Maggie Johnson Martin remembers some of the junk she was fed in school: "Beefburgers that were so greasy, when you picked them up, your thumb went through the bun and grease ran down your arm," she wrote in response to a Facebook query about the unhealthiest school lunches in memory. Grease is what Lora McCollom remembers too - even greasy soda crackers. Singed into others' memories are Tater Tots, Little Smokies, honey and butter sandwiches, bologna cups, Crispitos with nacho cheese sauce and cinnamon rolls taking up half the plate.
Not quite what you'd call brain food. Not that everyone was complaining. Some admit the bad-for-you stuff tasted good.
The days of feeding it to schoolkids may be waning, however. On Monday, President Barack Obama signed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act, aimed at giving schoolchildren more nutritious food options, and educating them on healthy eating habits. It increases federal reimbursement for districts that comply with federal nutrition standards. It applies to foods sold during school hours, including in vending machines.
The evidence for taking these steps is compelling (though sample menus offered up with a White House press release included, curiously, pizza, hot dogs and canned fruit). More than 31 million children eat school lunches. Many kids eat most of their meals at school, according to the White House. One in three U.S. children and more than two-thirds of adults are obese or overweight.
What you choose to eat as a grown-up is one thing, but what you're fed as a child lays the foundation for future health and eating habits. So schools should set a good example, right?
Not according to some. Before the bill signing, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack had to issue a public reassurance to Sarah Palin, via telephonic press conference, that the bill doesn't ban cookies or bake sales.
Good heavens! Will catsup still count as a vegetable?
Why did the former Iowa governor and Democratic presidential candidate have to ease the fears of the former Alaska governor and Republican vice-presidential candidate? Because Palin and conservative talk show host Glenn Beck have taken to mocking the administration's efforts as a case of big brother micromanaging people's lives. In a speech in Bucks County, Pennsylvania, Palin slammed the state board of education for considering limiting sweets brought into school. She showed up with what a New York Times writer called "dozens and dozens" of cookies, and tweeted the state was in a "school cookie ban" debate.
The new federal law should have a positive impact beyond the school cafeteria. It involves serving locally grown food and establishes "farm to school networks." It also aims to improve the nutritional quality of commodity foods schools get from USDA. Maybe that - not the defense of homemade cookies - is why pro-big-business and anti-regulation Palin and Beck are opposed.
In New York City, the soft-drink industry is invoking the line of left-wing anti-poverty activists to fight Mayor Michael Bloomberg's plan not to allow food stamps to buy soft drinks. Both argue government shouldn't dictate what the poor can consume.
If the government's paying, it should uphold health and nutritional guidelines. Otherwise, what's the point of having a department of health or agriculture issue them? That doesn't mean we can't sometimes indulge our kids in things that are not strictly good for them. But schoolhouse walls should be safe zones against daily barrages of fat-saturated, mass-produced canned or frozen fillers, when fresh, nutritional alternatives would surely grow healthier kids.
