Apparently the Senate is poised to debate a bill that will regulate what sort of drinks and food schools can sell to their students. I understand the arguments about the weight problem we have in the United States and certainly we need to do everything we can do curb the problem. But, to over-regulate to the point of telling every school in MA what they can and can’t sell begs the question of legislative overeach. Don’t get me wrong. I think schools should curb all the junk they sell to kids and I think it would make a difference but the decision should be up to the local school districts and local school committees. And why aren’t the sponsors of this bill seeking to mandate a certain amount of gym time per day — or increase that time per day?
Look, the state doesn’t fund schools enough, so they’re going to look for other sources of revenue. Here comes Coke and PepsiCo and Phillip Morris (sorry, Altria Group) dangling vending machine revenue and such in front of school administrators. Sure, they know that junk food is bad for kids, but so is not having a music program.
<
p>
So, here comes the lege, which says we can’t have junk food in schools, but isn’t willing to do what it takes to address the real reasons why it’s there in the first place.
I bothers me so much that school districts have to resort to corporate sponsorship just to provide basic educational necessities and programs like music, art and sports. Someone I heard speak the other night said it best when they said that the states are just as bad as the federal government, dishing out mandates and not backing them up with funding.
<
p>
No Child Left Behind . . .