&letterheadPoints

clarified

TO THE EDITOR: Congresswoman Gillibrand's conference in Lake Placid was a great opportunity to share the good work being done to address the issue of childhood obesity and poor health. I'd like to clarify points attributed to me in the article.

Ninety cents is the approximate amount food service directors have to spend on the actual food cost (not including labor and overhead), and 20 cents of that 90 cents is in the form of commodity foods, provided by the federal government (not purchased by the school). The federal Child Nutrition Act of 2004 mandated that schools create Local Wellness Policies, requiring the establishment of nutrition guidelines, nutrition education and physical activity goals. The idea is that these guidelines and goals would apply to the whole school food environment, which includes not only the cafeteria, but all the competing foods as well: food used as a reward, food for class parties, food sold in vending machines, at bake sales, or in fundraising (such as the sale of candy bars to benefit a club), and the snack line in the cafeteria which helps food service directors to make ends meet since they do not receive school budget funds. The lunch program is not federally mandated, but most schools participate in it and they are required to meet the Dietary Guidelines for Americans though many do not.

While schools are a reflection of the unhealthy food environment in our society at large, they are the place where children go to learn, and the food served should be consistent with what children are taught about good nutrition.

A main point I conveyed at the conference is that until the food industry stops determining food policy, we are fighting an uphill battle, and our efforts will not create the widespread change we wish to see.

Amie Hamlin

Executive director

New York Coalition for Healthy School Food

&letterheadEarly

professions

TO THE EDITOR: Some comments on stories from the Aug. 21 Press-Republican: A local businessman allegedly gives money to a bureaucrat and is arrested for bribery.

Poor guy. He could have legally given money to an elected official, in which case it would be called a campaign contribution and the elected official would have told the bureaucrat what to do.

The teacher's union threatened to withhold campaign contributions to Senators and Assembly members who support property tax caps. No surprise they did what the union asked and there are no education cuts. What's the difference between bribery and campaign contributions?

This reminds me of a quote from the great Ronald Reagan. He said, "It's been said that politics is the second oldest profession. I've learned it bears a striking resemblance to the first." Is It just me?