I can't say I ever saw a kiddo refused a lunch in Bismarck Public School System from 1981-1993. I don't recall any "different" lunches for any kids either. In elementary and Jr. High you mostly knew where kids lived. There were houses, apartment buildings that even in elementary school we knew were for low-income households and we knew who lived there.
We had punch-cards. Mom or dad would send a check to school W/me and I'd stop @ the office and pay for the card. In elementary school, the office and lunch service staff kept the card. Jr high and High School, you managed the card yourself. To my recollection, there wasn't a different colored card, lack of card, or any other designator that would denote to other children you're receiving a free or reduced cost meal.
I can recall many times forgetting to tell mom or dad I needed a check for a new punch card. We'd tell the lady running the punch machine, "Charge". She'd write your name down on a sheet of paper in front of her and make a mark on the sheet until you paid for a new card. With the new card she'd punch it to catch you up on the charged lunches and that was that. Despite my frequent forgetfulness, I wasn't ever refused a lunch.
It's difficult for me to believe that any public school system/district in ND has become more stringent regarding not providing a meal for a child who can't pay for it. Nor would I think embarrassment or condemnation of the child or their parent's inability to pay is somehow now highlighted so other children and staff are made known of a child's family's non-payment/inability to pay. Seems like there's an awful lot MORE rules, regulations, and policies AGAINST that very thing. Punishments and penalties for bullying, picking on, or shaming children in that situation carries a significantly stiffer penalty than it did when I was in school.
Given the above, I'd call the current concern a "Manufactured Crisis". Manufactured Crisis' happen for 2 reasons and are NOT political-party specific when we're able to look @ them in hindsight IME.
1. Some organization/group of politicians has lost "grift money" and they were essentially blindsided by the loss and are now scrambling to make up the loss. However, the "behind the scenes" motive isn't ever what's being advertised, the motive it to be able to continue to wield enough influence to perpetuate "The Grift".
2. There has been a significant amount of new $$$ flowing in a way organizations/politicians didn't see coming and they need a "Manufactured Crisis" to install "The Grift". Like the 435 in Congress didn't have anything better to do than legislate on College NIL $$$ or the NBA shifting 3 Billion + to the WNBA and all of the sudden congress needs to be Interested in/involved in the workings of the WNBA specifically?
So, my particular question regarding measure 2 is:
ND passes measure 2. The need/incentive for eligible parents/caregivers to apply for federal aid disappears. A big tax burden shifts back to ND residents. Who benefits from this, and how do they benefit?
"Together for School Meals" debated their side vs. a Republican from Velva a month ago. Since Together for School Meals the entity debating for the issue I clicked onto their "Who We Are" tab. It's a "Who's Who" of people I've voted against and/or organizations I don't support as are the people I recognize running the supporting in-state organizations.
Here's a link to the Together for School Meals "Who We Are" tab from their website.
Together for School Meals Partners
Scrolling down to the "R" partners: "Red River Valley Democratic Socialists of America" didn't strike me as an entity I'd like to support and I believe I can confidently say I'll agree with little to nothing folks who partner with them have to say either. Also, several "Partners" when I tried to get onto their website I was directed to the Great Plains Food Bank. I wonder how many 501c3's does GPFB have?
Best of luck to all seeking to form their own opinion, don't forget to exercise your right to GO VOTE!!