On April 16, 2008, NBC Nightly News aired a story called “Sticker
Shock at the Supermarket.” Reporter Erin Burnett ominously described “the
skyrocketing price of food” and its effect on Americans’ budgets. According
to the report, the pain of rising food costs extends beyond the nuclear family
to the nation’s school cafeterias. Eric Goldstein, who manages school lunches
for 860,000 public school students in New York City, told Burnett that he can
no longer afford fresh vegetables, seafood, and other nutritious items. “We
used to have fresh spinach; we used to have corn on the cob,” Goldstein explained.
“Now we’re having to look at lower priced alternatives.” Spinach (every child’s
favorite) is disappearing from the lunch room, only to be replaced by chicken
nuggets. The result, according to Goldstein: “I think the healthy diet is
in jeopardy.”
In this context, historian Susan Levine’s book, School Lunch Politics:
The Surprising History of America’s Favorite Welfare Program, is timely.
Levine chronologically traces the development of school lunches from their
origin in the early twentieth century to the present, highlighting the complex
interaction of politics, economics, nutrition, and welfare. As McCall’s
Magazine put it, “They’re playing politics with our children’s health.”
(p. 94). At the same time, Levine shows how school lunch programs have been
weighted down by assumptions about race and gender. By pulling all these strings
together, Levine reveal what turns out to be the complexity of the school lunch
program, and she weaves these diverse strands together in a clear, smoothly
flowing—albeit, sometimes repetitive—narrative.
Discussions of welfare usually revolve around programs like Aid to Families
with Dependent Children or Medicaid. Levine shifts the lens to school lunches,
which she describes as “one of the nation’s most popular social welfare programs.”
(p. 2). Indeed, the National School Lunch Program has been loved and hated
by people on both sides of the political spectrum. Unlike many welfare programs,
policymakers designed school lunches to benefit rich and poor alike—part of
the reason for the program’s sustained popularity.
When school lunches first appeared during the early twentieth century, they
were designed to feed hungry children while also improving the diets of middle-
and upper-class children. Part of Progressive Era reform, school lunch programs
were organized primarily by women interested in modern science and rationalization.
The charity-based programs were premised on the idea that malnutrition could
affect children of all socioeconomic backgrounds. Home economists, social
reformers, and nutrition scientists, Levine explains, worked to build “a culture
of nutrition” (p. 37) that they believed would not only improve individual
health but would also strengthen American democracy.
When the American economy collapsed in the 1930s, a new concern—the rising
surplus of farm commodities—entered the discourse of school lunches. As Levine
describes, policymakers saw an opportunity to solve two problems at once.
By sending agricultural surpluses to school cafeterias, hungry children could
be fed while also providing relief to American farmers. Operating under the
auspices of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA), school lunch
programs became much more concerned with economics than with nutrition. Moreover,
as the USDA took over lunch policies, Progressive women reformers’ influence
decreased, since the USDA was largely staffed by men interested more in business
than in child welfare.
As the United States mobilized for World War II, Levine argues that nutrition
was viewed as “a matter of national defense.” National security during the
war and postwar eras depended on a healthy citizenry. In 1946, Congress established
the National School Lunch Program, which is still in existence today.
The marriage of school lunches and the USDA in the 1930s continued after World
War II. Southern Democrats were crucial to the enactment of the National School
Lunch Program. They supported the federal lunch initiative primarily because
of the economic assistance it offered to agriculture. They utterly refused,
however, to cede control of the program to the federal government. Like most
welfare programs, the National School Lunch Program was administered locally.
Consequently, racial discrimination prevailed, and very few of the poor children
who needed free meals actually received them.
In the 1960s, Americans “rediscovered” poverty, and the civil rights movement
revealed economic inequities in American society. Levine traces how grassroots
anti-poverty and anti-hunger campaigns, led especially by liberal women, transformed
the National School Lunch Program into a poverty program. Though middle-class
students still had access to school lunches, the program focused primarily
on the poor in the 1970s and 1980s.
Still, a central problem that had plagued school lunch programs since the early
twentieth century continued to limit the effectiveness of the program. Levine
argues that the National School Lunch Program was grossly underfunded. Inflation
in the 1970s strained school food budgets even more, and in the 1980s, the
Reagan administration dramatically cut federal funding for school lunches,
though Reagan himself in a press conference denied that this was happening.
Out of economic necessity, schools turned to private food companies, including
fast food chains, to cut costs and operate their cafeterias more efficiently.
They also found ways to meet federal nutrition standards with lower quality
foods. Most famously, the Reagan administration suggested that ketchup could
be counted as a vegetable. “What emerged in many school districts by the end
of the 1970s,” Levine writes, “was a public/private partnership shaped fundamentally
by business concerns such as profitability and efficiency. Nutrition, health,
and education all became subsumed into a model of consumer choice and market
share.” (p. 152).
At this juncture, Levine’s story sounds very much like the report on NBC Nightly
News. The federal government and public schools remain committed to school
lunch programs, but food prices are rising quickly. Cafeteria budgets are
insufficient to keep up with the growing costs. As such, nutrition is taking
a back seat to economic expedience. We might note, however, that while malnutrition
was widespread in the 1930s and ‘40s, obesity has become near-epidemic with
America’s children today. In both cases, school lunches have been seen as
crucial to solving a national health crisis.
In laying out the long trajectory of school lunch policies, Levine provides
an important historical perspective for the current economic crisis. Moreover,
she offers an accessible narrative for anyone interested in the history of
welfare, education, and federal policymaking in the twentieth century. And
she reminds us that whatever winds up on those segmented food trays sits at
the intersection of many competing political concerns.