A question regarding the Child Nutrition Bill?

c504play · **A question regarding the Child Nutrition Bill? -** 01-02-2009, 01:09 AM

How does this bill infringe on people's rights? There doesn't seem to be a mandate that kids aren't allowed to bring certain foods from home, just that the schools themselves aren't allowed to sell certain things.

If it's a matter of State's rights that you're concerned with, that's one thing. But as long as we're going to have the federal government collecting money and distributing it to schools, doesn't it make sense to provide some guidelines on how that money is to be spent? As long as any government is collecting money and distributing it to schools, does it really make sense for that money to help underwrite the cost of making kids fatter? Is it really a restriction on civil liberties to say that no, taxpayers will not be paying for junk food?
These are not actual answers.
The first three, that is.
Correct me if I'm wrong here, but the bill is actually paying for food, right? The $4.5 billion price tag seems downright impossible as the result of handing down some new regulations.

My concern with this question is just about how regulating what schools sell to kids is somehow infringing on our rights.

GizzyGizz25 · 01-05-2009, 01:09 AM

It is about control not about Nutrition.

()

chick_paramore · 01-07-2009, 01:09 AM

its a stupid bill period. Its about control and not nutrition

kittyrogers · 01-08-2009, 01:09 AM

Don't legislate my uterus, but feel free to legislate anything I eat. HYPOCRISY.

AirDawg · 01-12-2009, 01:09 AM

Think about it this way... the bill cost $4.5 billion in tax payers money. So... in essence, you are paying the federal government to parent your child... something you should be doing.

The $4.5 billion doesn't just pay for food. It pays for the bureaucrats that enforce it. They have to hire people to come in and make sure the food is made with lean meats, etc and to fill out paper work for the one or two fundraisers involving food that schools are allowed to have each year, and it will pay for training of people in the lunchrooms to make sure the portion sizes are right so little Bobby doesn't get too pudgy. So this isn't about paying for food, there's a bunch of other stuff that comes with it.

Trisha · 01-15-2009, 01:09 AM

Part of it is state's rights. On the other hand, who is to say that Big Brother will always make good choices? It's a problem when government is no longer for the people AND by the people. The states started taking federal money for programs like Title I. Then the federal government has power to tell the states how the schools with Title I funds will be run. It's insidious. I know this because I taught for years in Title I schools. When I had a Title I reading lab, there were different "rules" for us. For one thing, it wasn't very popular to be a good enough teacher that your students tested out of Title I. God forbid too many children learned to read and the district lost Title I funds.

Defender · 01-17-2009, 01:09 AM

As much as I'd like to have a law that was about nutrition but didn't have any control, I'll have to say that it infringes on the rights of people who want to sell stuff regardless of whether it'll mess your kids up for life when you're not allowed to be there to monitor them.

Actually, we don't have to allow kids the "right" to eat s*** -- it'll be mandatory for them soon enough when they get out of school.

mutinysoccermom · 01-21-2009, 01:09 AM

Lenny, like you I don't think this is the most horrible idea out there. It's a good idea to have some control over children's school nutrition and vending machines. My problem with this is that it shouldn't be a government responsibility to do so but the parents and these additional programs are a waste of tax payers money that is once again going from people that do make sure their children have good nutrition to people and parents that don't.

Example, at my high school my friends had pizza and soda for lunch each day. My parents would make sure I had the usual sandwich, chips, apple, carrot sticks, and a drink. So why would my parents have to have their tax dollars going towards funding this bill just because other parents are satisfied that their kids want pizza and soda? I'm sorry but if you're worried about your kids being overweight, then make them go outside and play and start feeding them healthy alternatives on your own.