Michigan district reportedly lost $60,000 on lunch program due to menu changes

ARMADA, Mich. – Another school district – this time from Armada, Michigan – is reporting that it lost a significant amount of money on its lunch program last year after the federal government forced schools to serve lower calorie food that students don’t like.

The district with roughly 1,900 students lost about $60,000 on the program last year, according to the Voice News. The district had to dip into its general fund, which pays for teacher salaries and supplies, to compensate for the losses sustained by the “healthy” lunch changes promoted by First Lady Michelle Obama.

“Local revenues are going way down because the regulations are requiring us to put out food that the students don’t want to eat. You still have to buy the food; the students just aren’t eating it,” said district accountant Michael Frawley.

“With the new USDA guidelines, we got hit really hard,” food services director Stacy Moyer said. “They limited the protein, they limited the bread, so our nice, big sub sandwiches are now little, so we’re working very hard to do everything we can to get those kids back and try to be real creative on what we can do.”

“So what we try to do so we don’t get caught where we’re not getting a lot of reimbursable meals is we’re telling the kids, ‘you can have your hamburger and your milk, but you also have to take a fruit or vegetable.’ That way we do get the reimbursement money because we can claim it as a meal,” Moyer said in the Voice News story.

School board member Tami Seago suggested the district collect “unwanted lunch foods that could possibly be donated.”

That reminds us of a Seinfeld episode where Elaine suggests donating unwanted muffin stumps to the homeless.

Something tells us that’s not a viable solution for the problems created by the new lunch regulations. How about instead allowing school districts to serve meals students are interested in eating?

Via: EAG News

Continue Reading.....

Newspaper presses FOIA fight for food stamp payment data

South Dakota's Argus Leader newspaper urged a federal appeals court Wednesday to reverse a ruling blocking the newspaper from receiving data on how much the federal government pays to stores that redeeem food stamp benefits.

Jon Arneson, an attorney for the newspaper, told a panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit that a lower court judge misinterpreted the law by ruling that a confidentiality provision for retailer applications allowed the U.S. Department of Agriculture to withhold all data on payments to those retailers. Under the Freedom of Information Act, the newspaper requested the data on annual payments to each retailer approved to take part in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

"The Argus is not asking for the invoices. They’re asking for the payment information. All we’re really doing is asking: how does the government spend its money in this instance?" Arneson told the three-judge panel sitting in St. Paul, Minn. "Because of the way FOIA is intended to be applied, we’re entitled to the benefit of the doubt. If there’s doubt here, the Argus is entitled to that benefit."

(Also on POLITICO: Palestinian leader's son appeals loss of Foreign Policy libel lawsuit)

However, Assistant U.S. Attorney Stephanie Bengford said the confidentiality provision applies because the cumulative amount of payments to each retailer is based on the series of purchase transactions the stores submit to USDA.

"But for the fact of gathering that information as to each transaction, USDA would not have the total amount of what it paid to the retailers," she told the judges. She also said that a provision in the law protecting information like "income and sales tax filing documents" authorized USDA to withhold data on its own payments to retailers, because they became part of the stores' income.

Via: Politico

Continue Reading.....

Food stamp benefits going down before the holidays

Millions of American families could face a sparse holiday table when food stamps benefits get reduced in November, and that could be just the start of deeper cuts to the program to feed poor families.

The modern-day food stamp plan, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, is scheduled to scale back benefits for all recipients on Nov. 1 because a recession-era boost in benefits is expiring.

The cut comes as lawmakers also are considering billions of dollars of reductions to the overall SNAP program, which has grown substantially in recent years amid the weak economy and high unemployment.

The program is now serving more than 23 million households, or nearly 48 million people, according to the most recent government data through June. The USDA says the average monthly benefit is about $275 per household.

The exact reduction depends on the recipients’ situation, but a family of four with no other changes in circumstances will receive $36 less per month, according to the USDA. At today's average prices, that translates to four fewer whole chickens each month.

Stacy Dean, vice president for food assistance policy at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, said that can be a major hit for a family that is already struggling with such low wages that they can’t afford food on their own.

Via: NBC News

Continue Reading....

Some Fed Agencies Should Shut Down Permanently

The government shutdown has provided a great opportunity to examine some of the more obscure agencies that most Americans have probably never even heard of and that the country could likely do without. Think of all the money we could save as a nation. 

Besides brining attention to these largely unheard of agencies, the shutdown—caused by Congress’s inability to agree on a funding bill—is also shedding light on just how bloated the federal government is, with an astounding workforce that’s seen nearly 800,000 furloughed this week. Some media outlets report the shutdown could cost the already frail U.S. economy about $1 billion a week in pay lost by the government workers.

Of course, this doesn’t apply to members of Congress. They will continue getting their checks and so will the president because his annual salary—$400,000—is considered mandatory spending. There are other exceptions like active duty military, all of 1.4 million of which will remain on the job and receive paychecks.

Well-known agencies such as the departments of Commerce and Homeland Security, the Internal Revenue Service (IRS), which is part of Treasury, and Housing and Urban Development are also mostly shut down. So is the Department of Education, that useless 4,195-employee monster created by Jimmy Carter. Public education is a state duty yet the agency, which has grown immensely under President Obama, is bulldozing its way towards a takeover by, among other things, issuing federal standards known as Common Core.

We can’t move on to the less-known agencies that shouldn’t even exist before mentioning that the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) has six separate divisions that are closing during the impasse. The Food Safety and Inspection Service has the largest payroll (9,633), but there’s a Rural Development division with nearly 5,000 employees that provides consultations, assistance and funding opportunities for rural communities. The USDA’s 1,363-employee food stamp division will scale down but still operate to assure a record 46 million people keep getting their free groceries from Uncle Sam.

Here are some of the closures that are likely to go completely unnoticed. The Advisory Council on Historic Preservation, with 39 employees, advises the president and Congress on national historic preservation policy. The Corporation for National and Community Service will have 538 of its 610 employees stay home. We can’t really say what they do because the agency’s website is “currently not available” due to a “lapse in government funding.”

Here are a few other good ones; the Institute of Museum and Library Services, with 69 employees, will close, but not the Inter-American Foundation, which assists with development projects in Latin America and the Caribbean. The National Capital Planning Commission, which provides long-range planning guidance for Washington and nearby areas, will only keep five of its 35 employees and the Privacy and Civil Liberties Oversight Board will still function. A mainstream media outlet has provided a list of all the agencies and the number of workers they employ.    

Via: Judicial Watch

Continue Reading.... 

House passes bill cutting $40 billion from food stamp program

WASHINGTON — The House voted to cut nearly $40 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or food stamps, over a period 10 years on Thursday.

House Republican’s Nutrition Reform and Work Opportunity Act of 2013 passed largely along party lines on a vote of 217 to 210.

The billion dollar cuts to the program — which has ballooned in participation and doubled in cost since 2008 to nearly $80 billion annually — are achieved through reforms such as reducing waivers for work requirements for able-bodied adults without dependents, tightening eligibility requirements like categorical eligibility (a policy allowing states to determine SNAP eligibility through participation in other welfare programs) and closing loopholes.

The nutrition title represents the second portion of the farm bill, which was split into two separate bills when a comprehensive farm bill failed to pass the House over the summer (in large part due to disputed over the cuts to the program). The cuts to SNAP this time, however, were twice as aggressive.

In July, the House passed the first portion of the traditional farm bill, a stripped down bill dealing just with farm programs.

“In the real world, we measure success by results,” Indiana Republican Rep. Marlin Stutzman said on the House floor arguing in favor of the bill. “It’s time for Washington to measure success by how many families are lifted out of poverty and helped back on their feet, not by how much Washington bureaucrats spend year after year.”

Democrats argued that House Republicans are trying to take food out of needy American’s mouth, with House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi calling the bill “dangerous” and Maryland Democratic Rep. Donna Edwards calling it “mean” on the floor.

“This bill goes against decades of bipartisan support for fighting hunger and would be disastrous for millions of Americans,” Connecticut Democratic Rep. Rosa DeLauro said in a statement before the vote, calling the cuts “immoral.”

Via: Daily Caller

Continue Reading.....

Stunning Food Stamp Facts Uncovered ...

U.S. Report Makes Case for Food Stamp Increase

JUDICIAL WATCH: The Obama administration blew an astounding $80 billion on food stamps last year but it wasn’t enough to put a dent in the national epidemic of "food insecure" households, according to a new government study that aims to justify pouring larger sums of taxpayer dollars into the bulging welfare program.

It’s like there’s no end to the madness! In 2012 a record 47 million people got food stamps, according to the government’s own figures. Uncle Sam spent an unprecedented $80 billion on the program, marking an unbelievable $2.7 billion increase from the previous year.  To help illustrate the drastic growth, let’s consider the 2007 figures; 26 million people got food stamps that year at a cost to American taxpayers of $35 billion.

As breathtaking as these figures are, the Obama administration insists on expanding the rolls even offering the benefit to illegal immigrants. Earlier this year Judicial Watch obtained documents from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), the agency that distributes food stamps, detailing its work with the Mexican government to promote participation by illegal aliens. The effort includes a Spanish-language flyer provided to the Mexican Embassy by the USDA ensuring that Mexicans in the U.S. don’t need to declare their immigration status to get financial assistance from Uncle Sam.

Via: Judicial Watch

Continue Reading....

Get excited for more “farm bill” drama, coming soon to Congress

Earlier this summer, we watched the unexpectedly high-drama saga of the “farm bill” play out in Congress, and when lawmakers reconvene next week, it’s going to be a major action item that the leadership will want to wrap up before the current legislation expires at the end of September — even as the looming budget battle and the Syria debacle will probably occupy a lot of attention.

Here’s your refresher course on the pending status of the new legislation, as succinct as I can make it: The “farm bill” has traditionally contained both “agriculture policy,” ahem, and the outline for the federal Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (i.e., food stamps) — the deliberately omnibus design usually helps to ensure the passage of both urban and rural interests’ favored programs and protect the status quo. The budget for food stamps has more than doubled in just five years, but the Senate passed a renewed version of the farm bill that made only the most miniscule, practically nonexistent spending cuts possible to the food stamps program (read: an oh-so-brave and far-sighted $400 million/year out of an annual budget of now almost $80 billion). The House then took their turn at crafting matching legislation, and came up with a version that dared to make the wildly draconian cut of $2 billion a year, gasp, to food stamps. The White House immediately shot the idea down, but the issue suddenly and dramatically became moot when the House itself rejected the omnibus package with bipartisan opposition. Out of nowhere, lawmakers where suddenly talking about divorcing “agriculture policy” and food stamps into two more transparent bills, and for one brief, shining moment, it looked like we might get both some serious and reasonable cuts to both food stamps and the egregious corporate welfare divvied out to theagriculture sector and their many lobbies… But then, House Republicans voted through the agriculture portion as a single bill without really reforming our market-distorting and pork-tossing agricultural programs much at all, and we’re still waiting for the House version of a bill for the food stamp program.

Via: Hot Air

Continue Reading....

GOP sees food fight as kids trash USDA fruit, vegetable guidelines

House Republicans say new U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) guidelines aimed at forcing students to eat fruits and vegetables are a failure because students across the country are simply tossing the healthy fare into the trash.

"[T]here remains great concern with the amount of food waste generated at school cafeterias, much of it brought on by requiring students to take fruits and vegetables rather than simply offer them," Reps. John Kline (R-Minn.), Kristi Noem (R-S.D.) and Phil Roe (R-Tenn.) told USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack in a letter sent Thursday.

"This is a waste of federal, state and local funds and is contrary to the law's goal of feeding as many low-income and hungry children as possible," they said. "Once again, we are aware USDA has attempted to address this situation by allowing greater choice in reimbursable meals, but students should not have to take additional food if they have no intention of eating it."

Republicans have been criticizing USDA school lunch guidelines for the last few months, in particular USDA rules that set maximum-calorie guidelines for all meals subsidized by taxpayers. Last month, Rep. Steve King (R-Iowa) introduced the No Hungry Kids Act, which would repeal these calorie restrictions.

Via: The Hill

Continue Reading...