Essay
Pippa Serleth
Model Legislature 2026
Pro:
HF 2737, the Hunger-Free Campus funding bill, should be passed because it
addresses student food insecurity across Minnesota colleges and universities. The
Minnesota Office of Higher Education oversees the Hunger-Free Campus grant
program, which helps schools operate food pantries, provide emergency grants, and
connect students to SNAP benefits. These services allow students to focus on
academics instead of worrying about their next meal. Research from the Hope Center
for College, Community, and Justice shows that many college students experience food
insecurity, which is linked to lower GPAs and higher dropout rates. When students lack
consistent access to food, their academic performance suffers. By funding this program,
Minnesota would support student success and improve graduation outcomes. Meeting
students' basic needs strengthens both individuals and the state’s future workforce. The
bill also promotes equity in higher education. Low-income and first-generation students
are disproportionately affected by rising living costs. Hunger-Free Campus grants
require outreach efforts that reduce stigma and make support accessible. State funding
ensures that smaller and rural campuses can participate, not just large universities with
bigger budgets. When students have reliable access to food, they are more likely to
complete their degrees and contribute to their communities. For these reasons, HF
2737 is a practical and compassionate investment in Minnesota’s future.
Sources: https://ohe.mn.gov/competitive-grants/hunger-free-campus
https://hope.temple.edu/research/hope-center-basic-needs-survey
Con:
Despite its positive intentions, some argue HF 2737 should not be passed because it
increases state spending. Funding would come from the general funds, meaning
taxpayers would bear the cost. The Minnesota Management and Budget emphasizes
balancing education funding with other priorities like healthcare and infrastructure.
Critics argue that colleges could fund food programs through tuition revenue, private
donations, or nonprofit partnerships instead of relying on state appropriations. During
times of budget uncertainty, expanding grant programs may not be fiscally responsible.
Opponents also question whether the bill addresses the root causes of student hunger.
The US Government Accountability Office has reported that many eligible students do
not fully access existing federal programs like SNAP due to complex rules. Rather than
adding new funding, some believe the state should focus on improving access to
current programs or reducing tuition and housing costs. Food pantries and emergency
grants may offer short-term relief but not long-term solutions. For these reasons, critics
argue HF 2737 may not be the most effective or sustainable approach.
Sources: https://mn.gov/mmb/budget/state-budget-overview/current-estimates/
https://www.gao.gov/products/gao-21-45