Illinois Governor renews battle against junk food

[Joe Republic]

Source

Gov renews fight against junk food
November 29, 2005
BY DAVE MCKINNEY AND ROSALIND ROSSI Sun-Times staff reporters

SPRINGFIELD -- Undeterred by a lopsided loss in the Legislature last year, Gov. Blagojevich took another crack Monday at prohibiting the sale of candy, soda pop and other junk food in Illinois schools.

Heading into a likely 2006 re-election bid, Blagojevich called on the Illinois State Board of Education to impose new rules that would stop unhealthy foods from reaching youngsters in elementary and middle school and "help our most impressionable kids form good eating habits."

"Children who eat less junk food attend school more regularly, behave better when they're in school and score better on tests. We all know this," the governor said, "and yet, in schools across our state, junk food is available to any child who has the spare change to buy it from a vending machine."

Bake sales not targeted

Blagojevich's approach is scaled back from a failed legislative proposal he embraced last year along with House Minority Leader Tom Cross (R-Oswego). High schools, where junk food is most readily available and an important source of revenue, wouldn't be covered. The proposed junk-food prohibition for all schools drew only 28 votes in the Illinois House in March 2004, well short of the 60 votes needed for passage.

"I believe that if we successfully implement a ban on junk food at elementary and middle schools, it will help build the case for a ban in high schools," Blagojevich wrote in a letter to Christopher Ward, vice chairman of the State Board of Education, urging action on the new plan.

In the letter his office made public, Blagojevich did not specifically spell out a definition of what constitutes "junk food," nor did he or the state board have any data to show how pervasive soda and candy vending machines are in elementary and middle schools.

The governor stressed, however, that he is not targeting bake sales or candy sales that are the backbone of "traditional fund-raisers," or the sale of such foods at after-school sporting events.

Consumed at home

Numerous districts across the state adhere to their own junk food restrictions, leading some skeptics to question whether the governor's plan is a solution in search of a problem.

"I don't know what problem they're trying to solve here," said Ben Schwarm, associate executive director of the Illinois Association of School Boards.

Chicago, for example, won national plaudits for getting rid of junk food in its vending machines and cafeteria lines in the past year.

In Palatine's public schools, only one student-accessible soda machine exists in a district comprising four junior high schools and more than a dozen elementary schools. In that school system's case, the machine is on a timer and not for use during the school day, a district spokesman said.

"The bottom line, if they're looking at childhood obesity, the majority of soda and junk food consumed isn't consumed at schools," Schwarm said. "It's consumed at home."

'This . . . seems pretty minor'

Ten states have banned the sale of junk food in elementary schools until after lunch, while soda and candy are off-limits all day at elementary schools in Hawaii and Florida, the governor's office said.

The matter is expected to surface at the State Board of Education's December meeting and could be in place by the beginning of the 2007-2008 school year if the board and an additional legislative, rule-making body sign off on the plan.

"Do I think it's a good idea? Absolutely. We need to be consistent throughout the state. I think it's good for kids," said Ellen Wolff, supervisor of health services at Naperville Unit District 203, which began prohibiting the sale of soda pop during school hours from their vending machines this year.

But critics of Blagojevich's plan said it would trample local control, send mixed messages at a time when the state routinely allows schools to relax physical education requirements, hurt extracurricular programs and ignore much more serious health issues confronting young students.

"We have a whole lot of worse things going on in our junior high schools, with smoking, drugs and everything else," said Rep. Jerry Mitchell (R-Sterling), a former school superintendent. "This, to me, seems pretty minor."

[TheresNoMoney]

Lousy idea.

[MODU]

Heading into a likely 2006 re-election bid, Blagojevich called on the Illinois State Board of Education to impose new rules that would stop unhealthy foods from reaching youngsters in elementary and middle school and "help our most impressionable kids form good eating habits."

If "unhealthy" foods are limited to candy, twinkie's, and soda's, then I'm all for it.  Those items should not be sold in school anyway.  Now, if they are including chips, pizza, etc, then no, I would have to be against it.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

Lousy idea.

[Undisguised Sockpuppet]

This idea sucks.

[© tweed]

LOL

Blagojevich is one of the biggest jokes among Governors.  He's likely going down in 2006.

[David S]

One more reason why we need less government.

[opebo]

Absolutely.  The public schools should not be opened up to junk food peddlers addicting kids for profit.

[Gabu]

One more reason why we need less government.

We need less government so we can stop having more government?

Well, I suppose the latter would definitely follow from the former, yes.

[David S]

One more reason why we need less government.

We need less government so we can stop having more government?

Well, I suppose the latter would definitely follow from the former, yes.

Seems like a logical conclusion to me. 

The big government bureaucrats will be happy to take control of every aspect of our lives if we let them. IMHO we should tell them to get lost.

[opebo]

One more reason why we need less government.

We need less government so we can stop having more government?

Well, I suppose the latter would definitely follow from the former, yes.

Seems like a logical conclusion to me. 

The big government bureaucrats will be happy to take control of every aspect of our lives if we let them. IMHO we should tell them to get lost.

Good lord man, Blagevictch just wants to bar the junk-food pedlars from the public school!  In other words return to the sanity which existed a few decades ago.  How does that control every aspect of your life?  It just keeps the corporations from controlling your child's life for a few hours per day.

[Joe Republic]

I fear the wrath of the libertarians here, but I have to say I support this.

[John Dibble]

"Children who eat less junk food attend school more regularly, behave better when they're in school and score better on tests. We all know this," the governor said, "and yet, in schools across our state, junk food is available to any child who has the spare change to buy it from a vending machine."

I love how he's making the correlation = causation mistake. Kids who eat less junk food generally have parents who are just plain better parents, thusly explaining why they do so well in other areas.

[David S]

One more reason why we need less government.

We need less government so we can stop having more government?

Well, I suppose the latter would definitely follow from the former, yes.

Seems like a logical conclusion to me. 

The big government bureaucrats will be happy to take control of every aspect of our lives if we let them. IMHO we should tell them to get lost.

Good lord man, Blagevictch just wants to bar the junk-food pedlars from the public school!  In other words return to the sanity which existed a few decades ago.  How does that control every aspect of your life?  It just keeps the corporations from controlling your child's life for a few hours per day.

If the gov was saying lets make sure the kids have access to healthy alternatives so they can choose those things if they want, that would be OK. But that's not what he is saying. He is saying I know best what they should have and I'm going to make the decision for them by taking away the choices which I deem unhealthy. Neither the kids nor their parents get to decide, just the governor. As I said before, tell him to get lost.

The governor is able to get away with this  because he is doing it to kids who are not able to vote. Suppose he told the general public "I'm going to ban all pop, chips, popcorn, candy and other stuff I think is unhealthy so you won't be able to get it anymore. I'm doing this in your best interest because you're not intelligent enough or disciplined enough to make such decisions on your own."  I'm guessing the majority of voters would send him packing at the next election.

[Platypus]

He's got his priorities in the right place.

[I spent the winter writing songs about getting better]

LOL

Blagojevich is one of the biggest jokes among Governors.  He's likely going down in 2006.

He might be if he wasn't running against a party that thought it was a good idea to bring in Alan Keyes to run. Due to that, he's probably safe.

[David S]

He's got his priorities in the right place.

Yeah and maybe he can tell you when to breath too.. OK Hugh inhale now... now exhale...

Dammit are there none of you who are intelligent enough and responsible enough to make even the simpliest decisions about your life by yourself?

[opebo]

If the gov was saying lets make sure the kids have access to healthy alternatives so they can choose those things if they want, that would be OK. But that's not what he is saying. He is saying I know best what they should have and I'm going to make the decision for them by taking away the choices which I deem unhealthy. Neither the kids nor their parents get to decide, just the governor. As I said before, tell him to get lost.

Since when have kids been allowed to decide anything in this society?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However I'm sure the vast majority of voters would support disallowing such options for their children.  Why should the voters, who pay for public schools, have them turned into subsidized, captive markets for poison-peddlers?  For those few parents who prefer big, fat, porcine children, they can stuff them with the typical American diet once they get home.

[MasterJedi]

No, very bad idea for him.

[David S]

If the gov was saying lets make sure the kids have access to healthy alternatives so they can choose those things if they want, that would be OK. But that's not what he is saying. He is saying I know best what they should have and I'm going to make the decision for them by taking away the choices which I deem unhealthy. Neither the kids nor their parents get to decide, just the governor. As I said before, tell him to get lost.

Since when have kids been allowed to decide anything in this society?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

However I'm sure the vast majority of voters would support disallowing such options for their children.  Why should the voters, who pay for public schools, have them turned into subsidized, captive markets for poison-peddlers?  For those few parents who prefer big, fat, porcine children, they can stuff them with the typical American diet once they get home.

When I was school age I could buy what I wanted in school, pop chips, candy etc. This governor doesn't want them to have that choice.

Opebo you're a fine one to talk. You consider America to be facist because government does not allow you legal access to prostitutes and drugs, and yet you want government to dictate what our kids can eat. It seems to me that you only want government policies imposed on others and not yourself. Stick everyone else with high taxes and government regulations but not yourself.

[opebo]

When I was school age I could buy what I wanted in school, pop chips, candy etc. This governor doesn't want them to have that choice.

You must be from a younger, fatter generation.  I was never allowed such snacks or sodas when I was a youngster in the seventies.  As a young teenager in the eighties I was allowed sodas, but only, if I recall correctly, one per day. 

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't expect to have access to prostitutes and drugs inside the public school!  Everything at an appropriate time and place!  This policy doesn't dictate what kids can eat, just what addictive substances can't be peddled on school grounds and during school hours.  They can still eat disgusting American garbage food when they go home.

[Alcon]

Unless he can provide a way to make up in the surprising amount of funding that comes from soda machines and the like, I cannot see myself supporting this.

[John Dibble]

You must be logged in to read this quote.

I don't expect to have access to prostitutes and drugs inside the public school!  Everything at an appropriate time and place!
[/quote]

Appropriate? YOU PRUDE! How dare you force your subjective preferences of 'appropriateness' on students. Strapping young lads in school need release too you know! Who are you to deny them what they need when they need it? Not to mention it would be a great way for the ladies to earn money for college - their redneck fathers certainly aren't going to give it to them, being sexist pigs because they are men! Go join the religious party, you intolerant prude! *shakes fist*

[Speed of Sound]

One more reason why we need less government.

We need less government so we can stop having more government?

Well, I suppose the latter would definitely follow from the former, yes.

Seems like a logical conclusion to me. 

The big government bureaucrats will be happy to take control of every aspect of our lives if we let them. IMHO we should tell them to get lost.

Good lord man, Blagevictch just wants to bar the junk-food pedlars from the public school!  In other words return to the sanity which existed a few decades ago.  How does that control every aspect of your life?  It just keeps the corporations from controlling your child's life for a few hours per day.

I must say, at first I opposed this, but this is a very convincing argument, so id have to say that ill support it.

[opebo]

Unless he can provide a way to make up in the surprising amount of funding that comes from soda machines and the like, I cannot see myself supporting this.

I suggest that he tax the rich.