefore includes both whether universal school meals should be publicly funded and whether that commitment belongs in the state constitution rather than ordinary legislation and budgeting. School meals affect a child's day in a very immediate way, but a constitutional guarantee is a much bigger commitment than one year's lunch budget. I want to separate the question of whether meals should be available to everyone from the question of how permanently the state should lock in that promise.

Should free breakfast and lunch for public-school students be a constitutional guarantee in North Dakota?

Overall results

1
56% support · excluded by 10%
7

The state should not create another permanent statewide entitlement when federal nutrition programs and local districts can target assistance according to local conditions.

2
50% support · excluded by 14%
7

A worthwhile program does not automatically belong in the constitution. Statutory funding lets lawmakers adjust reimbursement and operations as costs and federal programs change.

7

Universal meals can be preserved while giving administrators more flexibility than a constitutional command.

3
48% support · excluded by 2%
7

Families above eligibility cutoffs can still face significant grocery and childcare costs. A universal program treats meals as part of the school day.

7

Universal access removes application gaps and avoids singling out children based on family income. Every student can eat under the same system.

4
44% support · excluded by 4%
7

Public resources should be concentrated on students whose families cannot reasonably afford meals rather than subsidizing every household regardless of income.

About the author