Congressional Republicans: Pizza is a vegetable

[Hauldren Collider]

You're an idiot.

Seriously, actually think about these things before you reflexively put you foot in your mouth. Conservatives ought to love welfare programs like school lunches.

Because it's not a federal responsibility.

What is the advantage of doing this at the state rather than the federal level, btw?

I know you don't think much of federalism, but I do. Also, I'm not particularly impressed by Washington's ability to legislate. I'm much more impressed by, say, Virginia's ability to legislate.

[Al B. Sure!]

Because it's not a federal responsibility.

I know you don't think much of federalism, but I do. Also, I'm not particularly impressed by Washington's ability to legislate. I'm much more impressed by, say, Virginia's ability to legislate.

It has been a federal responsibility since 1946, largely at the behest of the US military. I suppose your position would be reactionary.

[Hauldren Collider]

It has been a federal responsibility since 1946, largely at the behest of the US military.

That does not impress me. If we've considered childhood obesity a national security issue since '46, what good has allowing the military and congress decide this stuff done?

[Tupac Shakur]

Federal nutritional standards didn't help Alby develop a body capable of handling the rigors of military training, for example.

[Hauldren Collider]

That actually is a strong argument in favor of the system working.

[Asher]

I fail to see how supporting what is essentially the status quo is a far right policy.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Conservatism

Conservatism (Latin: conservare, "to preserve")[1] is a political and social philosophy that promotes the maintenance of traditional institutions and supports, at the most, minimal and gradual change in society. Some conservatives seek to preserve things as they are, emphasizing stability and continuity

[Hauldren Collider]

The far right is not particularly "conservative" in the traditional sense, Asher. In fact, if you're talking about preserving the status quo, you could even argue that the democrats are more conservative than the republicans right now, as they try to keep public sector unions in place, avoid budget and tax reform, etc. Personally, I think the terms "liberal" and "conservative" (in their traditional sense) are almost meaningless with respect to current US politics.

By the way, I voted for the democrats in the recent state elections

[Al B. Sure!]

That does not impress me. If we've considered childhood obesity a national security issue since '46, what good has allowing the military and congress decide this stuff done?

Well no. At the time, malnutrition was the problem and the military wanted the federal government to ensure children were well-fed. In this, they may have been too successful

Now, the problem is obesity.

[Pax]

Federal nutritional standards didn't help Alby develop a body capable of handling the rigors of military training, for example.

Personal Attack.
Alby is in much better shape than I was when I went through OCS, Boot Camp and the Police Academy. In fact, in all three I have seen people n great shape drop out do to injury. So let's get back on topic.
HC, if you're saying that since it's an ongoing problem that has not been solved then we should give up on a national standard then you're off your rocker. We should have a national standard and states and school boards should be required to meet those standards which are actually bare minimums. I think that your concept of giving states so much power in a variety of areas goes against the concept of a united states.
Also, I am assuming that you are somewhere on the right as such you must have your eye on China. A lot of there power comes from the fact that they have a strong central government that can make swift decisions. If we place more power in the hands of the states then we will have more uneven results. I see no reason why we would need a standard in New York City Schools that is different from the one in Muscogee County Schools. I do concede that Washington is full of lobbyists that can and do have a negative effect on what the regulations end up being. Still the power of lobbyists and special interest groups is a different issue.

[The Mad Monk]

Nevertheless, the fact that there has been Federal involvement since 1946, and we are still apparently in an unacceptable state, is the best argument against further Federal involvement that I can think of.

[Kuciwalker]

Indeed. It's pretty easy for a handful of lobbyists in Washington to get Congress to declare pizza a vegetable. Getting tens of thousands of local school boards across the country to do the same is almost certainly impossible.

It would be great if this critique were true, but it isn't. State and municipal governments are at least as 'corrupt' in that way as Congress, and frequently more so. They are poorly monitored by voters, compared to Congress. Local officials are also usually less informed and more dependent on information provided by lobbyists.

And municipalities are lobbied/bribed aplenty. e.g. Jefferson County.

[KrazyHorse]

I think you missed his point.

[Pax]

Nevertheless, the fact that there has been Federal involvement since 1946, and we are still apparently in an unacceptable state, is the best argument against further Federal involvement that I can think of.

It was'nt working so we quit trying. That is how the west was won. That is how the railroads were built. That is Yankee ingenuity. How about if something is not working we figure out how to fix it not just quit.

[Kuciwalker]

Possibly? I read it as "Congress is a single target and therefore more vulnerable".

xpost

[Pax]

If we as americans start showing some ****ing determination then we can get some **** done.