Not exact matches
Federal reimbursements are not provided for such
foods, but under current USDA policy, the federal reimbursements provided for school meals may be used to
subsidize the costs of providing
competitive foods.
As explained below, two possible uses of school
food revenue —
subsidizing paid meals and providing
competitive foods — raise concerns that low - income children may not be getting the full benefit of the federal reimbursements intended for those meals.
Just to bring everyone up to speed, «
competitive»
food and beverages are those offered in competition with the federally
subsidized school meal, and are sold via vending machines, school stores, fundraisers, snack bars operated by the school cafeteria and other outlets.
Second, according to Poppendieck, by offering junk
food in the same venue as the regular meal, the school district may feel pressured to keep the federally
subsidized school lunch
competitive by offering its own version of «junk
food» items (hence the prevalence of pizza on school menus).
According to Janet Poppendieck, the sale of so - called «
competitive foods» (because they compete with the
subsidized school lunch) had taken place for decades but escalated considerably in response to Reagan - era cuts in domestic social spending.
For those needing a refresher, «
competitive food» is
food that competes with the federally
subsidized breakfast and lunch programs.
In some school cafeterias, the sales of
competitive foods end up being
subsidized by federal school meal reimbursement.
-- tax carbon (simply a top - down government power grab, which achieves nothing regarding climate but hurts the most vulnerable plus the economy in general); —
subsidize corn ethanol (not
competitive, drives up the price of an essential
food crop); —
subsidize «green energy» development or manufacturing projects (too many Solyndras, too many political cronies getting taxpayer money to support basically uncompetitive projects).