The free and reduced-price lunch program allows students in families who make at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level — $41,795 for a household of four — to get free breakfasts and lunches at school. (Getty Images)
A yearslong effort by Democrats to expand access to free and reduced-price meals at public schools appears to be facing another uphill battle this year, as Republicans have raised concerns about the cost to the state.
The House Education Funding Committee voted on party lines last week to retain or recommend killing three separate bills that would address school lunch payments.
The committee recommended killing House Bill 583, which would require New Hampshire to sign up for Medicaid Direct Certification, allowing school districts to automatically enroll income-eligible families into the free and reduced-price lunch program using state Medicaid data. Currently, families that qualify — those making up to 185 percent of the federal poverty level — must apply, and not all eligible families do.
The committee also voted against a bill that would make that application easier. House Bill 646, which the committee recommended be killed, would require that all school districts make the application for free and reduced-lunch available online.
And the committee retained a bill, House Bill 665, that would dramatically expand how many students in the state could qualify for free and reduced-price lunch — by raising the income limit from 185 percent of the federal poverty level to 300 percent.
Retaining the bill means it will not proceed to the House floor and will be kept by the committee until 2026 for further tweaks and discussion.
One advocate for the bill expressed frustration afterward.
“We were crushed,” said Laura Milliken, executive director of New Hampshire Hunger Solutions, an advocacy organization, in an interview Monday. “It’s clear to us that there’s a lot of food insecurity happening in New Hampshire right now, and these bills specifically address child food insecurity. And the committee was not at all interested in any of the bills.”
Milliken cited the latest data from the U.S. Census Bureau Household Pulse Survey, from September 2024, which suggests 39 percent of children live in households that report having insufficient food. That designation includes “those who had enough food but not always the kind wanted, those who sometimes did not have enough to eat, and those that often did not have enough to eat,” according to the census.
The free and reduced-price lunch program allows students in families who make at or below 130 percent of the federal poverty level — $41,795 for a household of four — to get free breakfasts and lunches at school. Those from families making between 130 and 185 percent of the poverty level can receive breakfast and lunch at a reduced price — typically about 40 cents per lunch.
The program can make a difference: The full prices for lunches tend to be about $4 to $5 per meal.
Democrats and anti-hunger advocates say New Hampshire should ensure that all students who qualify for the free and reduced-price lunch program are getting it. Many students who could receive it do not, sometimes because their parents forget to send in an application and sometimes because the student feels stigma and chooses not to submit it.
Requiring the application process to be online, which some school districts do voluntarily, would allow more families to sign up, while entering Medicaid Direct Certification, a federal pilot program, would eliminate the need to apply altogether.
But Republicans voiced objections to those approaches.
Rep. Rick Ladd, a Haverhill Republican and the chairman of the committee, noted that schools can already choose to provide online applications; forcing them to do so would trample on local control, he said.
“My school district is doing this currently without the need for the legislation,” he said. “I know others in the state are doing the same.”
And joining Medicaid Direct Certification, which Democrats have proposed doing since 2022, could have budget impacts to the state, Republicans said.
New Hampshire’s school funding formula requires the state to give school districts additional money for each student enrolled in the free and reduced-price lunch program. Adding more students by automatically enrolling them could have immediate budgetary impacts, Republicans say.
Democrats countered that signing up the kids would simply give an accurate accounting of how many low-income students are in each school district, which would ensure that those districts are getting the state aid they are supposed to be getting.
Analysis by the state Department of Education suggests that around 10,000 additional students might be enrolled in the free or reduced-price lunch program if the state were to adopt the program.
“It provides the state with an accurate number, not a make-believe number, when it comes to identifying the number of kids from low-income backgrounds that attend our public schools,” said Rep. Dave Luneau, a Hopkinton Democrat.
Similar bills have been struck down by Republicans over concerns about the impact to the state’s Education Trust Fund. Anticipating those objections, Luneau proposed an amendment in which the state would enter Medicaid Direct Certification but would delay the funding by two years.
“So the amendment makes that budget neutral, and why do we want to make it budget neutral? Because we feel that the policy is very important to make sure that we’re identifying … students who are eligible for free and reduced-price lunch as 43 other states currently do it.”
Rep. Daniel Popovici-Muller, a Windham Republican, disagreed with that approach.
“I don’t think that something that’s not good policy adopted as is will be good policy because we delay the massive financial impact for two years,” he said.
The votes are not final; each recommendation will be taken up by the full House in the coming weeks. But they come as part of a long string of defeats for Democrats on this issue. In 2022, advocates pushed then-Gov. Chris Sununu to apply to join Medicaid Direct Certification as an executive action; Sununu said he wanted buy-in from the Legislature first. Since then, bills to do so or expand student lunch assistance have fallen short.
For Rep. Hope Damon, a Croydon Democrat, the benefits of increasing meal availability for children go beyond the lunch hour.
“It is not fiscally responsible to do this,” she said, referring to the recommendation to kill the bill, “because children with food insecurity are twice as likely to receive special ed services, twice as likely to repeat a grade, have increased hyperactivity and difficulty focusing, and are twice as likely to have behavioral issues that lead to suspension, so they cost more money when they’re not fed. It’s unconscionable that we can’t figure out a way to go forward with this.”
Milliken noted two Senate bills also intended to increase meals to children. Senate Bill 204 would raise the free lunch threshold from 130 percent of the federal poverty level to 200 percent, and require the state and school districts to split the additional cost 50/50; the Senate is likely to amend that bill to make it “opt-in” and allow districts to decide whether to participate.
And Senate Bill 205 would require all school districts to offer breakfast in addition to lunch. Currently, districts are mandated only to provide one meal and breakfast is optional.
Milliken said school districts have been ramping up their own efforts to encourage applications to the free and reduced-price lunch program, but that state law is necessary to close the gap.
“Families are struggling … because of the increase in housing prices and child care prices and food price prices,” she said. “So I think there are a lot of people who are feeling the pinch, but that it’s particularly hard on low-income working families.”