The bill is correct that a child who is not responsible for funding their lunch should be shamed by the school for being unable to pay that day. The problem with the bill is that it addresses a symptom of a much more complicated issue. Will the child be abused by parents because of a letter that the school is forcing the child to stay at home? Why can't the government just provide funding for a standard lunch? It would probably cost nearly the same amount of money as it will cost just to vote on this bill.