Politicians could change the whole-grain requirements and competitive food restrictions. Taking bite out of school lunch reform

House Republicans are gaining steam in their latest effort to scale back key pieces of one of first lady Michelle Obama’s crowning food policy achievements: school lunch reform.

The House Appropriations Subcommittee on Agriculture is looking at including language in the fiscal 2015 spending bill to potentially halt key school nutrition regulations for increased whole-grain requirements and competitive foods restrictions, which are set to kick in this July.


It’s a move that has nutrition advocates very concerned, not only for the regulations but because it represents what they see as a growing pattern of partisanship and congressional intervention in school nutrition policy set by the Department of Agriculture.

( Also on POLITICO: $474M for 4 failed ACA exchanges)

“This shift is really a big change in how the program has been dealt with in the past,” said Margo Wootan, director of nutrition policy at the Center for Science in the Public Interest. “I think the political wrangling that’s going on is really misguided.”

Giving tomato sauce extra credit toward the vegetable requirement, something that was inserted in a spending bill in 2011, has become the most infamous example of congressional meddling in school lunch policy, but the trend has continued in recent years.

Earlier this year, the House was able to insert report language in the omnibus bill that directed the Agriculture Department to create a waiver program for schools struggling to meet the new nutrition requirements, but USDA’s lawyers ultimately determined the department didn’t have the statutory authority to do so.

( Also on POLITICO: Court backs EPA on soot limits move)

The subcommittee is keeping a tight lid on what may be in the works this time around, but the staff of Rep. Rodney Davis (R-Ill.) confirmed appropriations staff has an interest in addressing the concerns raised by dozens of other lawmakers about the next round of regulations scheduled to take effect over the summer.

“We already went through the omnibus, and we’re working through the appropriations process,” Davis said in an interview. Davis, a freshman lawmaker, has been an outspoken critic of many of the nutrition rules that are the result of the 2010 Healthy Hunger-Free Kids Act. He serves on the House Agriculture Committee but not on the Appropriations Committee.

“All we’ve ever asked is for flexibility for the schools,” said Davis, who argues the regulations are far too prescriptive and unworkable for school nutrition programs. He points out that more than a million children have dropped out of the program and says plate waste has increased since the latest round of nutritional standards went into place.

Davis and more than 40 other lawmakers, including three Democrats, were planning to send a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack late last week, asking USDA to keep the whole-grain-rich requirement at 50 percent rather than moving it to 100 percent and to loosen some restrictions on competitive foods sales, which are both set to take effect in July; and suspend stricter “Target 2” sodium reduction requirements, which are set to take effect in 2017.

The letter also asks that USDA work with Congress to create a waiver program “until schools can implement these new regulations without incurring additional costs.”

Davis’ staff indicated that the whole-grain requirement could be addressed through the appropriations process by potentially withholding funding, but the specifics have not been worked out.

“Approps is a short-term strategy,” said Jen Daulby, Davis’ chief of staff. “And then, long term, it’s statutory fixes to flexibility and then reauthorization.”

Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.), chairman of the appropriations subcommittee on agriculture, has shown a lot of interest in the school lunch rules lately. Aderholt held a forum in mid-April with School Nutrition Association President Leah Schmidt in his district to hear concerns.

“It is clear to me that it is time for the administration to hit the pause button on the implementation of school nutrition guidelines and listen to the feedback — some of the rules are unworkable and having the opposite effect,” said Aderholt. “I am hearing this from the school administrators as well as the students themselves.”

With appropriations about to ramp up in the House, both sides of the school nutrition regulatory debate are in full court press to make their cases. The National Alliance for Nutrition and Activity is playing defense to keep all the USDA’s rules on track, while on the other side SNA and other school groups are making their case that schools desperately need more flexibility.

All of the issues raised by Davis and others are top priorities for SNA, which argues that schools often do not have access to products like whole-grain-enriched versions of pasta and biscuits that kids will actually eat.

The association points out that, under the competitive foods rule, items approved to be part of a school meal, like sandwiches, pizzas or fries, can be sold only as à la carte items the day they are also offered as part of a USDA-reimbursed meal and the following day. SNA wants those items allowed for sale five days a week without having to meet much stricter competitive foods standards, which include “extremely aggressive” sodium limits.

Nutrition advocates are staunchly opposed to such a change. They argue that while pizza, for example, is not a healthful option when served alone, it might be part of a balanced meal if alongside a side item, salad and low-fat milk.

SNA members are meeting with lawmakers daily to get their message out, Diane Pratt-Heavner, a spokeswoman for the association, told POLITICO. Eight Arkansas district nutrition directors were on Capitol Hill last Thursday meeting with Democratic Sen. Mark Pryor’s personal staff and committee staff, including his chief of staff and legislative director.

Pryor’s constituents were raising their concerns and “telling his staff what’s going on in school cafeterias in his state,” said Pratt-Heavner.

“I understand it was a very positive meeting, and the senator’s staff expressed an interest in finding some way to help,” she said, adding that she was not part of the meeting and didn’t have further details.

Asked whether SNA is specifically asking for appropriations language, Pratt-Heavner said: “We’ve been focusing on educating members on what concerns are. We’re certainly hopeful that there will be something there to provide some relief.”

Nutrition advocates are fully expecting that there will be something in the appropriations bill out of the House. The question is simply: How far does it go? And then what happens in the Senate?

“I think looking in the crystal ball, which is never as clear as you want it to be, that Rep. Aderholt will put something in the ag approps bill,” said Wootan. She thinks Pryor will very likely not put anything in his bill, but there would be wrangling over a compromise during conference.

Sen. Tom Harkin (D-Iowa), who worked for decades to get stricter nutritional standards, is concerned about what’s cooking in the House and especially concerned about the increasingly partisan debate that’s taking place. He is talking to his colleagues about why the regulations should not be meddled with, according to a top aide.

“It would be a sad day if child nutrition programs with 40 years of public health science and long-standing, bipartisan support behind them are eroded because Congress allows these programs to be guided by industry’s bottom line instead of what is best for our kids,” Harkin said. “Let’s be clear, the changes to nutrition programs people are pushing will mean more sodium in kid’s meals, fewer fruits and vegetables on their plates, more sugary drinks and snacks in our schools, and french fries for toddlers in the [Women, Infants and Children] program.”

On top of the policy implications, nutrition advocates point out that continued policymaking by appropriations is setting a precedent they do not like.

“It’s just not the place to be making these policy decisions,” said Jessica Donze Black, director of the Pew Charitable Trusts’ Kids’ Safe and Healthful Foods Project. “These are regulatory questions. Editing regulations via the appropriations process is just bad policy.”

“Anything they do that takes regulatory authority out of USDA and takes us out of the scientific process, is potentially a dangerous precedent,” she added.

Tracy Fox, president of Food, Nutrition & Policy Consultants, expressed similar concerns.

“It is sad that Congress feels compelled to unravel the very programs that have had strong bipartisan support for decades,” said Fox. “Then again, given that this is the same Congress that brought us pizza as a vegetable, it is no surprise that they now want to allow pizza in the lunchroom every day.”