It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.


Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.


Feds to Fine Schools for Not Following Michelle Obama’s Lunch Rules

page: 1

log in


posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:04 PM
Is this even legal?

I mean the wife of a sitting presidents tries to advise schools about nutritional needs and forces skimpy lunches on our kids.

The kids revolt against the meals inability to meet their nutritional and energy needs to function at school. So the schools stop taking her advice or modified her advice and now the Govt is going to fine schools and teachers for violating her suggestions.

This is just nuts in a handbag. since when is a presidents wife allowed to make rules for the nation without them being ratified by our political representatives in Congress and the Senate?

Now they want to enforce her rules ont eh people.

You know what I suggest, that all these Federal agents should be forced to eat the same meals they are forcing on our kids at school, but for three meals a day for 30 days and see how they like the food. then let them say it is a good thing.
edit on 29-3-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:07 PM
This article sounds fishy! Because Michelle Obama is the first lady, so therefore she cannot make the government do anything. And I don't think the "feds" will punish schools for the food they serve. Though Michelle Obama does like better food then the questionable food schools serve to the kids.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:22 PM
a reply to: ChesterJohn

It's another example "I know what's best for your kids, so shut up and do what I want". Michelle is doing what Hillary mastered while Bill was POTUS--using her husbands authority to enact her agenda. Kinda like a queen would do, huh?

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:35 PM
a reply to: Boscowashisnamo

Yeah Like when Queen Marie Antoinette said "let them eat cake".

Queen Obama says, let them eat carrots, because cake's full of sugar and bread full of carbohydrates.

edit on 29-3-2016 by ChesterJohn because: (no reason given)

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:37 PM
a reply to: Teddy916

No actually it is fruity, because she imposed extra fruits, vegetables and no bread on school lunch meals without regard to their nutritional needs to perform properly in almost all activities at school.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:48 PM
If this is true , it is just another example of the Fascist Obama Regime taking away state's rights and destroying the Constitution. It is not , and never has been , a Federal responsibility for nutritional value of school lunches. It is a STATE matter.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 12:51 PM
a reply to: ChesterJohn

On one side I'm not feeling it but on the other side I'm quite confident that some kids in my kids class are eating crap when they are home and not getting good meals..I don't necessarily have an issue with the food being low in sodium and sugar I'm concerned about it being too small a portion.

I get that people don't want the goverment to tell them what to eat but here in massachusetts you (meaning the school)does not get reimbursed for the lunch program if you are not following certain if you want the meals you want then your city taxes will need to be assessed to cover the cost (yes we pay all kinds of taxes that should cover it regardless)....if you the school wants be reimbursed on the food you provide your students then you will follow what they tell you...I'm wondering if it's the same in other states..I'm thinking it is given the link provided below..
Bottom line the school is not going to provide two seperate lunches for kids on government assistance an kids not on it..

Link to Federal Meal Program

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:19 PM
I don't think that she is aware that what she is trying to push as healthy can cause problems in some kids. They had a health granola bar at the granddaughters school and she ate it and had an asthma attack. It has Chicory root in it. Chicory is related to ragweed and sunflower lecithin is also related. They stick sunflower lecithin in almond milk. WTF, how is an asthma attack considered healthy.

If you have some of the autoimmune disease genes, some of the veggies that build the immune system are not good for you. But you can't tell people who think they are right anything that goes against what they believe. Well, I suppose it gives the doctors, hospitals, and Pharma companies more income.

They have known about the problems that veggies cause with some people for many generations. This Fad Nutrition we are spreading is not based on science, it is based on beliefs of people who are not informed correctly.

That is one way to trim our population and get rid of the nice people. Some veggies are necessary in our diet in moderation and salt is necessary in our diet. Some people need more salt than others. You will keep on eating till you fill your need of salt, if you try to scrounge you will just eat more food.

We all know that most of the people in DC need to be a little bit of a psychopath to fit in.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:31 PM
a reply to: chrismarco

So.........the kids can't just bring a lunch to school from home?

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:34 PM
a reply to: TonyS

They absolutely can bring a school lunch from home...I missed that part if you are suggesting that they are monitoring food from home...sorry if that's the case

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:48 PM
The Federal Government provides funding to schools for lunches. In return for this funding, the Fed provides guidelines on how the funding should be spent. The "fines" basically involve giving some of the funding back for not following the guidelines.

No school is required to accept Federal funding in the first place. Don't accept the funding and you don't have to follow the guidelines at all.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 01:53 PM
a reply to: chrismarco

No, no.....I wasn't suggesting that, although I have read of instances where they actually do monitor what's brought from home. I was just thinking that if the school lunches are really that bad, well then.......the kid could bring something to school that might be better. That's all.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 02:13 PM
a reply to: kaylaluv

And in a lot of cases, the government ends up paying for food that gets thrown in the trash. I know I certainly envision my property taxes going to pay for food to be put in trash cans.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 02:20 PM
a reply to: ChesterJohn

Not sure why anyone would follow the advise of the horrid beast of a first "lady" anyway, she looks like a strategically shaved ape that was in a house fire and has the personality to match, beyond that she is not a dietitian or a nutritionist so not really qualified to even give advise let alone create policy about school food.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 02:28 PM
a reply to: sycomix

Look, I'm not going that far. It was an appropriate cause for her to take up as first lady. Where it crossed the line was when it all of a sudden became mandatory and at levels the presume everyone's kid is obese.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 03:56 PM
The actual legislation is here:

"Section 303 of the HHFKA : Fines for Violating Program Requirements

Section 303 of the HHFKA requires the Secretary to establish criteria for the imposition of fines in the Child Nutrition Program s , referred to as assessment s in this proposed rule .
An assessment refers to a required payment of funds from non - Federal sources. Under section 303, the Secretary or a State agency may establish an assessment against any school food authority or school administering the Child Nutrition Programs if the Secretary or the State agency determines that the school or school food authority failed to correct severe mismanagement of any program, failed to correct repeated violations of program requirements, or disregarded
a requirement of which they have been informed.

Section 303 also provides the Secretary the authority to establish an assessment against any State agency if the Secretary determines the State agency has failed to correct severe mismanagement of any program, failed to correct repeated violations of program requirements, or disregarded a requirement of which they have been informed."

It's obvious what the intention of this progam is - to replace the supply of crap meals with "healthy options".
But with everywhere from small towns to large cities, anyone with money and power will try and funnel that cash
to their pals. So they set up a company, buy pork rinds, chicken leftovers, end of season vegetables on the cheap, mulch then together to make cheap meals, sign a education department contract and pocket the difference.

This happens to workplace lunch contracts even in prosperous cities. My last workplace relocated their offices and then attempted to sign contracts with local restaurants to open at lunch-time and provide a variety of meals like chicken tikka masala, burgers and chips, and kebab slices. The first meal gradually become more rice and sauce and less chicken. Burger and chips remained the same, but the kebab slices would keep you up all night and suddenly let you crash out.

posted on Mar, 29 2016 @ 05:51 PM
I'm not really buying this story (at least as quoted). Obviously she can't make laws. And the fact that she received backlash for trying to make America healthier is ridiculous.

Clearly when looking around at this country full of fat kids... parents today do not know what they are doing. And it would seem that in a country that is now full of fat adults, they don't really care about themselves either.

posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 05:20 AM
a reply to: okrian

Good intentions does not mean there should not be backlash when there is overreach.

posted on Mar, 30 2016 @ 05:54 PM
I couldn't believe that Rush Limbaugh was actually talking about this subject today.

And he agrees it is govt over reach in the enth degree and no federal agency should be allowed to punish anyone for not following the guidelines she set up.

new topics

top topics


log in