Last week the House passed the Senate version of the 2010 Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act; a reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Program. And...on the face of it, that's a good thing. As a mom it's important to me that my children get a healthy selection of nutritious food when they purchase lunch at school and we all know that a well fed child is better able to pay attention in class and to make better progress than a child who is hungry. Commonly noted provisions of the bill include:

• $4.5 billion additional dollars to improve the nutritional value of meals served in public schools.
• New criteria to provide more "good stuff" like fruits, vegetables, and whole grains and to cut down on sugars and fats in the meals provided.
• New criteria to expand the number of families and schools that can participate in free and low cost lunches (although there are currently 31 million children participating in some aspect of the program today).
• $40 million Farm to School program has been added and participation is encouraged in order to provide fresh, local produce.
• Within two years the USDA will be allowed to mandate what goes into meals served at public schools as well as what types of food can be sold elsewhere on campus.

What is less well known though are these less than desirable effects of the legislation.

Follow up:

• An average school lunch costs $2.72 today. The bill regulates prices for lunches served to children from families with incomes over 185% of the poverty level or more than $40,793 a year for a family of four. This provision will require that school lunch prices will need to be increased in some cases meaning children from middle class families will pay more for their lunches. 
• Fresh fruits and vegetables are much more expensive than their canned counterparts. While our children don't need extra sodium and heavy syrups, there are low salt and light syrup varieties that are widely available. The concern here is that dollar for dollar, with the emphasis on purchasing fresh produce, the buying power of the schools is going to be greatly diminished. How many cans of low sugar applesauce can you purchase for the cost of buying enough apples to make the same volume?
• And, who is going to make all those gallons of fresh applesauce? There are only so many hours in the day. How can existing kitchen staff prepare meals made up largely of raw fruits and vegetables in the same amount of time it takes to heat up chicken nuggets and tater tots...or open a can of applesauce? Once all of the provisions of the bill are in effect additional staff will need to be hired to do all the additional prep. The net result...increased salaries will allow for less high quality food to be purchased. We will be literally taking the food right out of our kids' mouths.
• Some of the additonal cost for the program will be from food stamp funds.

That takes care of the good, and the bad aspects of this legislation...but, what about the ugly?

The Organic Trade Association is ecstatic with the passage of this bill; and well they should be as it includes a $10 million Organic Pilot Program designed to provide organic food choices in school nutrition programs. Now imagine your six year old willingly eating a bean sprout, banana, and tofu concoction. [thinking...thinking...thinking] Yup...that's what I thought too! Of course that may not necessarily be a problem as the bill further stipulates that competitive grants favoring socially disadvantaged schools will be offered for the purchase of organic offerings. So it seems that although the OTC lobbied for organic offerings "for our children", this "better" food will only be available to children at socially disadvantaged schools. 

The National Farm to School Network must also be extremely pleased with the passage of this bill as $40 million was allocated for their program while the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine (PCRM) is bemoaning the fact that the bill did not go far enough in promoting more vegetarian options. The bill does provide though, that schools can establish their own gardens to grow food. Wow...that's a great and viable alternative. How large of a garden plot do you suppose you would need to grow vegetables for a school with a population of 700 students? How many people would you need to hire to care for that garden?

The bottom line is that what should have been a simple bill created to provide nutritious meals for our children has become muddied up by the lobbying efforts of special interest groups each intent on furthering their own agendas and profit making programs. Furthermore, it has provided an opportunity for the Secretary of Agriculture to take control over everything that our children eat on school grounds. I am excited though, that for now...there is no mention of dictating what I can pack in my child's Scooby Doo lunchbox.