It might be lower than tat some points in the past, but that is great. Just like it's great that a smaller share of our population is engaged in agriculture than in the past: resources are free for other pursuits.
> (this means that other nations are spending far less than they need to).
Or, it means that civilization is advancing , and the needed level as a share of total output is declining.
> You're also begging the question of whether or not providing lunches to schoolchildren is a federal responsibility. Reading the list of enumerated powers of the United States[0], unless you squint really hard and figure that it's necessary & proper to provide school lunches in order to 'raise & support Armies,' since malnourished children won't grow up to be good soldiers.
Actually, there's a much better argument for federal involvement in funding and prescribing anything attached to public education including school lunches in the militia clause, if you insist on seeing it through a military lens rather than a commercial one.
You could similarly argue that by reducing Social Security & non-school-lunch welfare spending, the school-lunch programme could be increased.
You're also begging the question of whether or not providing lunches to schoolchildren is a federal responsibility. Reading the list of enumerated powers of the United States[0] it really isn't, unless you squint really hard and figure that it's necessary & proper to provide school lunches in order to 'raise & support Armies,' since malnourished children won't grow up to be good soldiers. But if that's the case … then the school lunch programme is part of the defence budget!
[0]: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Enumerated_powers_(United_Stat...