John and Zach attend different schools in different school districts. John eats fatty, unhealthy foods excessively. He consumes cheeseburgers, fries, chips, milkshakes, and other non-nutritive foods more than he should in a day. When he gets lunch at school, he always eats the unhealthy items. John gains weight from a substantial amount of excessive eating. Zach also consumes unhealthy foods like John. But Zach eats only once a day. He does not eat breakfast or lunch at school, nor does he take snacks. Finding the school breakfast and lunch food disgusting, he does not eat at school and fails to eat breakfast at home and pack a lunch in the morning. Instead, he eats a huge meal once he gets home from school and does not eat again until the next day. Zach gains weight from not eating enough throughout the day, therefore slowing his metabolism. Zach also gains weight from eating many unhealthy foods as soon as he gets home from school. Both boys have one thing in common, obesity, an issue encompassing many children in the United States today. Obesity is defined as someone being "20 % over their ideal weight. [The] ideal weight must take into account the person's height, age, sex, and build" (MedicineNet, 1). Many students are becoming obese at a young ages. With the increase of school funding deficiencies nationwide, schools are underfunded when it comes to buying technology to cook hot, fresh, good, healthy foods, paying chefs to cook for students, and paying teachers to teach nutrition classes. As with John, if schools offered good-tasting, healthy foods in the cafeteria, he may have chosen to eat healthier items. If more classes on nutrition were being taught in the school where John and Zach attended, they would have learned more about what foods are essential to a healthy diet, what foods harm the body, and the body's metabolism, how it significantly impacts weight loss and gain in addition to what one eats. An increase in school funding deficiencies aided by local and national governments can reduce the problem of childhood obesity, protecting our futures' health. 

Childhood obesity is also greatly affected by the enormous amount of poor schools in this country. Students attending low-income schools are not able to eat healthy because the schools cannot afford to buy products. Without necessary funds to buy food that will give students the best nourishment, schools lose the opportunity to provide for their kids. This recurring chain of events is what fuels the childhood obesity epidemic throughout the nation. Increasing the amount of money schools receive will keep this issue from spreading and prevent obesity from occurring any more.

School funding has significantly decreased over the years. Local, state, and national governments are not giving school districts enough money to evenly distribute to schools within the district and support them in their financial endeavors. Katherine E. Baird in "Federal Direct Expenditures and School Funding Disparities, 1990-2001" points out that governments are not proactive enough in settling the financial issue. This source claims "federal direct spending, in practice, is not well targeted to districts (and students) with the greatest need for federal dollars" (Baird 309). Insufficient funds lead to a low distribution to every school in the district, restricting the amount, quality, and quantity of items used at each school. With this being the issue, schools are not able to buy technology compatible for making hot, nutritious foods, reducing the quality of food produced, pushing students away from healthy food and increasing obesity. 

In order to get the government more involved in funding and prevent childhood obesity from increasing, the source of money distributed to schools needs to be determined. According to "Sources of Funding for Schools" by Penny L. Howell and Barbara B. Miller, schools are provided with money from property taxes, income taxes, state taxes, bonds, and lotteries (Howell 40). Although people pay taxes to the government to better infrastructure, education, military, and other nationwide needs, enough money is not adequately distributed to these schools to support their needs. In 2016, only 15% of local, state, and federal government money combined is spent on education (Chantrill, 1). The money set aside for school districts after money is distributed to infrastructure and other government necessities is not sufficient to support a growing community of students. 

The lack of substantial support by local, state, and national governments to give school districts more money is shown in Chang et al.'s "Geographic Disparity in Funding for School Nutrition Environments." In this source, the authors discuss the relationship between surrounding demographics of school districts in Mississippi and the amount of money school districts receive to provide for students. After studying 811 schools in Mississippi, the authors conclude, "funds obtained by schools for advanced food preparation technology contributes to creation of healthier nutrition environments for children. However, fund availability is associated with community characteristics, possibly contributing to geographic disparity of child health" (Chang 127). In other words, schools without much money due to the demographics of the surrounding community suffer more than other schools. Only 55.6% of 811 schools observed were able to buy technology to produce fresh, healthy meals for their students. Schools with low student populations and located in low-income areas are affected severely by a lack of money, leading to childhood obesity and an unfit future. They need more support from the government to provide for students. But because they are given the same amount of money as the other schools, their kids suffer more and have higher percentages of obesity. A bigger presence of local and national governments in distributing to money to schools is necessary to benefit our students, our children. 

The local, state, and national government uses money to pay for numerous events. The order of importance in regards to money distribution throughout the nation to protect and provide for the people goes pensions, health care, education, defense, welfare, protection, transportation, general government, and other spending, a total of $6.7 trillion dollars (Chantrill 1). On this list, education comes third in the priority list for government spending. Even though education is ranked high on the priority list for government spending, and a substantial amount of money is given to schools collectively, a sufficient amount of money to provide for each school in each district individually is not given, especially those schools less fortunate than others. Yes, governments do have to work with a budget, but government subsidies can enforce organization sponsorships and make them interact with school funding in their communities. Organizations in the community can help the government provide for schools and defeat the increase in childhood obesity. 

Local, state, and national governments understand the problem between school funding deficiencies and childhood obesity, but they do not execute a plan that will give enough money to school districts to consistently produce hot, fresh, tasteful, healthy foods children want to eat. Even though governments are not giving enough money to buy quality technology and produce healthy foods, some efforts are being made by organizations to promote healthy eating and decrease the increasing childhood obesity rate. In local Richland County School District One, district administrators Imogene Clarke and Juanita Bowens-Seabrook have implemented the Healthier U.S. School Challenge to all of the district's schools. This challenge is administered by Team Nutrition, a USDA Food and Nutrition Service to support the Child Nutrition Programs. In this challenge, schools are awarded for achieving Gold status if students try new, healthier foods and refrain from eating snacks and drinking sodas. Being awarded Gold status is the highest award participants of this challenge can receive, so receiving this award aims to make students proud of what they have accomplished and makes them work harder to maintain this award (Godfrey, 214). In "School Nutrition Programs and the Incidence of Childhood Obesity, "Daniel L. Millimet, Rusty Tchernis, and Muna Husain researched the correlation between the School Breakfast Program (SBP), National Lunch Program (NSLP), and their effect on childhood obesity. Results found that, "the analysis does not point to the SBP as a contributing factor to the current obesity epidemic, and the SBP may actually constitute a valuable tool in the battle, but the NSLP is contributing to the problem" (Millimet 653). The quality of breakfast and lunch items served at schools was the reason obesity rates were increasing in children. Because of this, it is up to local, state, and national governments to find a way to give school districts sufficient funds to be able to provide for students, giving them healthy meals to choose from and shaping a healthy future. 

Some people disagree on the cause of increasing childhood obesity rates throughout the nation and worldwide. People blame the child's laziness and choice of unhealthy eating to explain why obesity has increased significantly over the years. It is up to the individual to take control of their bodies. They claim if students paid attention to their caloric intake, the sugars and fats consumed on a daily basis, the quality of food consumed, and how much they exercise, they would not be obese people. Students make themselves unhealthy, unfit people by not actively engaging in the balance between food and exercise, and that is where they fall short in staying healthy, fit, and in shape. In "A Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing Contributes to Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done," Harris et al. argue that marketing techniques are the sole cause for why kids are becoming obese. They claim advertisements are making children want to eat unhealthy foods because of the atmosphere, attitudes, and feelings associated with the food (Harris 211). Food organizations will advertise the sale of their product by making a commercial that shows people having a great time eating that particular food, making children eager to buy that food and eat it too. When kids watch TV, they form "positive associations [that] are assumed to develop over time. Every interaction with a brand is designed to reinforce these associations, from watching an enjoyable commercial ... , to viewing a favorite celebrity using the product, to using a brand logo on a sign during a sporting event, to actually consuming the product" (Harris 215). Not only do advertisements on TV advocate the consumption of unhealthy foods, but advertisements at sporting events also supports the argument that marketing techniques greatly impact childhood obesity. When food organizations sponsor different sporting events, an excessive amount of their product is served at the games, making it easier for people to buy the food, eat it, and want more. Without marketing techniques such as food advertising on commercials and at numerous sporting events, Harris et al. believes that the youth and young adults will have a much healthier future. They will not feel pressured to eat these foods if advertisements outlined the implications and consequences of eating this item. Essentially, children are ignorant of what is good to eat. They are more prone to eat anything they believe will taste good because it is the norm and done by everyone else around them, stemming childhood obesity. If more money was given to school districts to provide nutritive resources to each of the schools, students would not be influenced by advertisements. They would know what was good for them, what was not, and what they could consume at a low amount. 

People also claim that childhood obesity does not stem from lack of government participation, laziness by the child, or marketing techniques, but is due to the child's home life. Some believe that by the time a child reaches public school, their eating habits are already in place. Whatever they eat at home on a regular basis will become habitual and transfer to how they eat when not at home. If parents at home do not feed their kids regularly, and when they do feed them, only feed them fast food and not enough nutrients, their children are always going to choose to eat what is familiar to them. They will choose to eat the unhealthy foods that lead to obesity at a very young age. 

Even though the government does not give enough money to schools to help buy technology that will produce fresh foods and implement programs to teach children about healthy eating habits and obesity, the government has put in some effort to decrease obesity rates nationwide. In Omaha, a healthcare organization for children called ChildrensOmaha implemented a program to help students learn about nutrition and choose to live better, healthier lives. This organization went into the schools of many school districts in Omaha and interacted with each child. They taught them exercises and discussed the many foods and food choices they could eat to be healthy, fit students (ChildrensOmaha). Steps have been taken to try and improve obesity, but these steps still are not effectively decreasing obesity rates. 

 In 2010, First Lady Michelle Obama also came up with a plan called Let's Move to prevent childhood obesity rates from increasing in the future. This plan consists of serving healthier foods in schools, helping parents make healthier family choices, and doubling the number of schools participating in the Healthier U.S. School Challenge, making healthy food affordable, increasing physical activity, and implementing a partnership with states to create a healthier America. Michelle Obama's Let's Move plan has reduced the kind of snack served at schools and taken one step towards decreasing childhood obesity. But enough support is not being done from the government to affectively implement this plan nationwide and get children to eat throughout the day. In addition to eating unhealthy foods, students do not eat enough during the day to fuel their bodies and keep their metabolisms running. A slow metabolism paired with unhealthy eating leads to obesity, and government efforts are not ensuring students are consuming food at least three times along with eating healthy. Students are not eating consistently like they should because the food is tasteless. Although Michelle Obama's efforts have changed what is being served at schools, how much students exercise, the affordability of healthy food, and more, there needs to be a way to make sure students are constantly eating and burning calories to raise their metabolism, lose weight, and prevent obesity. 

With more financial support from the government, schools can buy technology and pay chefs to cook healthy, tasteful, fresh meals students would be willing to eat. More money would also pay teachers to specifically teach nutrition and metabolism classes. Students are ignorant of the way the body works, the relationship between what is consumed and used and what is released. They need guidance to know what to feed their bodies and how many times they need to eat during the day to boost their metabolisms. People may counter this argument and say that schools cannot make students eat if they do not want to because of personal preferences and health issues, but students can become more educated about this topic and hopefully learn to make better decisions. 

 Returning to the issue with John and Zack, it is imperative both boys are educated about their eating habits. They need guidance on what to feed their bodies and what not to feed their bodies. With more money from local and national governments to buy technology to produce fresh, tasty food and pay teachers to teach nutrition and metabolism classes, John can learn that consistently feeding his body unhealthy food is detrimental to his health. He will understand that he cannot keep eating such items on a regular basis if he wants to become healthy and shape a bright, fit future ahead of him. Zach will also learn more about the relationship between food consumption, metabolism, and how this relationship greatly affects obesity. Hopefully he will understand that he has to eat several times a day to keep his metabolism going, helping burn off the foods he has consumed. More money from governments, tasty, nutritious food, and classes on nutrition and metabolism will keep students from being succumbed to eat unhealthy items when watching TV and going to sporting events. It will also help them change their eating habits and know what is better for them if they have been trained to eat improperly. An increase in money given to school districts by local and national governments will decrease the increasing rates of childhood obesity and prevent them from rising again, shaping a fit future. 

