States Sue Over School Lunch Changes, Say They're Not Scientific Like the Obama Rules Based on Retracted Nutrition Studies
Plus: Pete Buttigieg says no to "free college," and the problems with Elizabeth Warren's plan to jail business execs
Suit takes aim at new school lunch standards. A recent rule change regarding school lunches was greeted with relief by some school districts, who had found that federal mandates from the Obama administration led to food waste, less lunches sold, and more kids buying meals from vending machines. Additionally, schools were still allowed to serve sugary flavored milk, but for some reason it had to be the less nutritious nonfat version.
The changes approved by the Trump administration are relatively minor—more time to comply with reduced sodium levels, no need for flavored milk to be nonfat, and lower whole-grain requirements for some foods—but they address some of the chief criticisms from public schools across the country.
Some state attorneys general don't like that. They're now suing in federal court to make the Obama-era lunch standards permanent.
The suit argues that the recent changes are illegal because Agriculture Department officials didn't provide scientific justification. This is pretty hilarious, considering the sloppy science that the Obama administration relied on when instituting its "Smarter Lunchrooms" program. Many papers from the lead architect of the initiative have since been retracted, after fellow researchers found inconsistencies, errors, and evidence of fraudulent data.
The lawsuit was filed by attorneys general in California, D.C., Illinois, Minnesota, New Mexico, New York, and Vermont. The eternal whackjobs at the PETA-esque Center for Science in the Public Interest have filed a separate lawsuit also challenging the changes.
FREE MINDS
Warren wants to lower burden of proof for white-collar crime. Some people are defending Sen. Elizabeth Warren's "bad bill to jail executives for negligence" using "the argument that we should trust prosecutors to show restraint," tweets Radley Balko. But this "flies in the face the history of prosecutors."
Read more on why from criminal law professor Carissa Byrne Hessick in this thread.
My concern with the bill is the proposal that we impose criminal punishment on executives who are negligent in running their companies. Negligence is an incredibly low standard for criminal punishment. There are very few crimes that impose punishment on this basis. 3/x pic.twitter.com/GUOiGrrHIj
— Carissa Byrne Hessick (@CBHessick) April 3, 2019
FREE MARKETS
Pete Buttigieg says no to "free college." Behold, the rare Democratic presidential candidate capable of resisting a trendy talking point:
BUTTIGIEG on free college: Americans who have a college degree earn more than Americans who don't. As a progressive, I have a hard time getting my head around the idea a majority who earn less because they didn't go to college subsidize a minority who earn more because they did
— Stephanie Murray (@StephMurr_Jour) April 3, 2019
QUICK HITS
- Amazing how many new ways that prison staff can find to be evil:
A Texas prisoner was allergic to his blanket, and it made him break out into sores. He asked for a new blanket. For 10 YEARS, officials refused. So he sued. The prison system fought it for a year instead of just giving him a new blanket. https://t.co/m8AgodbvYH
— Keri Blakinger (@keribla) April 4, 2019
- After stepping down as FDA commissioner, Scott Gottlieb will be returning to the American Enterprise Institute.
- Beautiful: A government social-media campaign in France got blocked by Twitter for violating the country's own law against "fake news."
- "International human trafficking ring":
Thus endeth the supposedly HUGE Martin County TRAFFICKING BUST. Two middle aged women, managing a business where women who had agency worked, charged with "deriving support from the proceeds of prostitution". Not pimping, not trafficking. #sexwork https://t.co/DvGNjsaUvU
— Mistress Matisse (@mistressmatisse) April 3, 2019
