Philly Sacrifices 26 School Kitchens to the Austerity Gods

PB&J as metaphor: a prefab lunch in an Illinois public-school cafeteria. <a href="http://fedupwithschoollunch.blogspot.com/search/label/daily%20school%20lunch%20post">Mrs. Q</a>/Fed Up with Lunch blog

Fight disinformation: Sign up for the free Mother Jones Daily newsletter and follow the news that matters.


As negotiations over the “debt ceiling” drag on (handy MoJo explainer here), one thing is clear: Austerity is coming to the United States. No matter what—whether the Republicans accept minor tax hikes as part of a deal; whether bond investors freak out or don’t freak out; whether Obama and the Democrats completely cave in to GOP insanity or just partially cave (as they already have)—the federal government will slice spending by about $1 trillion over the next decade, most likely including cuts to important social-insurance programs like Medicare and Medicaid

Let’s be clear: Slashing government spending at a time of lingering 9 percent unemployment and stagnant wages is imbecilic. You don’t have to be John Maynard Keynes to understand that when corporations stop hiring and investing, the federal government has to fill the gap, not widen it. And as the University of Texas economist James K. Galbraith has demonstrated numerous times over the past year (most recently here), the most-dire problems facing the nation are the related ones of underemployment and underinvestment in vital infrastructure, not budget deficits or the national debt. Our existing fossil-fuel-based infrastructure—roads, bridges—is crumbling. And if we’re going to transition to a post-fossil-fuel economy, we’ll need to build up decentralized electricity grids, wind and solar energy capacity, mass transit, local and regional food systems, and more—investments that aren’t being made at nearly a sufficient rate by private actors.

Galbraith likes to quote Keynes, architect of the postwar recovery: “There is work to do; there are men to do it. Why not bring them together?” Instead, congressional GOP leaders and (to a lesser extent) the president seem intent on keeping them apart. Results will likely be disastrous; the cascading effects of ill-timed austerity will likely lead to yet larger bills down the road. Penny wise, dollar poor.

Indeed, it’s already happening at the municipal level. Pressured by the bad economy and reductions in federal and state spending, cities across the nation face gaping deficits—and are responding by cutting vital services. Monday’s New York Times brought a taste of things to come in the form of Kevin Sack’s piece on budget cuts in Wilmington, N.C. The story’s intro involves what happens when cities “save money” by failing to maintain stuff like fire trucks. Unhappily, the anecdote reads like one of Aesop’s fable for our time.

The city of Philadelphia served up a whopper of an example regarding my own topic, food, last week. To help close a budget gap, Philly announced it will shutter 26 elementary- and middle-school cafeteria kitchens, many of them “in the city’s poorest neighborhoods,” reports the Philadelphia Inquirer. The affected schools “will switch from food prepared in the school by cafeteria workers to meals cooked, plated, and frozen several days before consumption and trucked in from a warehouse in Brooklyn, N.Y.”

Not having to maintain functioning kitchens and pay workers to staff them will shave $2.3 million from the city’s budget—but won’t go very far toward decreasing its $629 million deficit. And the collateral damage will likely be large. To wit:

• An untold number of kitchen workers are tossed off the city’s payrolls and into the city’s already-swollen ranks of the unemployed. They’ll adjust their spending accordingly, putting yet more pressure on the local tax base.

• By shuttering nearly all of the city’s remaining school kitchens—the Inquirer reports that even before the move, only 30 percent of Philly schools had them—officials are icing out local food suppliers and distributors, again putting downward pressure on a weak economy.

• The quality of the prefab, trucked-in meals will likely be quite poor, teaching the nearly 1,700 kids affected by the closures that cheap industrial crap is what’s good to eat. Do the math. The federal government reimburses school cafeterias less than $3 per lunch. If a private company is going to book a profit while prepping meals and shipping them frozen from Brooklyn to Philly at that rate, you can be sure it’s using the cheapest ingredients it can get away with. For an example of a school cafeteria that subjects students to awful premade meals, see the anonymous Illinois teacher Mrs. Q’s account of her year eating in her school’s cafeteria in solidarity with her students. The Inquirer quotes two local food-related NGOs lamenting the drop in quality between schoolmade and trucked-in lunches.

I should emphasize that the the shame here resides not so much with Philadelphia as with the federal government. Last year, the White House and Congress set the table for the Philadelphia kitchen closures by passing a childhood nutrition bill that increased federal funding for school lunches by just pennies per meal.

And more broadly speaking, the city’s leaders are merely answering incessant calls for “belt tightening” in the midst of a punishing jobs recession. From the maddest tea partier in the House to the president himself, national politicians are pounding the drums of deficit hysteria. Just this past weekend, Obama declared:

Government has to start living within its means, just like families do. We have to cut the spending we can’t afford so we can put the economy on sounder footing, and give our businesses the confidence they need to grow and create jobs.

In the present context, that means consciously deciding to neglect necessary maintenance work on aging fire trucks, or subjecting low-income kids to subpar meals.

The gods of fiscal austerity will be appeased. The only question is, how much pain will they exact from us before we realize that their counsel is false?

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

WE'LL BE BLUNT

It is astonishingly hard keeping a newsroom afloat these days, and we need to raise $253,000 in online donations quickly, by October 7.

The short of it: Last year, we had to cut $1 million from our budget so we could have any chance of breaking even by the time our fiscal year ended in June. And despite a huge rally from so many of you leading up to the deadline, we still came up a bit short on the whole. We can’t let that happen again. We have no wiggle room to begin with, and now we have a hole to dig out of.

Readers also told us to just give it to you straight when we need to ask for your support, and seeing how matter-of-factly explaining our inner workings, our challenges and finances, can bring more of you in has been a real silver lining. So our online membership lead, Brian, lays it all out for you in his personal, insider account (that literally puts his skin in the game!) of how urgent things are right now.

The upshot: Being able to rally $253,000 in donations over these next few weeks is vitally important simply because it is the number that keeps us right on track, helping make sure we don't end up with a bigger gap than can be filled again, helping us avoid any significant (and knowable) cash-flow crunches for now. We used to be more nonchalant about coming up short this time of year, thinking we can make it by the time June rolls around. Not anymore.

Because the in-depth journalism on underreported beats and unique perspectives on the daily news you turn to Mother Jones for is only possible because readers fund us. Corporations and powerful people with deep pockets will never sustain the type of journalism we exist to do. The only investors who won’t let independent, investigative journalism down are the people who actually care about its future—you.

And we need readers to show up for us big time—again.

Getting just 10 percent of the people who care enough about our work to be reading this blurb to part with a few bucks would be utterly transformative for us, and that's very much what we need to keep charging hard in this financially uncertain, high-stakes year.

If you can right now, please support the journalism you get from Mother Jones with a donation at whatever amount works for you. And please do it now, before you move on to whatever you're about to do next and think maybe you'll get to it later, because every gift matters and we really need to see a strong response if we're going to raise the $253,000 we need in less than three weeks.

payment methods

We Recommend

Latest

Sign up for our free newsletter

Subscribe to the Mother Jones Daily to have our top stories delivered directly to your inbox.

Get our award-winning magazine

Save big on a full year of investigations, ideas, and insights.

Subscribe

Support our journalism

Help Mother Jones' reporters dig deep with a tax-deductible donation.

Donate