Dems Rallying for First Lady’s $4.5 Billion School Lunch Bill
- Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:04am by
Jonathon M. Seidl
- Print »
- Email »
WASHINGTON (AP) — Congress is poised to give President Barack Obama — along with his wife, Michelle — a congressional victory as the House takes up legislation to push greasy foods off the school lunch line and sugary drinks out of vending machines.
The president met with liberal Democrats Tuesday in a last minute push to unite his party in support of a $4.5 billion child nutrition bill that would improve lunches in schools and expand feeding programs for low-income students.
Many Democrats signaled opposition to the legislation in September because it is partially paid for with cuts in future funding for food stamps. But several of them have now said they will support the bill after the Republican victories in the November elections.
Rep. Barbara Lee, D-Calif., was one Democrat who came around after meeting with Obama Tuesday. The White House has said it will find other vehicles to restore the food stamp cuts.
“I am very pleased we were able to work together with the president and his team to address concerns regarding cuts to the food stamp program,” Lee said after the meeting.
House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., also rallied Democrats, holding a news conference with Reps. Rosa DeLauro of Connecticut and Jim McGovern of Massachusetts in anticipation of House debate on the bill this week. The two Democrats led 100 of their colleagues against the bill two months ago after the Senate approved it with the $2.2 billion in food stamp dollars. But they now say they will support it after the White House promised to restore the food stamp funding.
Pelosi called passing the bill the “right, moral thing for us to do.”
While Democrats have come together in support of the legislation, it is unclear if Republicans will try to use procedural maneuvers to stall it. A spokesman for House Speaker-in-waiting John Boehner, R-Ohio, said he will vote against the bill but would not say if the GOP planned any procedural votes.
The first lady has lobbied for new school lunch standards as part of her “Let’s Move” campaign to combat childhood obesity. The standards would not remove popular foods like hamburgers from schools but would make them healthier, using leaner meat or whole wheat buns, for example. Vending machines could be stocked with less candy and fewer high-calorie drinks.
Creation of new standards, which public health advocates have sought for years, has unprecedented support from many of the nation’s largest food and beverage companies. The two sides came together on the issue as public pressure to remove junk foods from schools increased.
Congressional passage of the bill would be only the first step. Decisions on what kinds of foods could be sold — and what ingredients may be limited — would be left up to the Agriculture Department.
The legislation would also increase the number of children who receive free or low-cost lunches at school and increase the amount of money schools are reimbursed by 6 cents a meal.
Popular Stories
Does Misstated Marathon Claim Prove Paul Ryan Is Dishonest? (POLL) 681 Comments
‘Jumah at the DNC’ Speaker: ‘Muslims Visited America Prior to Columbus’ & ‘It Was a Muslim’ Who Guided Him to the ‘New World’ 532 Comments
Paper Details Obama Admin’s Alleged Secret Note Sent to Iran: If Israel Attacks, We Won’t Get Involved 434 Comments
Obama: RNC Like Watching ‘Black-and-White TV’ Because Romney ‘Did Not Offer a Single New Idea’ 373 Comments
Roseanne Barr: Most Billionaires ‘Violent Pedophiles’ & ‘Heartless’ Cocaine Addicts 330 Comments
Faith
This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 285 Comments- Pakistani Muslim Cleric Accused of Framing Disabled Christian Girl in Koran-Burning Case Read More
- ‘Made Up Religion’: TV Historian Enrages Muslims, Receives Threats After Producing UK Documentary Questioning Islam’s Beginnings 292 Comments
Meet the Controversial German Imam Accused of Brutally Beating His Wife & Pushing Sharia Law Read More
‘Self-Proclaimed Messiah’ & Unification Church Leader the Rev. Sun Myung Moon Has Died — Here’s His Life Story Read More
Business
President Obama Issues Major ‘Green Energy’ Executive Order 177 Comments- Germany’s Upcoming Court Ruling Will be Huge for the EU Read More
Ford Looks to Beat Toyota for Best-Selling Car in 2012 With This Model 148 Comments
Bernanke & QE3: Here’s What You Need to Know Read More- ‘Extortion’: Why Did the Labor Department ‘Drop the Hammer’ on Oregon Farmers? 301 Comments
Technology
- This Is the Creationists‘ Response to Scientist Bill Nye’s Viral Pro-Evolution Video Claiming They Harm Children 285 Comments
‘TaserDrone’: Hackers Weaponize Quadcopter With Actual ‘Shocking’ Technology Read More
Ever Heard of the Wild ‘Burning Man’ Festival in the Middle of the Nev. Desert? Here’s Your Primer Read More
Stanford Develops Technology ‘Better Than Steroids’ for Athlete Recovery Read More
Have You Pretended to Know What ‘the Cloud’ Is? You’re Not Alone Read More
Submitting your tip... please wait!
Comments (147)
Comeandtakeit
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 9:00amSomewhere in thei plan I see an SEIU purple shirt lurking. What could go wrong?
Report Post »EP46
Posted on December 2, 2010 at 7:09amUNIONS….on the docks…driving the trucks….all this is re-distribution of $$$ BILLIONS This food is bought from foreign countries ..top of list Mexico & India…we will IMPORT more….and with the new Farm Bill there will be more unionized workers and commissions to make sure the food is SAFE…we cannot grow it at home. Look behind the SMOKE we have been &&%%* again. STOP the INSANITY
Report Post »Derfel Cadarn
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:51amWhy not add KOOL-AID to the new salad bars it would bring costs down(with the sharp decline in participation) it will allow a larger percentage of funds per student. After all it is for the children.
Report Post »CarolinaGirl
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:49amThe more we the tax payers spoon-feed the babies and children of mothers on welfare, the more babies these lazy, suck-off-the-government, unmarried baby-poppers will produce. The sadest part is the future of these children. From whom do they learn responsibility? From whom do they learn productivity? From whom do they learn respect? Are we to continue to spoon-feed the lazy, dumb down the schools, and make excuses for the very ones who won’t even try?
Report Post »aggiehomer
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:48amThey (michelle) need to lead by example. Judging by her posterior this is obviously not the case. Just the further eroding of the republic taking place.
Report Post »Hondaman
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:44amYou know what? . . . . Our govt. is legislating lots of things it has no business doing. Hmmmm
Report Post »mcFirst
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:38amwhat about kids in private schools. they pay taxes too. or do you just need to surrender first to receive the payouts. is school some kind of welfare system. medical coverage is now welfare now schools will soon be.
I drive my kid to private school, can I get a bus to take them its really far.
Report Post »tobywil2
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:36amThe real question is which of Mr. Obama’s political cronies will profit from this law? How many small businesses will fail when there market is closed by this attack on our freedom. http://commonsense21c.com/
Report Post »Tri-ox
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:35amOur failed “president”, his party-of-destruction and his not-really-proud-of-America woman simply don’t get it. How much do these people hate America that they would keep spending money we don’t have? How much damage are we going to allow these people to cause? How many times do the American people have to say “no more” before these people get the message? Our failed “president” must be prevented from destroying America further. Defund obama now!
Report Post »CSA descendant
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:35amI was hoping HE was the only big spender!!!!
Report Post »LLATPOH
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:33amI’m probably nitpicking, but does anyone else get a little disturbed by seeing this called a “feeding program?”
It sounds like something you put livestock on to get them all in line for the slaughterhouse.
Report Post »icediva
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:31amSTop the insanity! Thought the elections were going to stop all this nonsense. Being a mother of a thirteen year old, after years of bargaining, strong arming and bribery it doesn’t work. Kids don‘t eat things they don’t like, mine would rather starve. This bill is a pay out to unions which run school lunch programs. UNBELIEVABLE!
Report Post »FedUP
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 9:39amMy kids will starve too- see my post on the 2nd page.
Report Post »printdesignchicago.com
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:30amyou wouldn’t want those poor children to STARVE, now WOULD YOU?!?!?!?
i‘m sure some looting progressive somewhere has uttered those exact words in defense of MORE GOV’T SPENDING
Report Post »icediva
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:34amMight be a good thing for some of these kids to know hunger pains.
Report Post »Veritas
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:27amThese idiots need to read their history books. When the British kept infringing on the freedom of the colonies after every possible avenue of diplomacy was used, the colonies finally decided that our country would be covered in blood before it would be covered in slavery to the crown.
Report Post »tobywil2
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:37amThrow the rascals out!
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:24amMichelle’s backside will be harder to decrease than the federal deficit.
Report Post »emertz8413
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:29amHahahahaha, love it!!
Report Post »m31sail0r
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:30ammmmm Michelles backside! nice comment
Report Post »icediva
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:38amYea great one! Some of the liberal media should get a good look at her backside they might see it for what it really is. HUGE Bet she never missed a eal.
Report Post »squeaker
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 4:15pmBeep Beep Beep………. clear the way…. michelle is backing up…!
Report Post »squeaker
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 4:17pmimagine what michelle could steal and hide in her fat rolls…
Report Post »emertz8413
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:23am$4.5 billion???? It will be more, they never state the exact cost, and WE CANNOT AFFORD THIS!!!
Report Post »We are BROKE people, when will they get it through their thick skulls!!!!????
EP46
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 10:44amThink…this has NOTHING to do with kids lunches. This is all about RESTRIBUTION OF WEALTH. The United States imports BILLIONS of dollars of vegetables each year from other countries. Mexico is the largest supplier. So put more IMPORTED food in schools and we can send more money to other countries. They will not LET US GROW our own food…it would provide jobs and feed Americans. This was part of the reason all the water was shut off to the San Joaquin Valley in California which was called “America’s Salad Bowl”. THIS IS REDISTRIBUTION of wealth to other countries..Mexico, India, Peru and many others who supply what we could grown here at home.
Report Post »CYCLONE
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 11:43amahhemmm… that is quite a “bill” in deed…almost as big as “roto-tiller butt”…
Report Post »EyebrowsLaMana
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:21amI thought it was the parents responsibility to feed their kids….I work hard long hours to feed my child, why do I need to feed everyone else’s too? (free & reduced lunches) Not to sound like a jackass, but if you have kids, feed them yourself…if you can’t then please refrain from having kids.
Report Post »Cemoto78
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:33amWell said, thank you.
Report Post »REETZBEE
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 3:46pmThat’s exactly what I was thinking, feed your own kids. I wonder when they’re going to start their Nazi training and making kids work out for an hour per day or march around the playground singing “yes we can.”
Report Post »capitalismrocks
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:15amHow the hell can it cost $4.5 billion to send a couple of letters to schools stating they are to discontinue purchasing of “x” products and to have removed from school premises all soda and candy machines…
This is total bull@*$# !!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!
Report Post »guyperram
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:28amAnd do you really think the military spends $700 on a toilet seat?
Report Post »Oil_Robb
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:14amLooks like RUE PAUL is at it again
Report Post »Gonzo
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:28amGood one!
Report Post »Conserving Ink
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:14amWe need someone dressed up like Reagan handing out ketchup packets. That’ll remind them how well the last one worked. We all know that 80% of this money will just go to the salaries of the Lunch Czars for each school.
Report Post »___________________________________________________________________
http://conserving-ink.blogspot.com/2010/11/wretched-hive-of-scum-and-villainy.html
tmkphx1962
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:12amCongressional passage of the bill would be only the first step. Decisions on what kinds of foods could be sold — and what ingredients may be limited — would be left up to the Agriculture Department.
Of course it will be left up the the administration to tell the kids what they get to eat. Congress is giving up more and more rights. Here’s an idea. Get rid of the Dept of Education and give the money to local schools to make these decisions.
Report Post »Nightstalker
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:12amShe can’t get prez zero to quit smoking,
Report Post »but she wants to tell us what to do!
The gall of these people!
EP46
Posted on December 2, 2010 at 6:59amobama said he smoked dope and used cocaine in school…so maybe now it is just cigs & ice cream ????
Report Post »HouseNegro
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:12amWe had lunch ladies that could cook back in the day. I say bring back the lunch ladies won’t cost 4.5b……
Report Post »starman70
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:10amAnother Washington money black hole! If kids don’t like the veggies being served in the lunchrooms, they will start bringing their own lunches with whatever they like.
Report Post »FedUP
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 9:27amThey will be forced to bring only certain types of food. So, not exactly the foods that they want. I have had teachers take food (that my kids brought for their lunch) away because it was not allowed.
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 12:11pmTeachers go too far when they take away food given to a child by his PARENT. My kid had a book taken because it had the history of firearms. No pictures of people getting shot or anything like that just pictures of guns. They wouldn’t give the book back to him after school, I had to go pick it up. Teachers are liberal loons who need to be kept away from our kids.
Report Post »Bad Thunder
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:07amJust say NO
Report Post »untameable-kate
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 11:05amexpand feeding programs for low-income students.
Does this sound like feeding the dogs or go feed the cattle to anyone else? Way to cut spending congress commies. Why do the schools need more money to buy buns when all they need to do is reinstitute the physical education programs. Get the fat kids off thier @$$es and take them outside to play.
Report Post »Lana40
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 11:41amKids don’t get fat from one stinking lunch at school…….they get fat when they come home and chow down on chips and stuff while playing video games or watching tv.
Report Post »dwh320
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:07amThe NANNY STATE in action.
Cemoto78
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:23amLet’s not concentrate on how the public school system is broken, but let the Government do the parents job. After all the Nanny State has all the answers and wants to just build more and more drones reliant on the Government for all their needs. Less Government is the answer and Michelle should be told to mind her own business and take care of her kids and leave ours alone. Sorrowfully, CA will jump all over this and become more insolvent. What ever happened to personal responsibility?
Report Post »HKS
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:31amThis has been tried before in Huntington WV, if you watched it on TV, not a bad idea but it doesn’t work. Kids like what they like and it’s to expensive to maintain. Another gubment waste program. The real reason behind this is to break the local governments requiring compliance with the program and it will break a local government. This money is just to get it started.
Report Post »LadyLiberty
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 8:48amHer ‘Lets Move’ program has very little to do with actually helping kids and everything to do with restricting our parental choices for our kids. She is fixated on making everyone equal and when everyone is equal, no one is exceptional.
If you have not read the outline for this program, you need to. It reads like a propaganda leaflet.
Report Post »->Click For Brain Enema<-
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 9:13amA lunch bill full of cheesy meals because we have to do something about the cheese surplus. Every farmer that takes money from the state is a traitor or for that matter anyone that takes benefits they did pay for. .
Report Post »->Click For Brain Enema<-
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 9:45am*didn’t pay for
Report Post »Polwatcher
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 10:09amHow is a dishonest politician supposed to make him or herself looking good without the U.S. Treasury and its printing presses handy? Cutting budgets will make all of them look bad without money to through around.
Report Post »independentvoteril
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 10:18amExcuse me First Lady and Democrats but WHO made YOU the MORAL police?? Feeding the kids a balanced diet IS NOT a bad thing after the crap they have been feeding them for years but it is NOT a MORAL thing it is a COMMON SENSE thing.. it should be CHEAPER than Pizza for all anyway.. NO increases needed just a menu change..
Report Post »Rogue
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 10:27amThe first nutrition “nudge” – getting the Dept of Ag involved in choices of foods effects production of foods as a whole and will effect market prices for all commodities. Get ready for this to bleed over into the grocery store, where “unapproved” foods and ingredients will be extremely expensive. They can’t tell adults not to buy sugary sodas, but they can sure make it about being able to afford such items.
$4.5 Billion? You have to be kidding me. For what exactly? A new wing of the Dept of Ag? Subsidies to farmers to push them towards producing different foods/meats? Money to schools to purchase more expensive organic foods?
Here’s a crazy idea – spend about 1/4 that amount and purchase playground equipment, kickballs, basketballs, jump ropes, and all sorts of other things for kids to use at recess, and make them put down their cell phones and portable gaming systems when they are outside.
I‘m curious to see how long kids will be suspended from school if they bring thier own lunch in with a can of soda and a slice of last night’s pizza, or hide contraband candy bars in thier desks.
Report Post »akim
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 11:17amIT MUST BE DOA UNTILL OBAMA KILLS TSA STRIP SEACH AND SEXUAL ASSUALTS ON WOMEN AND CHILDREN.
GOP should grid lock and become Party of NO until Obama orders TSA to stop rape and sex assualts at airports.
Report Post »oldoldtimer
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 11:29amShe love to spend OUR money. Fools this is nothing more than more control to a Gov’t agency. One lillte stupid step at a time until we wake one day and find we now live in a Socialist/Communist country worse than Russia or China.
Report Post »Beckofile
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 12:24pmHow about you send your kid to school with your own lunch and we shut the kitchen down in every school. We could save tons
Report Post »Beckofile
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 12:28pmMy kids came home yesterday and they are no longer able to bring balls for recreation to school. I guess the “let;s move” campaign does not mean actually move. It means lets move your kids onto a program of government dependance.
Report Post »grandmaof5
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 12:40pmI say when they start eating that stuff then, maybe, it should be given some consideration. I got an email with pictures of Michelle, my belle, in her tacky designer clothes and I guarantee she hasn’t missed a meal or desert in the last two years. In fact, I suspect she has a small fridge next to the bed with ice cream and deserts in it. (But her arms look reallly buff)
Report Post »jds7171
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 3:05pmIf you need the government to take care of your kids, then maybe you shouldn’t have kids in the first place. I know that I am waiting till I am out of college and actually have money. But that is just me.
Report Post »tower7femacamp
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 3:06pmhttp://ep.yimg.com/ca/I/infowars-shop_2135_5695501
Report Post »The Third Archon
Posted on December 1, 2010 at 5:45pmIs it the “nanny state” when police catch the man driving the white van that abducted your child?
Is it the “nanny state” when firemen pull your grandmother out of her burning home?
Is it the “nanny state” when an American soldier puts a bullet between the eyes of an al-Qaeda or Taliban operative so he can never again threaten an American, or (more likely granted) one of his fellow countrymen?
Is is the “nanny state” when D.O.T. contractors hire constructions companies or create their own to build roads allowing your child to be bussed in their busses, to their schools? Or to allow you to drive to your job?
Which you only have because the government supplies it with the capacity to receive utilities (as well as you) and protects the institutional structures of the firm through force of law.
Stop acting as though all government action is categorically bad and dismiss it prima facia. You need to engage with the specific consequences of each policy, not just say “meh government bad” because the are clearly examples of when that’s not true, of when socialism (i.e. the collective SOCIETAL action, if you define it by its broadest terms) is good.
Report Post »taskmaster78
Posted on December 2, 2010 at 9:20amI must add; they are currently 101,000 school and private institutions receiving money feeding over 31 million children. Am I too believe this will be added to the already wasted efforts being made by those who don’t have a right to get involved in this? Keep in mind one other thing, in 1986 it cost .82 cents of every dollar was spent on administration cost just to send one dollar to the states, in today’s inflationary world what do you suppose is the admin cost for that same devalued dollar?
Report Post »A Doctors Labor Is Not My Right
Posted on December 2, 2010 at 9:09pmSince when is taking money from someone and giving it to someone else a moral thing to do? It’s theft!
Report Post »FedUpAlready
Posted on December 6, 2010 at 1:53pmDon‘t the American citizen’s realize that the school lunch program comes from Social Security money? Also the Wic program! Enough is enough you’re bankrupting the country you stupid morons!!!!!!!!
Report Post »