Quoted Text

New lunch law may pinch schools Officials fret about pricey, possibly wasted foods
BY MICHAEL GOOT Gazette Reporter

    New federal guidelines being developed may force school districts to do what parents cannot — get children to eat their vegetables.
    Bake sales, already on the decline in schools, could also be on the way out as a result of a children’s nutrition bill President Barack Obama signed last month.
    The law, which is offi cially called the Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act, will require the U.S. Department of Agriculture to issue mandatory national standards for all foods sold on the school campus, which includes vending machines, bake sales and school stores.
    The department is also developing voluntary regulations for school meals — to be effective in the 2012-13 school year — which would lower calorie content, reduce sodium and fat and offer more whole grain foods and fresh fruits and vegetables in lunchroom meals. The bill’s passage was particularly important for fi rst lady Michelle Obama, an advocate for reducing childhood obesity.
    Education officials are already worried that the legislation will be a fi nancial burden.
    “It’s another mandate that will cost districts more money,” said Broadalbin-Perth Superintendent Stephen Tomlinson, who added he supports the goal of increasing students’ nutritional health.
    However, that increased cost may have to be passed along in the price of school breakfasts and lunches, according to Tomlinson.
    “At a time when we’re being asked by the governor to streamline and be more efficient in how we do business, it seems like these types of things are being overlooked.”
    New York State School Boards Association spokesman Brian Butry said the organization considers the new law an infringement on local control.
    “If government is going to pass a mandate like this — as well-intentioned as it may be — let’s make sure it’s paid for and you’re not putting an additional fi nancial burden on school districts at a time when they can least afford it.”
    The legislation authorizes $4.5 billion in spending, including reimbursements for school lunch programs during the decade. This represents a modest increase, but Butry said that is not suffi cient for districts to comply with higher standards. The full impact may not be felt for some time, he said.
    One increased expense for districts will likely be produce. Students now are offered either a fruit or vegetable a day, but the new regulation will require that students actually take one, according to Kim Gagnon, food service director for the Mohonasen Central School District.
    “Whether they eat it or not, I don’t know,” she said. “I’m hoping it works and gets the kids to try to eat the fruits and vegetables, but I’m not sure it will.”
    The district spends about $35,000 a year on fruits and vegetables. That cost could double with the new requirement, Gagnon said. “It’s not like I could get rid of staff because I’m going to need the additional staff to help put that out,” she said. “I can’t see us cutting back on anything else to replace that.”
    She noted that a lot of the other requirements, such as increasing whole grains, getting away from trans fats and lowering fat content, have already been implemented because school officials knew that changes were coming. The district also only serves desserts and sweets on holidays and special occasions, and then it is usually Jell-O or pudding.
    “The funny part is the kids haven’t complained as much as the adults have,” she said. ....................>>>>..........................>>>>..............http://www.dailygazette.net/De.....00903&AppName=1#

This type of nanny state control over our lives must stop or next we'll all be riding bicycles and cars will be banned.

City school children need a little help.  For many the only food they will get will be at school.  The guidelines are probably beneficial to them.

It shouldn't cost ANYTHING....we subsidize our farmers....we pay them NOT to grow and leave land fallow..they can kiss my American A$$

k

There is a huge difference between American Veggies and Conservative Veggies that is pertinent to this discussion.

While American veggies like carrots, peas, corn etc are pretty mainstream...
Conservative veggies (as defined by Ronald Reagan) are much less universal... Remember the Ronny Reagan veggie... catchup?  Picture a plate full of Conservative veggies if they were served at a restaurant...
Catchup, relish, and a little mustard... The Conservative food pyramid!  

Oh I think not only should the schools serve veggies, they should also give these kids a ONE-A-DAY Vitamin daily. They should also provide breakfast, lunch, dinner and healthy snacks. A warm shower daily with soap and shampoo provided. They should provide tooth paste, tooth brushes, hair brushes and deodorant if needed. Girls should be provided with feminine hygiene products and boys with condoms. Teachers should be willing to stay after school to do homework with the kids too. They should also provide money to these kids to buy their family birthday, mother's day/father's day cards and gifts. They should also provide one paid vacation a year to Disney for the kids who's parents can't afford it. They should also provide a clothing allowance for these kids too. Cell phones and laptops should also be supplied at no cost for these kids who can't afford them.Oh, and they should also provide a warm bed to sleep at night, cause some of these kids don't have that either.

Hey, the discount stores, second hand shops, non profits, churches and the billions going into the welfare programs just aren't cutting it. Perhaps the schools can now.....yes?

These are great idea BT.  I will forward them to Cuomo's office for his reflection.

This is a very difficult issue.

If the schools have all the sugary or salty, or processed foods, the kids will grow up with health problems and you know the kids who get the school breakfasts and lunches are the ones who are from low income families who are getting public assistance.  So the kids will grow up with the health problems and we will pay for their health problems.

Yes, for many, school would be the only place they get good fresh vegetables.

I like bumbles saracastic comment, but he's not far off.  Think about it.  There's that coats for kids program that is advertised a lot.  I often wonder how the parents who go get the coats for their kids, how come those parents have no money to buy coats, hats, and mittens for their kids, but they do have money to buy all kinds of electronic toys for the home, or they are paying rent-a-center?    

How about a change in the electronic food stamp cards.  Since it is possible to program those cards so people can't purchase the hot panini sandwiches at the supermarket (but they can buy their own ingredients to bring home to make them with), how about those cards be programmed to disallow purchases of canned vegetables, kool-aid, the frozen entree foods, the canned spaghettio's, cereal with sugar in excess of certain amounts, the potatos chips and other junk foods, and those boxes of hamburger helper like foods.   The WIC program actually specifies what to buy and how much to insure that the very young children get milk, the real juices, and good cereals, etc.   I'm not really suggesting that people get WIC like stuff for all their foods, I mean, don't have a program that specifies one pound of carrots when perhaps the familiy might prefer one pound of asparagus.  If the food stamp cards were programmed better, the family could choose the (fresh) carrots vs the (fresh) asparagus.  But disallow the high sodium canned version of these.  

Also, they get cash on their electronic cards.  I think that should be programmed so they can't actually "withdraw" cash, but rather the cards could be programmed for approved uses, such as buying clothing, but couldn't be used to pay rent-a-center or cable TV bills, or for the purchase of TV's nor for fingernail painting.

When I was a child, and both my parents worked full time (a blue collar and a pink collar job, i.e., not rich white collar jobs) and yet we were fed breakfast at the kitchen table every day, healthy breakfasts.  Mom made lunches for all four of us too, who remembers the metal lunch boxes?   I think I remember getting milk in the thermos until milk started getting sold in the school, a half pint for a nickel.  I think buying the milk in school was better because it was refrigerated, rather than being in the thermos all morning.  But that freed up the thermos for soup in the winter.  Our luches were usually a sandwich (with lettuce and sometimes tomato on it), a piece of fruit, and a maybe three cookies wrapped in plastic wrap (I don't think they had baggies then).  Rarely did we get potato chips in our lunches.  And every day we all sat around the table for dinner -- if it was mashed potatoes, they were made from scratch, not instant.  Ditto for rice.  I really don't even remember seeing canned vegetables.  

So, how "these people" and their advocates can claim that parents don't have time to give their children breakfast and make their lunches, I don't know.  


If parents feed their children unhealthy stuff, if parents purchase TV's instead of coats for their kids, etc, wouldn't that be neglecting one's children?   Don't we have a child protective system that can charge parents with neglect?  But is neglect ever charged for these reasons?  Hey, I know there are not enough staff in that system to deal even with the kids who are really abused, and the kids in the PINs program etc.  But just perhaps giving people things to ponder.  Is it the wisest use of our tax dollars to give handouts to people who won't clothe their kids properly but will use their taxpayer handouts to buy a flat screen TV but then they are not charged with neglect of their children (primarily beause there is not adequate CPS staff to address these types of neglect)?

Quoted from mikechristine1

This is a very difficult issue.

If the schools have all the sugary or salty, or processed foods, the kids will grow up with health problems and you know the kids who get the school breakfasts and lunches are the ones who are from low income families who are getting public assistance.  So the kids will grow up with the health problems and we will pay for their health problems.

Yes, for many, school would be the only place they get good fresh vegetables.

I like bumbles saracastic comment, but he's not far off.  Think about it.  There's that coats for kids program that is advertised a lot.  I often wonder how the parents who go get the coats for their kids, how come those parents have no money to buy coats, hats, and mittens for their kids, but they do have money to buy all kinds of electronic toys for the home, or they are paying rent-a-center?    

How about a change in the electronic food stamp cards.  Since it is possible to program those cards so people can't purchase the hot panini sandwiches at the supermarket (but they can buy their own ingredients to bring home to make them with), how about those cards be programmed to disallow purchases of canned vegetables, kool-aid, the frozen entree foods, the canned spaghettio's, cereal with sugar in excess of certain amounts, the potatos chips and other junk foods, and those boxes of hamburger helper like foods.   The WIC program actually specifies what to buy and how much to insure that the very young children get milk, the real juices, and good cereals, etc.   I'm not really suggesting that people get WIC like stuff for all their foods, I mean, don't have a program that specifies one pound of carrots when perhaps the familiy might prefer one pound of asparagus.  If the food stamp cards were programmed better, the family could choose the (fresh) carrots vs the (fresh) asparagus.  But disallow the high sodium canned version of these.  

Also, they get cash on their electronic cards.  I think that should be programmed so they can't actually "withdraw" cash, but rather the cards could be programmed for approved uses, such as buying clothing, but couldn't be used to pay rent-a-center or cable TV bills, or for the purchase of TV's nor for fingernail painting.

When I was a child, and both my parents worked full time (a blue collar and a pink collar job, i.e., not rich white collar jobs) and yet we were fed breakfast at the kitchen table every day, healthy breakfasts.  Mom made lunches for all four of us too, who remembers the metal lunch boxes?   I think I remember getting milk in the thermos until milk started getting sold in the school, a half pint for a nickel.  I think buying the milk in school was better because it was refrigerated, rather than being in the thermos all morning.  But that freed up the thermos for soup in the winter.  Our luches were usually a sandwich (with lettuce and sometimes tomato on it), a piece of fruit, and a maybe three cookies wrapped in plastic wrap (I don't think they had baggies then).  Rarely did we get potato chips in our lunches.  And every day we all sat around the table for dinner -- if it was mashed potatoes, they were made from scratch, not instant.  Ditto for rice.  I really don't even remember seeing canned vegetables.  

So, how "these people" and their advocates can claim that parents don't have time to give their children breakfast and make their lunches, I don't know.  


If parents feed their children unhealthy stuff, if parents purchase TV's instead of coats for their kids, etc, wouldn't that be neglecting one's children?   Don't we have a child protective system that can charge parents with neglect?  But is neglect ever charged for these reasons?  Hey, I know there are not enough staff in that system to deal even with the kids who are really abused, and the kids in the PINs program etc.  But just perhaps giving people things to ponder.  Is it the wisest use of our tax dollars to give handouts to people who won't clothe their kids properly but will use their taxpayer handouts to buy a flat screen TV but then they are not charged with neglect of their children (primarily beause there is not adequate CPS staff to address these types of neglect)?

It is not the government's role to provide ANY of these 'services/products'. They are 'personal' under the heading of 'personal choice'.
it is the government's role to protect the countries boarders. It is also their job to maintain a strong military for defense.  It is the government's role to provide a safe environment supported by infrastructure to encourage and promote jobs and job creation for all of it's citizens.

Government hand out programs are at an all time high in this country. So obviously the government is failing it's citizens.

Too many parents today don't know how to cook a decent meal so everything they provide their kids is fast food full of salt, fat, and lacking in nutrition. The kids today sit on their butts and play video games instead of going out and exercise the way we used to do as kids. It's the parents responsibility to provide their kids with healthy food choices not the governments.

Quoted from Shadow

Too many parents today don't know how to cook a decent meal so everything they provide their kids is fast food full of salt, fat, and lacking in nutrition. The kids today sit on their butts and play video games instead of going out and exercise the way we used to do as kids. It's the parents responsibility to provide their kids with healthy food choices not the governments.

It is what it is shadow. This is the life style that has been gradually created by both the government and businesses. You can't go backwards. Ya can't go back to the 'days of old'. It is what it is today. The government and the businesses knew darn well what the backlash would be for future generations. They didn't know that mcdonalds food wasn't healthy a decades ago?  palllllllleeeeeezzzz!

It's here....It was created by design.....people buy it......it is what it is!

A couple less Burger King meals, lottery tix and a couple less Itunes and cell phone minutes and they would have the money to eat right. They are just too stupid and careless about life to do that. "Urban" culture is a wonderful thing.

The problem is not limited to school lunches. These lunches have been horrible for decades. We have a exploding child obesity problem. Physical Education should be mandatory through college and much more rigorous. Every kid should participate in some sport. More kids need to go to summer camp and ski/ skate in the winter. Walking to school like back in the day would be very beneficial. This is another issue where throwing money doesn't work. Yes, a more balanced diet but that's only half the problem.

It really doesn't matter if you put MORE vegetables on a child's plate. It matters if that child actually EATS the vegetables. That has to happen with guidance and education, not simply a spoon of green beans on a plate.

I never ate the veggies way back when I was in elementary school, but I also didn't have my own tv or any 24 hr cartoon stations. Gym and recess were everyday and ultimately, we were pretty active kids.  

Like Benny says, you need to involve exercise with better food choices.