The Latest on the Child Nutrition Bill

by: Jill Richardson

Wed Aug 11, 2010 at 20:49:39 PM PDT

Lincoln's Child Nutrition Bill Passes Full Senate

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Aug 05, 2010 at 13:34:30 PM PDT

Blanche Lincoln's child nutrition bill just passed the Senate by unanimous consent. My god. The Republicans don't mind apologizing to BP or taking all kinds of other wildly unpopular positions, but even they won't vote against feeding hungry children.

The bill is flawed, primarily in its lack of funding for healthy school lunches, but it brings the National School Lunch Program far closer to perfection in just about every other way. The bill is not yet ready for Obama's desk. First, the full House needs to vote on Rep. George Miller's child nutrition bill, a bill that is slightly more generous than Lincoln's but still underfunded, and then the two chambers must reconcile their versions of the bill. We still don't know how the House bill will be paid for, as it must be before reaching the House floor. Thus, the questions remaining are: How much money will child nutrition receive, and where will it come from? The other question, of course, is whether the bill will pass before the deadline of September 30, but if the Senate has passed its version, I am hopeful.

School Lunch Bill Passes House Committee, Includes Organic and Vegan Pilot Programs

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Jul 15, 2010 at 18:56:57 PM PDT

Some of the biggest news for me are two great new pilot programs established with amendments added yesterday. First, there is an organic foods pilot program that provides $10 million per year between 2011 and 2015 to selected schools with high low-income populations. That was proposed by Lynn Woolsey and Dennis Kucinich and it passed by a roll call vote. My hunch is that the funding is discretionary, which means that the Appropriations committee gets to decide whether to fund the program or not. I'm trying to find the roll call vote to see who voted or and against this but I don't think it's online yet.

Second, Jared Polis proposed a vegan (plant-based) foods pilot program, which passed in a voice vote. Some schools will participate in a program offering kids "plant based protein" (a.k.a. whole grains, nuts, beans, and veggies) and then they will evaluate which foods are superior in cost-effectiveness, marketability to school food authorities, ease of preparation and use, and acceptance by the kids. Yay! Awesome!

Last but hardly least, the bill includes $50 million in funding for Farm to School grants.

Update from Child Nutrition Markup So Far

by: Jill Richardson

Wed Jul 14, 2010 at 13:26:47 PM PDT

My former representative, Susan Davis, on the other hand, put forward an amendment (which I believe was accepted or will be) to automatically enroll any children in military families who are already in the military's version of food stamps in the school lunch program.

Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH) also introduced an amendment that was accepted that sets up a grant program to help low income kids get access to food during summers when school is out.

Kucinich (D-OH) and Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) just introduced an amendment to put organic foods into the school lunch program and made brilliant arguments for why it should be done. The Republicans, of course, complained that it would be too expensive. It will be up for a roll call vote later.

Rep. Wu (D-OR) put forward an amendment that would allow frozen fruits into the Fresh Fruits & Vegetables program. This amendment passed.

Rep. Petri (R-WI) submitted an amendment to allow schools to donate excess food to food banks. That amendment passed.

And, because pork can come in cranberry flavor, Rep. Petri (R-WI) asked that any standards limiting added sugars in foods did not limit cranberries. Wisconsin is the nation's top producer of cranberries. It's not a crazy idea, since cranberries are pretty healthy, even with a bit of sugar added. As Petri pointed out, sweetened cranberries can have less total sugar than unsweetened apple juice. The point there isn't that cranberries with sugar are awesome but that we should think twice before guzzling down big tall glasses of apple juice. Instead, serve kids apples.

Jared Polis introduced a measure to make vegetarian food available in schools as a pilot program. Kucinich spoke out very strongly for it.

They have also debated Miller's "Manager's Amendment," which I've included details about below.

I will update this post later once I'm more certain which amendments are in and out and what, specifically, the amendments actually do. Good on the Dems for smacking down Republicans who tried to cut money out of this bill.

BREAKING: House School Lunch Bill Introduced at Press Conference Featuring Rachael Ray

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Jun 10, 2010 at 09:07:32 AM PDT

It improves food safety for school food in a much needed way. A GAO report found last year that when foods were recalled, the steps to remove those foods from school meals weren't necessarily being taken. So that's good.

It also improves access to free meals to eligible children by allowing direct certification - if a kid gets Medicaid or SCHIP, they automatically qualify for free meals. Also, in high poverty areas, all the kids get free meals no matter what. That's HUGE because there's often a stigma to getting free meals, and sometimes kids who are entitled to them won't actually eat them because they are afraid of being made fun of by peers. Where there's universal access to free meals in high poverty areas, all the kids will eat so nobody has to worry about being uncool.

Unfortunately, the the increase in the school lunch reimbursement rate - the amount spent per kid per meal - only goes up by 6 cents. That's the same as in the Senate bill. It's not enough to make the changes we need in school food. Activists have called for increases between $.35 and $1.00, and I tend to think the amount needed is closer to $1.00.

This is a great bill in many respects and Rep. Miller is a wonderful representative whose intentions I don't doubt at all. I know he wants to help kids and I know he wants to improve lunches. So why do we have so much money for bailouts and wars but only 6 cents for our kids?

Why the Soda Lobby Was Happy... They Helped Write the Nutrition Rules

by: Jill Richardson

Fri Mar 26, 2010 at 22:27:01 PM PDT

U.S. Senator Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., Chairman of the U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, along with Senator Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, and Congresswoman Lynn Woolsey, D-Calif., today announced a major agreement between the food and beverage industry and public health and education groups on national school nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools.

Why is the junk food lobby at the table to make rules about nutrition? Would you have a criminal at the table to make laws about crime? The American Beverage Association, Coca Cola, Mars, Nestle, and PepsiCo were all included in negotiations for the new school lunch nutrition standards in Lincoln's child nutrition bill. Under the bill, the USDA will set one set of nutrition standards for all food sold in schools during the school day (including vending machines). This is a change from current laws, which forbid the USDA from setting rules over most food sold in schools outside of the federally-reimbursable school lunch (i.e. the meal served to kids who receive free lunch).

So here's the question: What did public health groups give up by negotiating with the junk food lobby? What do public health experts think the school nutrition standards should be, and how far apart is that from the actual language of the bill?  

Why is the Soda Lobby Happy?

by: Jill Richardson

Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 15:50:32 PM PDT

I realize that much of their spending is related to defeating a soda tax, but some of it is for school lunch and child nutrition programs too. They are scared shitless that Congress will ban vending machines from schools (a great idea!). Thus, they are promoting their own, voluntary, "self-regulation:"

The beverage industry is committed to the health and wellness of its consumers, including America's schoolchildren. Just this month, we announced the remarkable results of the final progress report on the implementation of our School Beverage Guidelines. The report shows that, when it comes to beverages, it's a whole new day in America's schools. In fact, we've removed full-calorie soft drinks and slashed beverage calories available in schools by 88 percent!

They don't mind cutting the calories because the same companies that sell soda (and diet soda) also sell water, juice, and sports drinks. So long as schools have vending machines with ANYTHING in them, these companies make money. Removing the calories doesn't harm the bottom line, but removing the vending machines does.

What I want to know is: what's in the Senate bill that the ABA likes so much? I've emailed the Center for Science in the Public Interest to see if they know anything. Also, I've included more on the ABA's lobbying below.

School Lunch Bill Passes Committee in Senate

by: Jill Richardson

Wed Mar 24, 2010 at 13:18:04 PM PDT

First, the bill went forward with $40 million for Farm to School. And second, Sherrod Brown is helping school lunch go organic:

An amendment by Senator Sherrod Brown (D-OH) was accepted by voice vote with no opposition to authorize an organic food pilot program that would provide competitively-awarded grants to school authorities to create pilot efforts to buy more organic foods for the school meal programs. The measure would still need to be funded by Agricultural Appropriations for the program to get off the ground.

The bill still only provides $4.5 billion in new money over 10 years (less than half of what Obama called for). Here's how they came up with the money:

The child nutrition reauthorization bill as reported out of Committee today also includes three funding cuts to offset the additional $4.5 billion being invested in school meals and nutrition programs. In addition to cuts to SNAP Ed, as the food stamp education program is now known, and the bonus commodity program, the bill cuts $2.8 billion in farm bill mandatory spending budget authority for the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) over the next ten years.

It seems that this would only give about $.06 extra to each kid's school lunch, raising the reimbursement rate from $2.68 to $2.74. The School Nutrition Association is asking for an extra $.35, which I believe is what is needed to help schools pay for the current (often crappy) school lunches they now serve. In other words, anything over $.35 goes to improve school lunch quality, and anything less means no improvement at all. We need an extra $1 per lunch to make school lunches really healthy. From everything I've seen about school lunch, I believe that it all REALLY does come down to money. So there are some good bits in the bill, but it's just not acceptable unless we get over $.35 added to the reimbursement rate.

The next step for this bill is the Senate floor. After it passes the full Senate, it will go to the House.  

More on the Lincoln School Lunch Bill.. and it Ain't Good

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 13:08:35 PM PDT

Part of the problem is that Congress passed a "PAYGO" rule (Pay as you go) requiring that any time they increase spending in one area, they find a way to pay for it by either taking money away from another area or by raising taxes. And obviously nobody wants to raise taxes. When Obama called for $10 billion over 10 years for child nutrition, he did not also provide Congress with $10 billion in cuts elsewhere in the budget. So it was left to Congress to figure out how to pay for it. And Lincoln - Senator of Factory Farms and Wal-Mart - decided to cut conservation spending. I'm positive there's any number of wasteful weapons programs out there that we can cut, and I would also like to see corporations pay their taxes (as many do not). Those to funding sources alone, if tapped, could probably pay for gourmet, all-organic meals for our kids.

The bill text and more details on the bill are available here. I had these links yesterday when I posted saying I didn't have the bill text. That's because the bill does not open when I download it. The other files do open though, so check those out.

UPDATE: I forgot to add that there will be a hearing on this on Wednesday, March 24. You can watch live via webcast from the Senate Ag Committee website.

School Lunch and WIC: We Have a Bill... Lots of Bills

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Mar 18, 2010 at 00:53:43 AM PDT

• S. 3123: Growing Farm to School Programs Act of 2010, introduced by Sen. Pat Leahy (D-VT) with 13 cosponsors.
• S. 3124, to reduce the paperwork burden on child care sponsors and providers, introduced by Sen. Amy Klobuchar (D-MN) with 1 cosponsor.
• S. 3126, a bill to promote wellness policies by Sen. Klobuchar (D-MN) with no cosponsors.
• S. 3127 a bill to require continual updating of foods provided under WIC by Sen. Klobuchar (D-MN) with no cosponsors.
• S. 3128, a bill to make all foster children automatically eligible for free breakfast and lunch by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) with no cosponsors.
• S. 3129, a bill to change WIC so that once qualified, participants are in the program for a year before they must be re-certified by Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand with no cosponsors.
• H.R. 4734 and S. 3040, a bill to improve summer meal programs by Rep. Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) and Sen. Lugar (R-IN) with 1 cosponsor in the House and 4 in the Senate.
• H.R. 4710: Farm to School Improvements Act of 2010 by Rep. Rush Holt (D-NJ) with 17 cosponsors.
• H.R.4638: The Healthy Start Act, a bill to provide $.05 in federal commodities for school breakfasts by Rep. Herseth-Sandlin (D-SD) with 10 cosponsors.
• H.R.4148: The Hunger Free Schools Act, a bill to provide direct certification for free breakfast and lunch by Rep. David Loebsack (D-IA) with 21 cosponsors.
• H.R. 3705: Expand School Meals Act, a bill to expand the number of children eligible for free school meals by Rep. Keith Ellison (D-MN) with 47 cosponsors. (It appears that this bill makes meals free for any children who are currently eligible for reduced cost meals.)
• H.R. 4402: The Nu­tri­tious Meals for Young Chil­dren Act and S.2749, a bill to improve access to food for young children in child care by Rep. Paul Tonko (D-NY) and Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand with 41 cosponsors in the House and 5 in the Senate.

What will probably happen is that most of these bills will die, and components of them will be folded into whichever bill ultimately becomes law. Lincoln's bill, which I don't think she's actually introduced yet (and the text of the bill is most certainly not available from the Library of Congress yet), has a darn good chance of ultimately becoming law. More on that below.

TODAY: House Hearing on Child Nutrition

by: Jill Richardson

Tue Mar 02, 2010 at 06:00:00 AM PST

Improving Children's Health: Strengthening Federal Child Nutrition Programs
Full Committee Hearing 2:30 PM, March 2, 2010

On Tuesday, March 2, the U.S. House Education and Labor Committee will hold a hearing on strengthening the federal nutrition and school meal programs through the upcoming the child nutrition reauthorization.  Improving federal child nutrition programs is one of the four pillars of First Lady Michelle Obama's recently announced "Let's Move" campaign to combat childhood obesity.

Witnesses:

• Dora R. Rivas President of the School Nutrition Association, Executive Director of Food and Child Nutrition Services Dallas Independent School District Dallas, Texas
  
• Carolyn L. Morrison President of the National Child and Adult Care Food Program Forum Chief Executive Officer of Child Development Services, Inc. Gresham, Oregon
  
• Kiran Saluja Deputy Director Public Health Foundation Enterprises, Inc. Irwindale, California

Additional witnesses to be announced.

Vilsack's Child Nutrition Priorities

by: Jill Richardson

Mon Feb 15, 2010 at 15:13:48 PM PST

Obama Proposes Budget, Pushes GMOs, and Falls Short on School Lunch Reform

by: Jill Richardson

Wed Feb 03, 2010 at 06:00:00 AM PST

Unlike other nutrition programs (such as food stamps) that are entitlements, WIC (Women, Infants, and Children) must have funds appropriated by Congress. For entitlement programs, the government spends as much money as it takes to pay for everyone who is eligible for the program. That's not the case for WIC. And when the economy is down (as it is now), the number of people eligible for WIC goes up. (To be eligible for WIC, you must be a pregnant or breastfeeding mom or a child under age 5 with a household income of less than 185% of the federal poverty level.)

After splitting out part of the extra $1 billion for WIC, according to Kim Severson of the New York Times, the remaining money for school lunch amounts to less than 20 cents per meal. Quite frankly, this is pathetic. The School Nutrition Association asked Congress for an extra 35 cents per meal, and I thought THAT was pathetic. This is far worse. Tom Philpott agrees (and cleverly references the Depression-era hit song "Brother, Can You Spare a Dime?"... or two dimes in this case).

In other parts of his proposed budget, Obama gives a record amount to ag & food research (much of which will go to biotech), money to promote agricultural exports, and (the one bright spot) conservation money for Chesapeake Bay.

Among the USDA's goals, he ironically lists "Ensure that all of America's children have access to safe, nutritious and balanced meals." (A great idea, if only he would fund it!) And, sadly, he says "Help America to promote agricultural production and biotechnology exports as America works to increase food security." Dumping cheap commodities on other countries to undermine their food sovereignty is bad in itself, but a specific emphasis on biotechnology by the Obama administration is especially upsetting.

See Obama's budget fact sheet below...

State of the Union's School Lunch: Nutrition as National Defense and Fiscal Health

by: Jill Richardson

Thu Jan 28, 2010 at 16:36:11 PM PST

State of the Union's School Lunch: Nutrition as National Defense and Fiscal Health

by Debra Eschmeyer

Don't make us tighten our belts on child nutrition programs while the girth of the nation grows. The government spends $1 million per soldier in Afghanistan, yet barely spends $1 on the food in a school lunch.

More below...

Vilsack Lays Out Priorities for Child Nutrition But Says Very Little

by: Jill Richardson

Sat Oct 31, 2009 at 14:49:54 PM PDT

In general, he wants three things. First, better access to school nutrition programs for children. Second, healthier school lunches. Third, less errors made by the federal government in managing the school lunch program.