Kern-Rugile: Healthy Kids Act is about hunger

Jenna Kern-Rugile lives in East Northport.

The terms "gridlock" and "Washington" are practically synonymous these days. But the partisan contentiousness that characterizes so much political discourse was put aside last week for the sake of children, when the House of Representatives passed the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act.

The $4.5-billion measure, which unanimously passed the Senate in the summer, reauthorizes the Child Nutrition Act for 10 years and will now go to President Barack Obama's desk, where it's certain to be signed.

The bill's main goal is to bring fresher, healthier food to children - especially those who need it most. It also will expand the number of kids eligible to enroll in free or reduced-price school breakfast and lunch programs, increase the reimbursement rate to schools for those meals by 6 percent, and place limitations on junk food in school.

It's that last provision that has garnered much of the buzz, in part because of comments made by Sarah Palin. In reference to first lady Michelle Obama's advocacy of the bill - along with her support of other initiatives to combat hunger and obesity in children - Palin said in an interview on Laura Ingraham's radio show: "What she is telling us is she cannot trust parents to make decisions for their own children. . . . Instead of a government thinking that they need to take over and make decisions according to some politician or politician's wife's priorities, just leave us alone." She had brought that point home earlier by showing up - sugar cookies in hand - at a Pennsylvania school last month, to protest the state's plan to ban junk food in schools.

But "don't touch my junk food" theatrics are a distraction from the federal bill's primary purpose. Millions of children in our country go hungry every day, and Long Island is far from immune. The bill was applauded by advocates including Randi Shubin Dresner, head of Island Harvest, the largest hunger relief organization on Long Island, who said it "will help provide nutritious food to over 110,000 children on Long Island who face the risk of hunger each day."

Both Houses should be commended for putting the health of kids ahead of highly exaggerated political posturing. U.S. Department of Agriculture Secretary Thomas Vilsack has made it clear that bake sales and birthday parties aren't what the Child Nutrition Act is about. The bill's junk food-elimination provision is "primarily aimed at vending machines, snack bars and other similar venues," he said in a statement, with exemptions considered for fundraising and other special events. It also has no impact on after-school events or sports concession stands.

So don't worry, Gov. Palin: Washington isn't interested in robbing our youngsters of the occasional cupcake (that's just for the few districts that have taken such bans to extremes). But there's another part of the bill that could take food out of the mouths of our nation's children, and that is something worth worrying about.

Nearly half the funding for the Child Nutrition Act is slated to come out of the federal food stamp program, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP.

That doesn't sit well with Dresner: "Using SNAP funding to support important programs including is akin to taking food away from dinner so you can eat lunch. Our children deserve better than that. If we don't ensure that they have access to healthy foods in their formative years, we are setting them up for certain failure."

Obama has promised that the SNAP cuts will be replaced with other sources before that money would be needed - sometime around 2013. The White House has to live up to that commitment. We found the funds to bail out Wall Street fat cats; we can come up with a way to help feed hungry children on Main Street.