More

Featuring fresh takes and real-time analysis from HuffPost's signature lineup of contributors
Debra Eschmeyer

Debra Eschmeyer

Posted: November 22, 2010 04:02 PM

We are preparing for the most thoroughly planned meal in America, and it's not Thanksgiving dinner. It's school lunch.

Once every five years school meals are put on the Congressional kitchen's front burner through reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Act. In the process of cooking up this legislation, school meals have been researched, reviewed, rallied for and railed against. And while the resulting stuffed turkey that is the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids' Act, is not perfect, it's pretty darn good.

Congress must stick a fork in the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act during the lame-duck session, get it done and finally serve the kids. 2010-11-22-RasaCNRv.4.jpg

For the last two years, advocates, lobbyists, politicians, and celebrities from Rachael Ray to Michelle Obama have worked to craft a bill that will daily affect the lives of the 31 million children who clamor to the nation's school cafeterias to quell their grumbling bellies. For this bill to pass, over the next few days we the people must prove to our elected officials that the Child Nutrition Act is a national priority.

This past September marked our country's first National Childhood Obesity Awareness Month. Yet while one in three U.S. children are obese or overweight, one in four struggle with hunger. The U.S. Department of Agriculture's Economic Research Service (USDA-ERS) reported last week that more than 50 million Americans, including more than 17 million children, are food insecure - meaning they lack consistent access to a nutritious, well-balanced diet.

Simultaneous hunger and obesity may seem like a paradox, but the root cause is the same: lack of access to healthy food. Give children nourishing food in the cafeteria, nutrition education in the classroom, and hands-on learning through school gardens, and a lifetime of healthy eating can take root.

We need to show our support for House passage of the $4.5 billion child nutrition bill that passed the Senate earlier this year. If the bill isn't on the president's desk soon, supporters will have to start over in the new Congress. It's like dropping the turkey in front of all the seated family and friends.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act offers a real chance to improve nutrition for all children. By improving opportunities for healthy meals in and out of school, the bill would take an important step towards addressing both child hunger and obesity.

Unanimously passed by the Senate and supported by more than 1,300 national, state and local organizations, the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act (S. 3307) will:

• Improve school meals;
• Support farmers through Farm to School programs;
• Address skyrocketing obesity rates; and
• Feed more hungry children.

The bill would help reduce hunger and increase children's access to healthy meals by expanding the after-school supper program nationwide, better connecting eligible children with free school meals, and streamlining the certification process for the Women, Infants, Children (WIC) program.

The bill would strengthen nutrition standards for all foods sold in schools, provide schools with increased resources and training to improve meal quality, and support Farm to School programs and school gardens.

Last week, the House designated October as National Farm to School Month. Now they have a chance to walk the walk, in addition to talking the talk, by passing a bill that will increase access to quality food for school children, foster local farm job growth and generate local economic development. The Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act establishes a competitive grant and technical assistance program in the Department of Agriculture to increase the use of local foods from small- and medium-sized farms in schools, with $40 million in mandatory funding.

The competitive grant program would help create more Farm to School programs benefiting kids and communities alike. A recent study from the University of Minnesota found the potential economic benefit of Farm to School to the region ranged from about $20,000 if each school served one locally grown meal a month to up to $430,000 if they bought large amounts from farmers.

Now consider that the fast-food industry spent more than $4.2 billion on marketing & advertising in 2009 alone, according to the Yale's Rudd Center for Food Policy & Obesity. And our elected officials can't pass child nutrition legislation that provides almost an equivalent amount in $4.5 billion over 10 years to reduce hunger and provide access to healthy food.

What have you done to help reach the goals of ending child hunger by 2015 and solving childhood obesity in a generation?

Before you pass the turkey, consider helping to pass the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act during the lame-duck session. You and your family can deliver a strong message to Congress to vote yes on this urgently needed legislation, by sending your photo as part of a nationwide photo petition. Go here for details.

A healthy school lunch for our children is something to be truly thankful for this holiday season.

 

Follow Debra Eschmeyer on Twitter: www.twitter.com/farmtoschool

We are preparing for the most thoroughly planned meal in America, and it's not Thanksgiving dinner. It's school lunch. Once every five years school meals are put on the Congressional kitchen's fron...
We are preparing for the most thoroughly planned meal in America, and it's not Thanksgiving dinner. It's school lunch. Once every five years school meals are put on the Congressional kitchen's fron...
 
 
  • Comments
  • 135
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2 3  Next ›  Last »  (3 total)
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
realitytrumpsbull
two 'alves of coconut!
11:51 AM on 11/26/2010
Teach kids how to plant apple trees and strawberry plants instead of eating store-bought junk. Presto, healthier kids. Tending gardens and so forth also involves something called 'manual labor', which is a way to maintain muscle tone and burn calories without spending Big Bucks on things like gym membership. 'Work' is therapeutic, in more ways than one.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
SusanElizabeth1949
My micro-bio may be empty but my head isn't.
08:38 PM on 11/27/2010
where do kids who live in huge multi family buildings plant anything?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidMG
OWS Senior Citizen
01:04 PM on 11/29/2010
Good question. I answered it in "The ABC's Fruits & Vegaetables and Beyond" which includes lots of activities that even city kids can do. I'm happy to that the book is being used by education programs from coast to coast. You see sample pages at healthyhighways.com
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
DavidMG
OWS Senior Citizen
01:29 PM on 11/29/2010
Take a look at a book called "The ABC's of Fruits & Vegetables and Beyond" It helps with the problem you describe
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
06:01 AM on 11/24/2010
According to the FDA, food insecure households do not mean that children living in them ", including more than 17 million children, are food insecure - meaning they lack consistent access to a nutritious, well-balanced diet.". It means that at least one day in a year, one person is worried about being able to afford the normal (unaltered) diet for everyone in the household. According to the FDA, children in food insecure households are sheltered from hunger almost universally. This article exaggerate the issue.

http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FoodSecurity/ (the FDA topic)
http://www.ers.usda.gov/Briefing/FoodSecurity/labels.htm (what IS food insecurity)

From the site:

"However, children are usually protected from substantial reductions in food intake even in households with very low food security. In 2009, 988,000 children (1.3 percent of the Nation’s children) lived in households with very low food security among children."

There's nothing insubstantial about nearly 1 million children in households that experience hunger, but even then most of the children are shielded from hunger because adults are mostly good people who make sure kids eat. Distorting the facts and figures to make political points does no one credit.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
scrogginsfarms
proud daughter of the american revolution
01:39 PM on 11/23/2010
a conservative vegetarian will not eat meat,
a liberal vegetarian does not want you to eat meat.

welcome to the "state" of america.
12:43 PM on 11/23/2010
School lunch programs should be abolished. Let the parents take care of their kids. The taxpayers shouldn't have to provide lunch.

Are you really going to tell me that there are parents out there that can't afford a loaf of bread and some peanut butter or bologna to make sandwiches for their child's lunch?

And even if there are, it would be much cheaper to buy them the bread than to go through the hassle of supplying a school lunch.

This whole thing is a sham.
photo
Jericho the Red
moderate before it was called liberal.
01:17 PM on 11/23/2010
that works well until it's your kids that need the food isn't it..
yah, f those kids, they should starve cause their poor
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
06:05 AM on 11/24/2010
While I agree the program is far more expansive than strictly necessary, the sad truth is there are parents who struggle to put meals on the table, but are good parents. Then there are neglectful parents that the system doesn't pick up on; drug addicts, alcoholics, etc, who don't abuse their children enough to attract attention but who send them to school without food routinely. My best friend in high school came from one of these households, and school meals were the only guaranteed food for her and her younger brother and sister every day.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Changeizgood
11:24 AM on 11/24/2010
When they enter a "good parents home and fiind the problem is no-career or skilled training holding them back and request some sort of program to end the povewrty and put these parents in the workforce with skills, like the job corp, only local, then they have had to deal with the "CUT ENTITLEMENT CORPORATE POLITCAL PARTY, THAT DOESN'T CARE IF THEY HAVE HEALTH CARE.

Just one less to feed, is the motto.

Sick twisted selfish minds calling policy on the poor's children when they really just don't give a damn and won't admit it, because they are supposed Christians and in denial after listening to Rush, Beck and Fox for years.
Stereotyping the poor and middle class.

YOU BETCHA.

Nobody grows of dreaming of welfare and living in poverty. If you ask these kids what they want to be, you certainly don't hear the word "POOR" in the answer.
09:46 AM on 11/23/2010
Lets not forget part of the hold up is they want to fund part of the bill with 2.2 billion from SNAP(food stamp) benefits. We should not be taking from families who need it most, there are other places!
09:52 AM on 11/23/2010
Exactly. Why rob Peter to pay Paul? Of course, these programs should be strengthened but don't fund it at the expense of other people's ability to feed themselves!
03:02 PM on 11/23/2010
They will be taking away money from SNAP Education funds funded by the stimulus package: it's a one time deal and will NOT be "stealing from dinner to serve lunch". It will in no way affect the amount of money given in food stamps, it will decrease the funding given to education efforts which are not necessarily deemed effective as of right now. They have pinpointed an ineffective program and are removing funding now to expand a program that already works and does good things.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Changeizgood
11:25 AM on 11/24/2010
Paul must be Wall Street. They certainly don't have a problem "feeding them."
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
09:34 AM on 11/23/2010
The problem is school lunches are politicized, and we don't agree on what good nutrition is.
It's a fight between USDA and farmers, anti-tax neocons, soft-drink industry, ranchers, vegans.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
06:06 AM on 11/24/2010
How did you drag the soft drink industry into this one?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Changeizgood
11:30 AM on 11/24/2010
They are still mad the Dems put juices, instead of soda machines in the school lunch program.
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Adam616
bweh
09:33 AM on 11/23/2010
We used to have liberty up here in Canada. Then the government introduced free health care. Then it built shelters for homeless people in every Canadian city with a population over 50,000. And then it made laws forcing schools to serve ONLY nutrient-rich, low-fat, low-sodium foods.

Things went downhill from there: Now I can't even chow down on a Triple Whopper with extra mayo with a HUGE printed warning about cardiovascular disease on the wrapper staring me in the face.

Don't you GET it, America??? IT'S SOCIALIST TYRANNY!!!!! DON'T GO THERE!
11:49 AM on 11/23/2010
I hear you and it is sad to watch the great United States dwindle into irrelevance.

Americans won't accept Socialism at face value but they will and are accepting every fragment of it under Liberalism. There government isolates and devours piece by piece. Health Care, Auto, Wall St., etc.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThomasPaine1776
Left is right; Right is wrong
01:59 PM on 11/23/2010
I want to move there. Any country that produced Gordon Lightfoot and Sarah McLachlan has got to be basically GOOD.
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
09:26 AM on 11/23/2010
The root cause of obesity is access to unhealthy food, not lack of access to healthy food.
Junk foods such as processed carbs are addictive. Mice will eat it preferentially, become obese and unhealthy. So will humans.

First step: replace soft-drink vending machines with free bottled water in cafeterias. That includes fruit juices, fructose is terrible for you, and they all have added corn syrup. And artificial sweeteners cause obesity, they cause insulin release so can cause diabetes, Google same for info.
photo
intolleft
ObamaCare...getting you shovel ready
11:00 AM on 11/23/2010
The root cause of obesity is more calories consumed than burned. It don't matter what form the calories are in.
11:35 AM on 11/23/2010
That is highly, highly debatable. Quality matters. Unhealthy fats are very unhealthy, healthy fats are very healthy. A diet rich in whole foods is much more healthy than one made up of processed foods. Period.
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
02:27 PM on 11/23/2010
No, insulin causes the body to put on weight instead of burning it off. We have sweet sensors down our whole digestive tract, and when they sense sweets and processed carbs the body releases insulin. Artificial sweeteners trigger the same cells, cause insulin release and weight gain, potentially diabetes.

Scientists realize that it's impossible for the body to correctly judge calorie intake. If weight depended on that we would all soon be obese or starving, a few calories would make too big a difference.

All this according to Science News, great mag.
11:38 AM on 11/23/2010
I think your point is important. The unhealthy food we eat is flat-out dangerous. It causes degenerative diseases. Children have more heart disease than ever before, diabetes is absurdly prevalent, and depression and other learning disorders are rampant.

It is both, though... we need access to healthy food and lack of access to unhealthy food.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
Changeizgood
11:44 AM on 11/24/2010
The best way to do this is contracts with local farmers that don't put poisonous pesticides in the food also.

But a contract with a local farmer, keeps them going and is healthier and cheaper to provide because of NO shipping cost.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
freddypudwacker
It's all psychological.
08:45 AM on 11/23/2010
We start feeding kids crap early, like in preschool, it's cheap. I worked at a daycare, and every day, the kids were fed stuff that was fried or deep fried, no whole grains, no fresh fruit or vegetables, lots of starch, and whole dairy. A lot of these kids were already well on their way to obesity, sad.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThomasPaine1776
Left is right; Right is wrong
02:00 PM on 11/23/2010
We feed the kids stuff that they wont complain about. The kids complain, then the parents complain, and then we go right back to giving them what they want, NOT what is GOOD for them. JUNK FOOD AMERICAN SCHOOLS.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
sabelmouse
my micro bio is emty
08:17 AM on 11/23/2010
it's funny that this would even be needed.( i am only laughing so as not to cry. )
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
08:16 AM on 11/23/2010
What's funny is that school lunches are fully controled by government at some level. Either the local government that plans the lunches, or the DOE that funds the schools, or the FDA that provides the food at deep discounts.

And the best that government can do is pizza, fried chicken, and hamburger and fries.

Now they are asking for a law so they can do what's right for the kids. Well why not just provide a healthy menu to the kids now? There is no law stating that the lunches government provides has to be high fat and crappy.
12:09 PM on 11/23/2010
I tell you what, Dana1982, take a minute to contact your local school district's nutrition office and ask them for the nutritional information on the foods they serve. They're required by law to have that info on file. Also, the food served in schools is not the same old stuff you knew as a kid. Most districts follow federal dietary guidelines and serve very healthy foods, not what you get in the fast food places. Manufacturers work with districts to develop foods that will meet the regs and kids actually will eat them.

It's the mean-spiritedness of those that don't take the time to learn the reality of school nutrition that help perpetrate the misconception that school food sucks. Nothing is further from the truth. But then, I wonder if you could handle the truth? Reality is that there IS a law that says school meals must NOT be high fat and crappy.

Step out of your little comfort zone; volunteer at your local school's cafeteria. You might be surprised at what you'll learn.
photo
Jericho the Red
moderate before it was called liberal.
01:09 PM on 11/23/2010
I'm glad the area you live in is so blessed..
but since it varies county to county, You cannot speak for the whole of all..
I can only speak for my county, I have eaten there.
The bill needs to pass for those who don't have that form of nutrition
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThomasPaine1776
Left is right; Right is wrong
02:01 PM on 11/23/2010
It's because no one can stand up to a complaining parent.
06:17 AM on 11/23/2010
I saw "steak patty" on a school lunch menu. Does anyone know what that is?!
ThatsTheTheWayItIs
religion, ideology, partisanship are delusional
09:36 AM on 11/23/2010
A bovine "Peppermint Patty?" :-)
photo
intolleft
ObamaCare...getting you shovel ready
11:00 AM on 11/23/2010
meat matter.
06:16 AM on 11/23/2010
I'm still on the fence about this one. I am a vegetable girl myself but most children aren't. So many kids these days are so accustomed to having a "big kids meal" for dinner. Yes, I'm willing to say the majority of children do not have a home cooked meal and/or eat supper as a family unit. If the school serves...let's just say a salad....it will either be drowning in ranch dressing or thrown away. I'd love to see a healthier school menu, but just like everything else it starts at home. If parents don't care what their kids eat at home, they surely won't care what they get fed by someone else!
Until enough people care pack your kids a lunch.Once tohe gov loses out on the lunch money maybe they'll listen?!
12:16 PM on 11/23/2010
That makes sense, Sydracer, but the fact is that most school districts barely earn enough revenue from the meals served to cover their costs.

Also, that would mean that the parent's would have to pack lunch daily, but wait.....a lot of adults are out of work and have been for a while. That means they have or should complete an application for school meals. Oops, sorry, that means they would have to eat crappy school food. But wait, if you simply take a minute to check it out, school food is NOT crappy.

It is the perception that, since school meals are either free (not really, but who's checking that one out??) or very inexpensive (same meal purchased at a restaurant away from home would cost about $5) then they are crappy....but then that would blow the perception of those that don't take the time to really check things out.

Go to your local school district's website and check out the Food Service webpages. Bet you get a really nice surprise!
photo
Jericho the Red
moderate before it was called liberal.
01:12 PM on 11/23/2010
you cannot use the all inclusive "school meals are not crappy"
cause you don't know about every school...

it varies
generalizations are not truths
01:49 AM on 11/23/2010
My grand daughter came home from school today with a headache and did feel well. We asked, what did you have for lunch? The answer, a corn dog and ketchup, at 11 am. After a granola bar an apple and milk, she felt better. School lunches today, are not the lunches I had when I was going to school, in the 60's. I remember having meat, vegetable, starch, salad and dessert (plus milk) for 1.35. My favorite thing was Boston Cream pie, baked fresh that day, with swiss steak and green beans and a salad. My grandkids will never see a meal like that. They should...but asshats don't think our children should have good meals. What do our corporate leaders have for lunch these days... in the Congressional cafeterias? I have recently eaten in a federal cafeteria and the food was fairly cheap and better than a school cafeteria. Perhaps our "fearless leaders" should have lunch with school kids, and then have a moment of clarity. What do they want their own kids to eat for lunch?
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
ThomasPaine1776
Left is right; Right is wrong
02:10 PM on 11/23/2010
Meat and dairy has cholesterol in it and cholesterol kills. There is no justification for humans eating animal products of any kind. We simply do not need to eat meat. Eating meat is a vestige of the dark ages winter "feast" when all the vegetables ran out and they had HAD to start killing and eating the farm animals. This turned into, somehow, a positive thing, and a demonstration of wealth. Only rich people, land owners, could afford to be so wasteful as to eat an animal. European peasants were actually eating healthier than their landed lords, who died of rich mans diseases, fat, puffy, gouty and prone to heart attacks. The poor people, however, emulated the rich people, when they could, and now we have a nation of meat eaters. Ever notice how people, especially men, get when they say "A big, juicy steak"? they get all macho, and boastful. That's because they are demonstrating their manly ability to acquire resources. Animal flesh, however, is in every way unhealthy and unnatural to eat.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
tomteboda
06:49 AM on 11/24/2010
"corn dog and ketchup" is that all they served, or is that all she ate? I'm pretty sure that there are nutrition guidelines in place requiring things like vegetables to be served.
01:12 AM on 11/23/2010
That's Great!!! I will feed your kids and my kids. Why is it in this day and age that people with an amazing assortment of Birth Control and liberal answer, abortion; why am I paying for your hungry kids? Let's just pass a law that parents have to take care of their own children.
01:52 AM on 11/23/2010
Did you have a good school lunch growing up? Just saying..perhaps you should revise your comment. Tell me what you remember eating. And, why, exactly, should our children get crap for lunch? I
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
03:34 PM on 11/23/2010
Our children?

My mother packed my lunch, and yes, she was employed.

There are better ways to go about this that don't involve another 4.4 billion that we don't have.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
bryan broome
All your money won't another minute buy.
09:47 AM on 11/23/2010
"Let's just pass a law that parents have to take care of their own children."
That's is just CRAZY. Feed them, clean them, teach them. NO way. I wan't Uncle Sam to do that for me. :-)