February 6, 2013

New Dept of Agriculture regulations will prohibit soda, candy, in nationalized local schools

And people thought I was joking 9-year ago when I predicted that, if we followed the governmental and regulatory trajectory we were on, we’d soon find ourselves having to do mandatory morning exercises in order to justify our (now “free”) health care.  The Hill (h/t Mark Levin):

The Obama administration proposed regulations Friday that would prohibit U.S. schools from selling unhealthy snacks.

The 160-page regulation from the Department of Agriculture (USDA) would enact nutrition standards for “competitive” foods not included in the official school meal.

In practice, the proposed rules would replace traditional potato chips with baked versions and candy with granola. Regular soda is out, though high-schoolers may have access to diet versions.
“Although nutrition standards for foods sold at school alone may not be a determining factor in children’s overall diets, they are critical to providing children with healthy food options throughout the entire school day,” the proposed rule states.

“Thus, these standards will help to ensure that the school nutrition environment does all that it can to promote healthy choice, and help to prevent diet-related health problems.”

The rules are a product of the 2010 Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, which also overhauled the nutritional make-up of regular school meals. They would apply to any school, public or private, that participates in the National School Lunch Program and the School Breakfast Program.

Those rules saw a backlash from conservative lawmakers who said students were going hungry as a result of calorie limits.

— Which is and was irrelevant, though useful as an objective correlative. Because what conservative lawmakers should have said is that schools are run locally, and that the federal government — and more specifically, a First Lady who routinely stuffs her own maw with red velvet cake and all manner of gourmet foods soaked in butter — has no business setting menus for the nation’s schools.  In fact, the very idea is preposterous and at odds with constitutional principles, not to mention an assault on parents and parental rights and responsibilities.

Were not the teachers’ unions and the Democrats — that is, big government — so inextricably tied, one imagines we’d see local school boards telling the feds to sod off, thanks. But they, too, are risk-averse and often disarmingly doctrinal, and when run by the left, they are always more than happy to get elected in order to turn their power over to the federal government. Like puppets.  Or the apostates who guarded Damien Thorn.

It seems as though, as with everything else promised by the left, the “free” public education your child gets comes with lots of strings attached — from the right of educators to nationalize curricula meant to indoctrinate their charges, to the federal bureaucracy’s determination that it is within their power to control over every aspect of children’s diets in a one-size-fits-all model of socially-engineered egalitarianism that, with some exceptions, leads to underfed, uninformed future low information voters.

Of course, my son goes to a charter school. So what business is this of mine?  Guess I’ll just shut up.



Posted by Jeff G. @ 12:52pm

Comments (43)

  1. Sort of off topic, but something interesting I encountered a few days ago: from Madison’s Notes on the Constitutional Convention, Sept. 14, 1787 (three days before the Convention adjourned and in a period tinkering with the powers granted Congress in the 8th section of Article I)

    *** Mr. MADISON & Mr. PINKNEY then moved to insert in the list of powers vested in Congress a power — “to establish an University, in which no preferences or distinctions should be allowed on account of Religion.”

    Mr. WILSON supported the motion

    Mr. GOVr. MORRIS. It is not necessary. The exclusive power at the Seat
    of Government, will reach the object.

    On the question

    N. H. no. Mas. no. Cont. divd. Dr. Johnson ay. Mr. Sherman no. N. J. no.
    Pa. ay. Del. no. Md. no. Va. ay. N. C. ay. S. C. ay. Geo. no. [17] ***

    And down to defeat it went. Phew, though, that was a close one.

  2. Unless they implement closed campuses at all schools, they’re just ensuring that nearby convenience stores will get more business. I recall that both of my middle schools & high school had many nearby options for procuring the type of food they’re banning on campus (and they were also student hang-outs).
    Also, how soon can we expect to see them defining which foods can & cannot be included in a packed lunch from home? My son’s former elementary school outlawed the obvious ones, such as candy, but what about cheetos and snack-cakes?

  3. providing children with healthy food options throughout the entire school day,

    Mandatory options, aren’t.

  4. Which bonus, for as Joe Biden tells us, the kids may get to learn a smattering of Hindi, Bengali, Gujarati, or if they’re really lucky a bit of Urdu, while they’re gathering up their cheery repasts.

  5. brb, have to sod off to MiniTrue to file a report on the chocolate ration

    going up from 300 to 250 grammes

  6. Back in the day, we didn’t even have vending machines in school. Mostly, students ate breakfast at home, brown bagged it or ate whatever was on the cafeteria menu that day for 50 cents or something (not sure, I was a brown bag kid. No way were my parents buying lunch for 5 kids every day!), and showed up at the table at dinner time if they wanted to avoid going to bed hungry.

    We could eat all the junk food we wanted, if that’s what we wanted to spend our 50 cents a week allowance on (candy bars were a nickle then, but I didn’t blow all my allowance on candy…not when there was a G.I. Joe to properly outfit, or a box of BB’s to buy). Popcorn was the main family treat, except for special occasions.

    What I’m getting at, this wouldn’t be a problem if it weren’t for the bigger problem of parents letting (and in the case of the vocal ones, demanding) the state take over their responsibilities. This seems to me like a cultural symptom of a generation that thinks never telling their kid “no” is a virtue.

  7. We had vending machines back in the Stone Age when I went to high school. It was a sport to beat the machine out of its goods. Put in a dime and get all the selected candies or chips the machine held. There was one that made the wrong change all the time. You came out money ahead when you bought anything out of it.

    Of course, we also went off campus at lunch and bought cigarettes out vending machines for 50 cents a pack at dive bars, too. The pay phones were by the cigarette vending machine, so there was none of that “Hey, kid! Get out of here!” business since no one tried to tell you that you couldn’t use the phone.

  8. Do you suppose the candy bar and soda pop racket will be a lucrative as the dope racket?

  9. Better watch out, the way the charters work here they’re still public schools. Which means that all the hippy-dippy rules apply, they just don’t have to go to court when a teacher wants to use chalk instead of a $30,000 “Smart Board”.

    They’ll have jelly banned in no time.

  10. Yes it will, Ernst. It’s already happening in some schools. Some of the teachers are in on it, as well.

  11. The USDA was established to collect and distribute new and better seed varieties across the country, and to collect and distribute statistics on crops and prices. The fact that today it’s in charge of determining what sort of foods and drinks local school districts may provide to their students is all the evidence we need to prove that the Department is way, way off the rails and needs to be dissolved.

    (As do DHS, Ed, Energy, HUD, HHS, and Labor. Transportation, Commerce, and Interior can stay, provided we yank about 3/4 of their funding.)

  12. Batter up, Outlaws. New regulations on food labeling are on the horizon. More in depth information about what Safeway, et al, put in their storemade donuts, breads, salad dressings, deli salads and the like.

    Prices will be adjusted accordingly. Upward.

  13. Wow. You’d think local communities could work out local kids should be allowed to bring into a school in terms of foodstuff.

  14. The Progressives simply ask themselves “What can’t we take away from you?” And answer, in principle: “Nothing is beyond our reach.”

  15. Batter up, Outlaws.

    Now I feel like somebody’s fixin’ to throw us into a deep fryer.

  16. That’s the first thing I thought of too, Squid.

  17. What us, calamari?

  18. just no coconut oil

  19. “Parents and teachers work hard to instill healthy eating habits in our kids, and these efforts should be supported when kids walk through the schoolhouse door,” he said Friday in a statement.

    this is a lie and you Tom Vilsack are a filthy fascist liar

  20. Teachers give candy as rewards to the kids.

    Something wrong here.

  21. The Land of the Decree and the Home of the Slave

  22. Teachers give candy as rewards to the kids.

    edu.commie penalizes kids for imaginary guns

  23. There is nothing they can’t reach into, nothing they can’t do to you. Just watch them go.

  24. these people are compulsively obsessed with raising the cost of food

    it’s some serious anti-christ shit

  25. The Egyptian government has its peoples to eat less, already.

    A sort of coming attraction for us.

  26. *instructed* its people

  27. Speaking of coming [un]attractions, check out the furor in merry old England. Can’t see what they’re all upset about though, since none of those folk look like immigrants to me.

  28. The NHS has issued an apology. Really, what more do those people want?

  29. that NHS is full of mischief I tell you what

    buncha silly socialist pranky pranky pranksters

  30. Especially sad since the government does not seem to know beans about good nutrition.

    Ever since I read Gary Taubes’ “Why We Get Fat – and What to Do About It”, I’ve been distrustful of the gubmint’s advice on what to put in my pie hole.

    Of course, reading history makes me distrustful of government as kind of a default position…

  31. But Parker — the government has experts!

  32. Well, I did learn that my tinfoil hat has to have the shiny side OUT from a government expert – so I do listen to them when it really counts.

  33. It’s a good thing there are no health problems associated with drinking diet soda.

  34. John, it’s not just diet sodas. Any kind of soda taken in large quantity over long periods will lead to a host of health problems.

    I do agree that diet sodas ought to have a skull and crossbones on the label.

  35. Come on, guys, read the thread.

    Just turn the shiny side OUT and you’ll be fine!

  36. I know. I just found it ironic that the USDA will not let high schoolers have sugar drinks but will let them have access to drinks with other KNOWN health problems. Particularly, depression.

  37. I agree.

    It’s difficult not to stand up and say “Are you out of your fucking mind!?” when you see mothers order diet colas for their little ones. All because sugar is the E-vil.

  38. Once again an example of the failure to respect ..
    The Public’s Right to NO
    … that is protected by the 9th Amendment.

  39. There is something about correlation and causation that needs to be pointed out.

  40. Artificial sweetners have long been known to be hazardous. They are cumulative in the organs of the body.

    It’s analogous to booze and liver problems. Apply enough booze over a long enough period of time resulting in impaired hepatic function.

  41. i believe in crystal light cause i believe in me

  42. Pingback: The NeoSexist · Today’s Quick Hits: 2013-02-07