School fundraisers should feature healthier food
It’s well known that many children in the U.S. are overweight and obese. Efforts are being made to change school cafeteria menus and provide fresh fruits and vegetables when possible. Some schools monitor via high tech photography the number of calories consumed by each child in an elementary school, as is being done in San Antonio through a $2 million USDA grant.
Rowan-Salisbury Schools hired a director to institute more physical activity into the school day, both to address the need to expend more calories through exercise as well as to develop greater interest in recreational pursuits that promote fitness. PE classes include rigorous aerobic and anaerobic exercises via video teaching. Health classes encourage students in the virtues of wholesome family menus and a reduction in fast foods.
For many years past, however, many of our schools have raised money through fundraisers that push the sale of soda, high calorie cakes, candy bars, chips, snow cones, etc. This contributes to the obesity problem and directly contravenes efforts to combat poor choices.
We ought to change our sales format to exclude most of the unhealthy choices and promote the sale of more fruit, stationary, wrapping paper and other items. Companies have contracted with RSS to cultivate brand names and promote sales of their products that are contradicting our stance in the cafeteria and classroom. We are preaching liberation from despicable sugar and fat, but are selling it in abundance to raise money for athletics, clubs and PTAs. Our focus is not entirely on our children’s health when we see profits from the sale of junk food as more important than practicing what we are teaching.
As a new school year approaches, I am suggesting Rowan-Salisbury Schools adopt a policy for school sales that eliminates unhealthy foods, including sales by sponsored clubs and concession stands at athletic contests. This would require a sacrifice, but the health and well being of our children is worth it.
— Marcia Kirtley
Salisbury
Congressional hypocrisy
A few months ago I conducted an informal, very non-scientific survey of a few leading Tea Party representatives. These included the offices of Majority Leader Eric Cantor, Michelle Bachmann, Peter Reese and Paul Ryan. I asked the person who answered two simple questions; had there been any staff reductions, and had there been any staff-wide pay reductions.
The first question got either “I can’t answer that” (Mr. Cantor’s office) or “I don’t know.” Interesting, every place I’ve ever worked, word of staff reductions (a.k.a. layoffs) went around like wildfire. Apparently not so in congressional offices. Or these Tea Party leaders haven’t put their own staff’s jobs where their congressional mouths are.
The second question — have there been any pay cuts? — got the same reaction. Either congressional staff are so well paid they don’t notice a smaller paycheck or there haven’t been any reductions in congressional staff payrolls either.
Admittedly this was very unscientific, but it does serve to highlight a point; these so-called “reformers” are perfectly willing to cut or eliminate programs which benefit the poor, the retired and the middle class, but not those which benefit their own supporters and staffs. Perhaps the local Tea Party leaders would like to explain this hypocrisy.
People, and especially members of Congress, should be measured on what they accomplish, not on what they say or what they fail to do. That’s how people in the real, work world are measured, and that’s how politicians should be measured.
— John P. Burke
Salisbury