Creative Commons License

Credit: Mansfield CT

There was no shortage of high-fives and backslapping recently as the state’s rainy-day fund approached $4.1 billion, and Gov. Ned Lamont’s budget office projected a $1.64 billion surplus by the fiscal year’s end.

But you know who is not celebrating? Hungry kids in school and their stressed families. Connecticut’s leaders have chosen to amass huge budget surpluses at the expense of schoolchildren who need nutritious meals.

Connecticut has now become the first state to roll back a significant school nutrition program after ramping it up during the pandemic. While most states have expanded their school nutrition programs — with eight states now providing both breakfast and lunch to any child who wants them — Connecticut decided to provide breakfast for only one year before pulling the plug. Starting this fall, the state will go back to requiring families to jump through taxing administrative hurdles to prove they are poor enough to receive federal assistance, instead of just providing free meals for all kids without the stigma or barriers.

California, Michigan, Massachusetts, Maine, Vermont, New Mexico, Minnesota, and Colorado are leading the way to provide meals at no-cost to all K-12 public school children. My philanthropy worked with local organizations to get Connecticut added to that list. We had a partial victory for kids and families in 2023 when the state decided to provide free breakfast for one year, but it wasn’t easy. Connecticut’s leaders were reluctant to make the investment even though schools, parents, frontline food service workers, and hunger organizations were all begging for relief as meal debt (costs incurred by districts when parents can’t pay) ballooned.

At the bill signing in August 2023, Lamont emphasized the importance of school meals, declaring, “We are just getting started.” Apparently not.

Even with the breakfast program this past school year, meal debt ballooned to a level never seen before, including in places like Groton, considered one of the wealthier towns in the state. At mid-year, the debt was already over $366,000. By next school year, it will be much worse.

But state leaders cited the $90 million price tag as a reason for not moving forward. This claim rings hollow now, with a $1.64 billion surplus. Connecticut should have moved quickly this year to join the list of states that prioritize feeding their kids. In those states, leaders understand that families are struggling, and hungry children cannot learn. They know that families earning just above the threshold for federal assistance still can’t afford to feed their kids properly, especially in Connecticut, the third most expensive state to raise a family. 

By taking a huge step backwards, state leaders have turned their backs on the children of essential workers like retail employees, nursing assistants, child care workers, home health aides, mechanics, maintenance workers, and teacher assistants. These hard-working families deserve support in feeding their children in school, giving them the same start as others.

Some state officials blame the federal government for not doing more. Others take responsibility and feed all their children. In those states, meal debt is eliminated, attendance and test scores improve, and stigma disappears. Kids are happier. Other Democratic governors, like Gretchen Whitmer and Tim Walz, have passed universal school meals, underscoring that it’s a consensus, common-sense issue, even in politically divided states.

Not in Connecticut. The state’s leaders seem more concerned with the possibility of feeding a few “rich” children — who already receive the same technology, transportation, and textbooks as everyone else — than with the benefits of feeding all kids, which would cost just 2% of their rainy day fund.

I hope state leaders enjoy counting their surplus taxpayer dollars next year while Connecticut children suffer in the rain.

Bradley Tusk is the founder and CEO of Tusk Philanthropies, which funds Solving Hunger, and runs legislative campaigns in states to expand access to food assistance programs, especially school breakfast and lunch.