More students are complaining about the new USDA-mandated lunches:
Statistics that show obesity is a growing problem prompted an overhaul of the nation’s school lunch menus. The new rules require twice as many fruits and vegetables, more whole grains and less sodium and fat. And some students aren’t very happy about the changes.
I noticed the reporter doesn’t even ask himself if the overhaul will actually reduce obesity. In fact, I’ve yet to read a mainstream media article which raises that question. Reporters all seem to accept that more fruits, vegetables, healthywholegrains and reductions in fat and sodium are good ideas that the kids just don’t happen to like.
On Tuesday, Congresswoman Kristi Noem sat down with students in Pierre to see what they think of the new menu.
It’s nice that a Congresswoman is listening to kids in her district, but once again, somebody in the mainstream media should be asking the Big Question: Why should school-lunch menus be a federal issue in the first place? By what strange reasoning do we accept that politicians and bureaucrats in Washington are better qualified than parents and local officials to decide what kids in South Dakota should be eating for lunch? The issue here shouldn’t be whether or not we (or a Congressperson) can somehow convince the school-lunch overlords to let kids eat more of what they want. The issue should be the very existence of school-lunch overlords.
With the new federal regulations, kids can’t pass up both the fruits and veggies when going through the lunch line anymore.
Pretty please, take a moment and think about the utter arrogance underlying that rule.
What, you don’t want a fruit or vegetable on your plate? Too friggin’ bad. We in the USDA have decided you will put a fruit or vegetable on your plate, period. We know what’s best for you.
So we’ve got do-gooder officials in Washington telling kids in our district in Tennessee what they can and cannot – and must – put on their plates. Parents, teachers, local administrators, the kids themselves – their preferences don’t enter into it.
Here’s more of the same arrogance in a reply by a USDA official:
“One thing I think we need to keep in mind as kids say they’re still hungry is that many children aren’t used to eating fruits and vegetables at home, much less at school. So it’s a change in what they are eating. If they are still hungry, it’s that they are not eating all the food that’s being offered,” USDA Deputy Under Secretary Janey Thornton said.
Got that? If the kids are hungry, it’s their fault for not eating the fruits and vegetables the overlords at the USDA have insisted must go on their plates. It couldn’t possibly be that fruits and vegetables – which have little or no protein or fat – just aren’t very filing. It couldn’t possibly be that the USDA experts are friggin’ clueless about what a growing child or active teenager needs to get through the day without going hungry. No, by gosh, we’re from the government and we’re here to help.
I hope students all over the country rise up against this nanny-state, paternalistic nonsense. I hope they coordinate their protests through social media and make it a nationwide revolt. Come on, kids, take a stand. Start an Occupy The Cafeteria movement. When government officials start telling you what you can and cannot eat, it’s time to raise hell.