Guns and butter? SNA wants Congress to see things its way

Nation's Restaurant News, Feb 21, 2005 by Paul King

When members of the School Nutrition Association descend upon Washington, D.C., for the organization's annual Legislative Action Conference, they will arrive armed with a powerful message for federal legislators: If you cut funds for the National School Lunch Program, you risk taking food from millions of children's mouths.

Marshall Matz, legal counsel for the SNA, says the association is more concerned over the federal budget process for fiscal year 2006 than at any other time since 1981, when child nutrition programs were cut by $1.5 billion. That cut forced 3 million children to drop out of the NSLP, Matz says.

As a matter of fact, rather than cutting funds aimed at school meals, the association plans to tell lawmakers that they need to provide more money to expand existing programs aimed at delivering healthful meals for more school-aged children and continuing their battle against childhood obesity. But winning such a lobbying effort--even when it is attached to such a high-profile mission--is not going to be easy.

"The new 109th Congress will quickly focus on a significant budget debate, which could jeopardize child nutrition programs," Matz said in a Child Nutrition Alert e-mailed to association members. "An effort will be made in March and April to cut the federal deficit through a budget 'reconciliation' process. Reconciliation is used only for entitlement programs like the National School Lunch Program."

The proposed budget released by the Bush administration Feb. 7 did not suggest any cuts to school-based meal programs, which have been exempt from cuts since 1981. But Matz noted that no programs are sacrosanct this year.

"The goal is to cut the $400 billion-plus deficit in half within five years and to balance the budget by 2014," he explained. "In order to hit these targets, while making all of the tax cuts permanent and exempting Social Security, Medicare, defense and Homeland Security from any cuts, it would require a cut of approximately 38 percent in all other programs, according to the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities."

So the alert sent out last month urges members to prepare, either by coming to Washington next month or through phone calls, e-mails and snail-mail letters, to urge their senators and representatives to exempt the school lunch and breakfast programs once again from any cuts.

That action is also the first of four talking points covered in the SNA's 2005 Legislative Issue Paper. But the position paper does more than advocate exemption for the child nutrition program. It also asks for even more money from Congress to carry out initiatives that the association believes are essential for the health and well-being of America's schoolchildren.

For example, the paper suggests that Congress needs to provide more funds for school breakfasts and lunches. In addition to reminding Congress that funding cuts "would jeopardize the viability of local school meal programs, which would undermine student health and achievement," the paper goes on to state that "current reimbursement rates are inadequate to cover the cost of quality school meals. Implementing the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans will further increase meal costs, as will other efforts to improve the school wellness environment."

The position paper also seeks the elimination of the reduced-price category, in effect giving children of any family with incomes up to 185 percent of the poverty level free breakfast and lunch in school. It also urges Congress to make the Summer Food Service Program available in all states and asks federal legislators to appropriate 50 cents per enrolled child to help the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Team Nutrition enact more programs to combat childhood obesity.

Those requests will be a lot for a Republican-controlled Congress to absorb and consider. Asking lawmakers to protect a vital foodservice program is one thing; going to them with hat in hand to request more money is quite another, no matter how important the programs may be.

Few people will argue against the need to deal with the obesity epidemic in this country. But it may prove to be too much to expect Congress not only to vouchsafe the integrity of school meal programs but also to pour more funds into those efforts while slashing other worthwhile programs as it grapples with a massive deficit.