Capitol Ideas

By Chad

February 15, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this

Unfortunately as Morgan Spurlock found in “Super Size Me”, in public schools it’s an issue of cost, and finding the cheapest provider of these foods. Health food in schools? Absolutely, I think it’s a no brainer. Our kids are fat, slow, and while sugar gives a kid a quick high, it certainly doesn’t help their overall health.

Unfortunately as long as our schools have no choice from a budget perspective and have to outsource food service to the lowest cost provider, our kids are going to continue to get crap.

By jean

February 15, 2006 09:25 AM | Link to this

Improvement has to include a combination of healthy food and a strong, mandatory, physical education program in our schools.

By Jay Smith

February 15, 2006 10:48 AM | Link to this

I just read Kemp’s plan on his website, www.votebriankemp.com. It’s pretty amazing. It calls for a standard high nutrition plan for all schools, more PE and nutrition education, the junk food ban. he even talks about having a website where working parents can sign up for emails of recipes for quick meals that are healthy.

never thougth I’d care about an Ag Commissioner race but I do now! Great job Kemp!

By Howard

February 15, 2006 10:54 AM | Link to this

I’m a conservative Republican and i’m glad that somebody is finally offering some real leadership down there at the Capitol. We spend all this effort of stupid frivolous stuff. our kids health is more important than anything! I’m voting for this Kemp guy!

By Kyle

February 15, 2006 11:00 AM | Link to this

It is about time somebody addressed this problem. Our kids are becoming to inactive and becoming to fat! We have to start somewhere, our schools are a great place to start. I commend Sen. Kemp for this bold proposal. You have my vote, never even knew this was an elected position.

By Doc

February 15, 2006 11:06 AM | Link to this

How can you not support it. Everyone knows that our schools are the only decent meal many children get during the day. It is an excellent idea and just one way the average person can see the value of the Ag. Commissioner’s office.

By Max

February 15, 2006 11:08 AM | Link to this

It is about time that we have a candidate stand up with the bold leadership to propose a visionary plan on how to protect our families and help fight against bad health and obesity.

It is nice to find out why a city boy like my should care about this race and about the office of Ag Commissioner.

Kemp’s got my vote because he is protecting my family, that means more to me than peanuts!!

By H Billings

February 15, 2006 11:11 AM | Link to this

Wow, talk about bold proposals. This is a bold position to take and issue that many do not want to talk about.

The fact is, our kids are fat nowadays and we must do something about it because it is causing nothing but health problems for our children.

I don’t know this Kemp guy, but a man that caan stand up for this, will have my support.

By Michael

February 15, 2006 11:38 AM | Link to this

I guess this is bad but I bever realized that the office of Ag Commissioner was so far reaching. After I read this Kemp plan I realized how important this is.

I guess I am really going to vote in this race this time and for Kemp.

By Jamie

February 15, 2006 11:42 AM | Link to this

It has been a long time since a leader has emerged in the Agriculture Commissioner Race. People may ask why the elected official for the Commissioner of Agriculture is important. Well, it hasn’t been. The commissioner’s office for agriculture has remained stagnant for far too long.

Funding for the statewide agency has been dwindling primarily due to a lack of motivation on the part of the commissioner’s office to create dialog within the state legislature. Positive, forward-looking initiatives also became obsolete after the Commissioner acquired his tenure upon the declaration that the Civil War had come to an end.

State Senator Brian Kemp, a motivational progressive leader, has brought together a simplistic yet intuitive idea to fight for farmers and families of Georgia—Wow, why didn’t the incumbent think of this. Moreover, this primary fact is why Kemp is for Georgia and will address the problems that have been ignored for to long.

By Jamie

February 15, 2006 11:48 AM | Link to this

It has been a long time since a leader has emerged in the Agriculture Commissioner race. People may ask why the elected official for the Commissioner of Agriculture is important. Well, it hasn’t been. The commissioner’s office for agriculture has remained stagnant for far too long.

Funding for the statewide agency has been dwindling primarily due to a lack of motivation on the part of the commissioner’s office to create dialog within the state legislature. Positive, forward-looking initiatives also became obsolete after the Commissioner acquired his tenure, which occurred at the closing of the Civil War.

State Senator Brian Kemp, a motivational progressive leader, has brought together a simplistic yet intuitive idea to fight for farmers and families of Georgia—Wow, why didn’t the incumbent think of this. Moreover, this primary fact is why Kemp is for Georgia and will address the problems that have been ignored for to long.

By abc

February 15, 2006 11:54 AM | Link to this

I agree with banning junk food from schools, but what will offset the lost vending revenue? I’ve always thought the only reason the junk is in the schools is because of the amount of money to be made from it (an offensive notion in itself). I don’t think that the kids will buy health food snacks from the machines.

By Elizabeth

February 15, 2006 11:55 AM | Link to this

I just checked out Senator Kemp’s website, and it’s extremely impressive. I consider myself to have moderate political views, but Senator Kemp definitely has my vote. He seems to really know what he’s talking about, and he obviously genuinely cares about Georgia families. It’s about time someone took the initiative to make the office of Agriculture Commissioner something more. He obviously is the only Republican who has what it takes to do an excellent job. Needless to say, Irvin needs to go. I’m excited to see what happens in the July primary- I will undoubtedly encourage people to show up and vote for Kemp!

By bill

February 15, 2006 11:56 AM | Link to this

This is great, as an educator I support this 100%. To bad is has taken this long for someone to stand up and fight for this.

By John

February 15, 2006 11:58 AM | Link to this

This is a matter left to local systems. If a school in Georgia wants to have vending machines and a parent wants to give a child money to buy “junk food”—whatever the term means—let them. It’s not that big of a problem. Worry about real issues and problems in education and not non-issues. Once again Republicans who supposedly against big government are sticking their noses where they don’t belong.

By chris connolly

February 15, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

Why didn’t the current Commissioner think of it? Because school lunches are not regulated by the Ag Commissioner but by the US Department of Agriculture and local school systems. While it sounds like a great idea, Brian Kemp would have no control over it as Commissioner. From all the plans I’ve seen from him, I’m starting to wonder if he knows what powers the Ag Commissioner has.

By H Billings

February 15, 2006 12:06 PM | Link to this

John, I don’t think the plan ever said that this would be forced or mandated. I believe it said that Kemp would work with schools and encourage healthier alternatives. This doesnt seem to be a mandate. THis is leadership.

By MHS

February 15, 2006 12:07 PM | Link to this

Please don’t take junk food out of schools. My students might start staying awake in class because they won’t be crashing from the sugar highs, and then I will have to control them again… :)

By steve

February 15, 2006 12:12 PM | Link to this

I am with ya MHS. The fact is Kemp is talking about fighting for a change in how things are done. He is working to make our children healthier. Everyone should be in favor. You are either for our families or not.

By Bev

February 15, 2006 12:13 PM | Link to this

Chris, Senator Kemp has said repeatedly he wants to WORK with others- he wants to ENCOURAGE healthier food- he knows exactly what “powers” he will have as Ag Commissioner. You need to read the Kemp Plan more closely. I’m voting for Kemp, and I encourage all other parents to do the same.

By Miranda

February 15, 2006 12:14 PM | Link to this

Well John I guess you are ok with your kids becoming fat and unhealthy. You say big government, but have you thought of the problems this can cause for the government and citizens down the road. When these kids grow up and become more obese and eventually are diagnosed with diabetes and other health problems. Who is going to be faced with the problem then? It is better to start teaching children better health habits at a young age. If parents want their kids to have junk food then that is fine, let mommy and daddy go out and buy the twinkies.

I think this is a great idea, this has been floating around for a few years but nobody would step up to the plate and run with it. I am a democrat, but I will be voting for Mr. Kemp! Thank You Senator for standing up for our children.

By Michael

February 15, 2006 12:19 PM | Link to this

It is finally nice to have a candidate in the state with a plan. There is not one other candidate in this state, Rep. or Dem. that has such a plan as this and everyone needs to know about it.

By Paula

February 15, 2006 12:25 PM | Link to this

I think it’s absurd that schools serve lunch in the first place. If all parents packed their children’s lunches then the school’s luncheon menus would be moot, the kids would get a healthy meal, and the government would get out of the food industry business in schools altogether. Now that would be refreshing and much healthier.

By Julie

February 15, 2006 12:30 PM | Link to this

Great proposal! We need a leader who will stand up and fight.

By sped teacher

February 15, 2006 12:40 PM | Link to this

Kemp’s plan sounds great. I’m backing him 100%.

Paula, did I read what you wrote correctly? So, what a/b the kids who’s parents can’t afford to pack them a lunch? Or, what about the homeless students our schools serve? What would they eat if we didn’t serve a nutritious breakfast and lunch?

By Jim

February 15, 2006 12:46 PM | Link to this

Best site! order-phentermine.tripod.com Visite now. Will not regret!

By Ben

February 15, 2006 01:47 PM | Link to this

Thank You Senator Kemp! We need more leaders like you in Atlanta, and especially leading the AG. Department. It is time for that old crazy Irvin to go. After looking at Kemp’s website and plan I am going to tell everybody to vote for Kemp for Ag Comm.!

By JS

February 15, 2006 02:19 PM | Link to this

This obesity thing has gotten out of hand. we need some changes. sounds like kemp’s on the right track

By Dan

February 15, 2006 02:53 PM | Link to this

Can someone do a study on how many of the free lunch kids spend $1,$$2, or $3 a day in the soda and snack machines. You could provide a nutritious lunch from home for about $10 a week. I am so tired of hearing people whine about the kids who can’t afford lunch. We can’t build a system targeted at the 1% for whom that is true

By MMM

February 15, 2006 03:01 PM | Link to this

I hate to drop a wet blanket on this effort at mandating morality, but I have had to figure out how to comply with the Federal School Nutrition Program rules to set up lunches for my kids charter school. What is already out there needs a complete re-do rather than an add-on of another layer of regulation and recomendations.

I am so sick of listening to the complaints about our meals of vegetables. Food is a very personal issue which produces very hot tempers. It isn’t that we don’t know kids should eat the vegetables, it is that this is completely different than what kids are given at home. Once again we seek to legislate behavior that we want the schools to enforce. Why can’t the parents be responsible for saying no?

By mike

February 15, 2006 03:21 PM | Link to this

I don’t know Kemp, but he’s got my vote for throwing out an idea. To many times, candidates for office fail to back up their rhetoric with policy substance. Kemp has shown he has a plan which he is willing to place in the forum for debate. Kemp’s energy and ideas are in stark contrast to the antiquated agriculture department and its commissioner. We need new blood and ideas. Sorry Tommy, you have done a great job for this state but its time we get someone with policy and plans to change things for the better. I am voting for Kemp this fall.

By Paula

February 15, 2006 03:39 PM | Link to this

Yes, sped teacher, you did read my comments correctly. In the days of smaller government, parents fed their children and teachers taught them. Children were thinner than they are nowadays, and subsequently healthier, and they were better educated. It’s really none of your business to critique our children’s diet.

By Fluff

February 15, 2006 03:51 PM | Link to this

I kept my sister’s kids a while back and was appalled at what they were eating for lunch. One day the niece had a beef burrito (so wrong on so many levels) and a can of Coke. My nephew ate nachos one day and a bag of chips another. I asked my niece if they have healthier food at the school and she said they do but it takes the whole lunchbreak to get served (problem wasn’t lines, it was slow service). She said the salad bar was disgusting also. Lots of the stuff was very old.

As a non-parent, I wasn’t quite as concerned with this issue. But after hearing what the kids had to eat, it’s an issue now. Fortunately they don’t have a weight problem…yet. Without PE and some vegetables, these kids are going to be HUGE someday.

So tell me, where is all that money that’s pouring into the lottery every day going? Why aren’t your kids dining on Beef Wellington and Fois Gras every day (not that they’re healthy, but you get my drift)? I’d be in a tizzy if I were a parent!

By KempsKids

February 15, 2006 04:15 PM | Link to this

Kemp is great and Kemp is good, and we thank him for our food. Why is the AJC letting all these fake posters turn this into an unpaid Kemp ad/lovefest?

By John

February 15, 2006 04:37 PM | Link to this

Fluff,

As anybody who even remotely keeps up with public affairs knows, no lottery money has ever gone or will ever go into the day to day operations of the schools. Those proceeds go strictly to the HOPE college scholarship and to Pre-K programs. Money for lunch programs comes from federal grants,the prices charged to the students, and property taxes.

By Lee

February 15, 2006 04:56 PM | Link to this

Kemp’s “no junk� food plan makes sense for Georgia kids. However, don’t be fooled by his pie-in-the-sky “plan.� The Commissioner of Agriculture has absolutely nothing to do with the administration of the school lunch program. This “plan� is little more than a political ploy to attract suburban moms who agree with the concept, but don’t understand the role of this elected position.

Quite to the contrary, the Department of Agriculture does regulate meat counters, produce aisles, pet stores, and gasoline stations. These are important issues to Georgians that the Commissioner has direct control over and this should be the centerpiece for any visionary plan for the Department of Agriculture. Rather Kemp has focused on issues he would a little control over as commissioner of agriculture.

The only person in the race with the experience and relationships in Georgia’s food production and distribution industry is Gary Black. He has spent 25 years in the agriculture industry fighting for consumers and farmers. He knows the department and his plan reflects realistic expectations of the department and its personnel. As someone closely tied to the agriculture industry, I urge you please don’t be falsely persuaded by a “feel good� plan from someone who has spent his life destroying farms and profiteering off their resale. Please make an informed, not a hasty, decision about who needs to lead the Georgia agriculture industry. Please visit www.votegaryblack.com

By Max

February 15, 2006 05:04 PM | Link to this

You know it is interesting, no one was being too political on here. We were discussing how best to help our children and how Senator Kemp’s plan provides ideas and initiatives which will help our kids.

I don’t care about politics or anything when it comes to protecting my family. The only political ploy is the one used by people like Lee who take advantage of this debate and belittle the debate of how to prevent child hood obesity and health problems.

I think Kemp’s point is to be innovative, to do things that have not been done, not to stay with the status quo. Why replace who we have now, if things will stay the same??

I dont know Gary Black, but I do know what this Kemp is proposing, and he will have my vote.

By KABA

February 16, 2006 08:32 AM | Link to this

Banning junk food will not solve the real problem with obestiy in children, which is inactivity. I think the kids would be better off with scheduled P.E classes for everyone, ballroom dance classes, class walks outside for 15 minute breaks, and if schoiols start competitive after school sports programs in elementary school such as swimming, running, soccer, jump rope, etc.

Everything is moderation is my motto. Kids have growing brains that need more carbohydrates, and ice cream, candy bars and occasional cokes are only ‘junk’ if they are eaten in excess. But if kids are regularly moving around a lot, have boosted their metabolisms through exercise, then junk food gives them an energy burst, not an extra pound of fat.

IMHO the legislature should focus on fitness programs for school kids, not punitive junk food bans. And who will define JUNK FOOD? the truth is there are plenty of seemingly healthy granola bars out there with a ton of sugar in them, as much sugar as in a candy bar!

By Dan

February 16, 2006 08:41 AM | Link to this

KABA People with your perception is exactly why there is a problem “oh they are growing its ok” I don’t care how much growing a kid is doing Brains or otherwise, ice cream candy and coke are ALWAYS junk particularly when eaten in lieu of real food, they have almost zero nutritional value. There are much better and cheaper ways to provide what they need for growth. I am not saying they can’t have empty snacks at all but they should be treats or an indulgence

By KABA

February 16, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this

Dan, You need to read more carefully. I said that I don’t think government legislation of junk food will solve the obesity problem, but more activity will. And I certainly didn’t say I advocate eating junk food in lieu of real food. My ‘occasional’ equals your ‘treat or indulgence.’

The problem with this legislation is who and what defines what will be junk food? There is plenty of hidden sugar (junk) in many seemingly healthy products. And who polices the schools and students? Are you going to say schools should suspend a student for carrying a Snickers in his backpack? Are they going to raid lockers in search of cokes and potato chips?

I think legislating junk food out of schools is a feel good idea, but it doesn’t address the real problem of obesity, which is INACTIVITY!

By H Billings

February 16, 2006 08:59 AM | Link to this

Kaba, I believe Kemp proposed better fitness programs too? It is going to take a little of both to fix the problem.

By Jay Smith

February 16, 2006 09:18 AM | Link to this

KABA, you make a good point, but in Kemp’s defense, he calls for more PE and nutrition classes as part of the basic school curriculum.

KABA is right, it’s a mix of a lot of things, but I have to applaud Kemp for being the only statewide candidate talking about this key issue. Finally it’s getting the attention it deserves.

Everybody should check this guy out. www.votebriankemp.com

By KABA

February 16, 2006 09:24 AM | Link to this

H Billings, You are right, the schools should limit access to candy, cokes and ice cream, and offer healthy lunches to kids. The school cafeteria lines need to get the hidden sugar and fat out of their meals to start with, then the kids wouldn’t be looking for a sugar fix in the afternoon.

Most diets fail because the person didn’t increase their activity level, and didn’t exercise regularly. Clearly kids are more obese becuase they burn fewer calories than they are consuming. So we need to get them out of their seats and moving more. Junk food is part of the problem, but first and foremost is the INACTVITY!!

Back to legislating junk food. What exactly is junk food and how do you measure what is too much sugar, too much fat, or a combination of both? Drinking fruit juice can give a child just as much sugar as a coke, and the body doesn’t recognize the liquid as nutrition, and tell the child he’s satisfied, so he goes looking for more. Is fruit juice junk food, too?

I just think that the legislature needs to stay away from defining what is and isn’t junk food.

By KABA

February 16, 2006 09:29 AM | Link to this

Jay Smith, Thanks for the info. I am not criticizing Kemp’s efforts, and I am glad he’s promoting PE and nutrition programs, too. I just think Junk Food is too hard to define for legislation purposes.

By KABA

February 16, 2006 10:15 AM | Link to this

While we are talking about Junk Food, be aware that JUNK permeates the lunches produced by school cafeterias. Look at the labels of prepared and breaded meats, canned fruits and veggies, and see the added sugar, salt, fat and perservatives and look at the lard the cooks are using to cook with.

Several news reports lately have shown that when school cafeterias switched to fresh cooking meats and veggies that kids feel better, waste less food, have more energy, fewer behavior problems in class, and are less prone to go hunting for a sugar fix in a candy bar or coke because their blood sugar levels don’t crash in mid afternoon.

By Dan

February 16, 2006 10:56 AM | Link to this

Kaba I generally agree with you it is not the governments place to dictate such things. Why is a school involved in food? Wouldn’t holding class in a restaurant make just as much sense. Anyway my point is much of the problem is, people saying as you did (albeit without some of your caveats) that growing kids need the sugar, blah blah It is a cop out for those people to blame someone else for their childs situation.
I further agree with your point about “defining” junk food. That would be impossible

By Brenda Blaylock

February 16, 2006 11:37 AM | Link to this

The kids throw most of the food on their plates in the cafeteria in the trash. Especially in elementary school. I am a sub in all grade levels and I see them all waste alot of the food. Kids just don’t eat it. Some trays looked almost untouched after lunch.