Like Countable?

Install the App
TRY NOW

house Bill H.R. 1241

Should Waivers be Required to Buy Foreign Food for the National School Lunch Program?

Argument in favor

This commonsense, bipartisan bill ensures that Buy American provisions in the National School Lunch Program are followed by requiring waivers whenever school food authorities want to buy foreign commodities or products because of the scarcity or cost of domestic options.

Jennifer 's Opinion
···
04/22/2018
OMG, do any Trump haters actually read the bills? As it stands now, school programs are buying less safer products from overseas. No, this administration didn’t create another law against their deregulation agenda. This bi-partisan bill only deems that schools must now ask for a waiver, making it transparent, as to why they are not buying American food products. So again, your hatred of Trump colors your thinking... you care more about getting Trump out of office than about our children and their safety! And although this is a federal food program, and not a state program as it stands now, whether it could become a state’s one is a question for another day. And, if Trump had completely deregulated this program, you’d all be screaming that he’s trying to kill our children!
Like (51)
Follow
Share
ManfromNebraska's Opinion
···
04/22/2018
Support US producers as much as possible and use foreign as little as possible.
Like (20)
Follow
Share
Gopin2018's Opinion
···
04/22/2018
Yes definitely, I want American kids to have the best and safest food at school to eat period.
Like (18)
Follow
Share

Argument opposed

The current exceptions process for Buy American provisions in the National School Lunch Program is sufficient, as a more stringent waiver request process would lead to more domestic goods being purchased which cost taxpayers more.

burrkitty's Opinion
···
04/22/2018
Let’s not make it more difficult to feed our kids at school. We don’t need this red tape at the federal level. If a state wants to force their education system to use local product, then the state can make the law. In California and in the Pacific Northwest, where nutritious food is grown locally and is very high-quality, this law makes sense, but ONLY at a state level because the West Coast is unique in that regard. Making this a federal law forces many states that cannot provide quality products en masse to pay a lot more and those states are the ones who are at least able to do so, where more children need the security of school-based nutrition, and where the education funding is at its lowest. We cannot put another roadblock in the way of the children of “flyover” states, just to sell more California agriculture to the public school system. If California is trying to sell more California agriculture to California schools, fine, let them make a state law. Either way, this doesn’t belong to the federal level. The USA does not produce enough of all kinds of food in every season of the year in order to supply food to every school in the country. That just doesn’t jive with reality. I’m a progressive liberal from the PNW, but this is just a bad idea. This disproportionately hurts the central states where the education systems can’t afford more economic damage. As a Washington resident, I would rather feed more kids in the poor central states than sell more apples and asparagus and feed fewer kids. Remember, it’s not the children’s fault they live there.
Like (72)
Follow
Share
Marc's Opinion
···
04/22/2018
The USA does not produce enough of all kinds of food in every season of the year in order to supply food to every school in the land. This is nothing more than political interference in normal everyday lives of Americans. Plus it will add more cost for schools
Like (24)
Follow
Share
David's Opinion
···
04/22/2018
I believe this should be controlled at the state and not the Federal level. States have different levels of access to different foods, what is good for Maine may not work for Alaska.
Like (22)
Follow
Share

bill Progress

  • Not enacted
    The President has not signed this bill
  • The senate has not voted
  • The house has not voted
      house Committees
      Committee on Education and Labor
    IntroducedFebruary 28th, 2017

What is House Bill H.R. 1241?

This bill would require school food authorities (SFAs) to request a waiver from the Dept. of Agriculture (USDA) to purchase foreign commodities or products for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Waivers could only be granted if: 1) domestic commodities or products aren’t produced in sufficient amounts or of satisfactory quality; 2) domestic commodities or products would be significantly higher in price; and 3) the SFA agrees to make the waiver publicly available on its website and email a notification to parents or guardians of students who will be served the foreign commodity or product.

Under current law, Buy American provisions require SFAs to buy domestic commodities or products for the NSLP to the maximum extent possible. There are limited exceptions permitting the purchase of foreign products or commodities if using domestic products isn’t truly practicable, but there is no requirement to request a waiver — the SFA only needs to keep documentation justifying the exception.

Impact

Students in the NSLP and their families; domestic and foreign producers of commodities and goods that are purchased by school food authorities; and the USDA.

Cost of House Bill H.R. 1241

A CBO cost estimate is unavailable.

More Information

In-Depth: Sponsoring Rep. Doug LaMalfa (R-CA) introduced this bill to bring more accountability and to the Buy American provisions of the National School Lunch Act:

“Northern California produces some of the highest quality food in the world, unfortunately school districts too often look elsewhere to provide students with foreign food that is not held to the same standards of safety and quality. The Buy American provisions of the National School Lunch Act were created to provide students with foreign food that is not held to the same standards of safety and quality. The Buy American provisions of the National School Lunch Act were created to ensure our children enjoy fresh, local produce instead of potentially less healthy alternatives from overseas. This bill increases transparency for schools who request a waiver to use foreign products in school lunches and helps to ensure our tax dollars are used to buy American produce and to support American agriculture.”

Original cosponsor Rep. John Garamendi (D-CA) added:

“One of the best ways to make sure our kids have local produce is to enforce the existing Buy American provisions of the National School Lunch Act. These provisions are designed to ensure taxpayer dollars support U.S. jobs and businesses, and they have the added benefit of increasing the amount of American-grown food our children enjoy through the school lunch program. We have seen too many instances of school districts, including some in my district, importing foreign food unnecessarily without the proper disclosure. Recently, we’ve even seen recalls of imported foods owing to disease outbreaks when that same produce could have been sourced locally right here in California, subject to the highest food safety standards in the world.”

This legislation has the support of 21 bipartisan cosponsors, including 12 Democrats and nine Republicans.


Media:

Summary by Eric Revell

(Photo Credit: Steve Debenport / iStock)

AKA

American Food for American Schools Act of 2017

Official Title

To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to require a school food authority to make publicly available any waiver of the Buy American requirement, and for other purposes.

    Jennifer 's Opinion In Favor
    ···
    04/22/2018
    OMG, do any Trump haters actually read the bills? As it stands now, school programs are buying less safer products from overseas. No, this administration didn’t create another law against their deregulation agenda. This bi-partisan bill only deems that schools must now ask for a waiver, making it transparent, as to why they are not buying American food products. So again, your hatred of Trump colors your thinking... you care more about getting Trump out of office than about our children and their safety! And although this is a federal food program, and not a state program as it stands now, whether it could become a state’s one is a question for another day. And, if Trump had completely deregulated this program, you’d all be screaming that he’s trying to kill our children!
    Like (51)
    Follow
    Share
    burrkitty's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    Let’s not make it more difficult to feed our kids at school. We don’t need this red tape at the federal level. If a state wants to force their education system to use local product, then the state can make the law. In California and in the Pacific Northwest, where nutritious food is grown locally and is very high-quality, this law makes sense, but ONLY at a state level because the West Coast is unique in that regard. Making this a federal law forces many states that cannot provide quality products en masse to pay a lot more and those states are the ones who are at least able to do so, where more children need the security of school-based nutrition, and where the education funding is at its lowest. We cannot put another roadblock in the way of the children of “flyover” states, just to sell more California agriculture to the public school system. If California is trying to sell more California agriculture to California schools, fine, let them make a state law. Either way, this doesn’t belong to the federal level. The USA does not produce enough of all kinds of food in every season of the year in order to supply food to every school in the country. That just doesn’t jive with reality. I’m a progressive liberal from the PNW, but this is just a bad idea. This disproportionately hurts the central states where the education systems can’t afford more economic damage. As a Washington resident, I would rather feed more kids in the poor central states than sell more apples and asparagus and feed fewer kids. Remember, it’s not the children’s fault they live there.
    Like (72)
    Follow
    Share
    Marc's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    The USA does not produce enough of all kinds of food in every season of the year in order to supply food to every school in the land. This is nothing more than political interference in normal everyday lives of Americans. Plus it will add more cost for schools
    Like (24)
    Follow
    Share
    David's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    I believe this should be controlled at the state and not the Federal level. States have different levels of access to different foods, what is good for Maine may not work for Alaska.
    Like (22)
    Follow
    Share
    Hillary's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    No, schools should have to request a waiver to serve overly processed, sugar filled, dye filled, fake food instead of real vegetables and healthy food.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    ManfromNebraska's Opinion In Favor
    ···
    04/22/2018
    Support US producers as much as possible and use foreign as little as possible.
    Like (20)
    Follow
    Share
    Gopin2018's Opinion In Favor
    ···
    04/22/2018
    Yes definitely, I want American kids to have the best and safest food at school to eat period.
    Like (18)
    Follow
    Share
    operaman's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    I will vote NO on foreign food wavers for our school lunch system. Sure, domestic foods may cost more, but domestic producers are supported, not foreign governments and business. As an afterthought, under what Constitutional Amendment supports National School Food Programs? None! Just another socialist program to create Federal Dependency.
    Like (16)
    Follow
    Share
    NoHedges's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    This is an issue to be handled at the state level and on an individual basis. For example Governor Ivey of Alabama likely has very different concerns than Governor Walker of Alaska. Seems like a power grab to force some states to pay unnecessary regulatory fees from their meager education budget.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Deanna's Opinion In Favor
    ···
    04/22/2018
    Can someone please tell me where the responsible adults with a brain are being held? These are our children, the future of this country and if this planet. Can’t the local governments work with the farmers, grocery stores, or food distributors to get better pricing on local, fresh, healthy food? If the Republicans who put forth a bill that has no cost analysis at this time or no plan of action, then why and how is this even being considered and voted on. Do what you are supposed to do and take care you of the people within your districts. Maybe stop the tax cuts in these major corporations, make them pay a higher tax and take care of the people for a change.
    Like (7)
    Follow
    Share
    Christina's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    This should be handled at the state level. There are a lot of areas of the country where local produce is difficult to obtain or prohibitively expensive. These states, with smaller taxpayer bases or no state income tax at all, may not be able to afford it. The federal government should stay out of it.
    Like (6)
    Follow
    Share
    Annita's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    If we pass this, we're have to guarantee schools have the money to buy domestic. Our goods aren't necessarily exempt from recall.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    Pierce 's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    First they should be focusing on giving healthier meals to students, as a homeschooled student/ past public school student I know that I can eat a lot healthier without that unhealthy school meals. This may not effect kids right away at our age but it comes back to bite humans in the ass, no offense but you older generation is obese and it is going to carry on to mine. Nothing is being done about it. First Lady Michelle Obama was working on this and now we have stopped, this should be another priority beside the other hundreds of priorities.
    Like (5)
    Follow
    Share
    MinnesotaMom's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/23/2018
    Our local school lunch programs have been trying to make school lunch more popular by trying to adapt ethnic recipes & immigrant recipes from local communities & this has been popular w all the kids. I don't wan't some jingoistic buy american program to force my local lunch ladies to have to try to source U.S. grown tamarind paste or fish sauce or else close the program.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    ZackSS's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/22/2018
    This sounds like an obvious money racket. And will only do more harm than good. Why is this even an issue to debate when there are more pressing issues that need serious attention?
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    KenBudris's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/23/2018
    If the objective is to ensure schools are serving safe, healthy food to our children, then it should require food to be purchased from properly regulated sources. This falls under the purview of the FDA—not the USDA. This bill is an attempt to prop up the American agriculture industry at the expense of already-cash-strapped school systems.
    Like (4)
    Follow
    Share
    Anna's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/23/2018
    First, schools need fully funded. Once they are given the funding necessary to run all programs, including a lunch program the way they should be then we can discuss regulations that require local healthy food. Second, along with buying local it also needs to be healthy. Get the candy, soda, and junk out of schools.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Stephen's Opinion Against
    ···
    04/23/2018
    States should decide what the standards should be for the food allowed in their schools.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    Robert 's Public Comment
    ···
    04/22/2018
    How stupid can we get. I buy cherry tomatoes in Walmart and Market Basket and even look for USA grown and they are seldom available. So if a school went to Walmart they would need a waiver most of the time. Lot of fruit and vegetables are grown in Mexico and shipped to USA. NAFTA is still in effect.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    IllWill's Opinion In Favor
    ···
    04/22/2018
    We need to make sure that school food authorities are buying more locally-produced food in order to help our domestic food industry instead of buying food from overseas some of which is certainly lower in quality, but is also detrimental to environment if imported from far away. Getting cheap products from overseas isn’t usually the best course of action.
    Like (3)
    Follow
    Share
    MORE