By Rich Kozlovich
On July 27, 2022 Joe Miller published this piece, 22 AGs sue USDA to stop withholding school lunches over gender, sexual orientation rules, saying:
Schools ordering food for the beginning of the fall semester could be facing uncertainty over whether they’ll receive federal assistance that’s the center of a legal battle for being tied to sex discrimination rules. Twenty-two attorneys general are suing the Biden administration to prevent any loss of federal nutrition assistance for failing to obey the funding catch tying the money to other issues.
In May, the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) announced any state, local agency, program operator or sponsor receiving its funding must “investigate allegations of discrimination based on gender identity or sexual orientation.” The USDA also required all organizations to update discrimination policies and signage to include prohibitions against discrimination based on gender identity and sexual orientation.
There is so much wrong with this it boggles the mind. First, why and when did the federal government start supplying lunches to school children? 1946, under the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, with the goal of providing:
"low-cost or free school lunch meals to qualified students through subsidies to schools."
That was the emotional tag to make it palatable to the public. Whenever there's a program that claims in statement or context, "it's for the children", you had better start looking deeper. There's always more involved:
The program was established as a way to prop up food prices by absorbing farm surpluses, while at the same time providing food to school age children. It was named after Richard Russell, Jr., signed into law by President Harry S. Truman in 1946, and entered the federal government into schools' dietary programs on June 4, 1946.
So, while there were many good intentioned people involved, in reality this was a way to justify the federal government's hand outs to agriculture that started with the Roosevelt administration and has continued right up to now, and that figure is massive. In 2020 it amounted to 20 billion dollars.
Also, why is the USDA getting involved in this social issue? How is this an agricultural issue? The federal government confiscates trillions of dollars every year and returns huge amounts of that money to the states to fund various programs. That is unless the state has the audacity to ignore these ideological commands from the bureaucrats, stripping them of the funds they have every right to receive.
These commands are rules being implemented by these agencies don't have the Constitutional authority to impose, as the Supreme Court ruled on "West Virginia v. EPA that put and end to the EPA's self invented authority to impose rules on emissions, and that mentality is true of every agency of the federal government.
I have no problem with subsidized lunches being served at schools, but that should exclusively be a state responsibility, and the state should decide if, how much, when, and what will be served by the people of the state that funds it, instead of Michelle Obama, whether she was right or wrong on her choices isn't the issue. The issue is where that authority belongs.
As for the arguments the states may not be able to afford it: That's a load of horsepucky. If you look at state budgets you will see waste and misspent funds to the tune of millions of dollars, and Ohio is guilty of that.
It's time to purge these agencies and eliminate the Department of Education, which has been a incredibly expensive failure and a disturbing intrusion in the lives of American families. All this is nothing more than a way for the leftists infesting the agencies of the federal government, through incremental steps, impose a socialist tyranny on America.
Solution? Repeal the 16th and 17the Amendments.
Post a Comment