PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Referred to the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities.
Congressional Research Service
Version 00 · Introduced in House · Dec 10, 2009
Ensuring All Students Year-round (EASY) Access to Meals and Snacks Act - Amends the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to reimburse private nonprofit and local government service institutions (other than public schools) under the school lunch program for up to one meal and one snack per child each day during after-school hours, weekends, and school holidays during the regular school calendar. (Currently, such institutions are reimbursed for meals and snacks served to children over the summer months or to children who are on vacation under a continuous school calendar.)
People & committees
Rep. Larsen, Rick [D-WA-2] · D–WA
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Aug 14, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.4274 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.4274 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.4274 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.4274 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.