Connecticut Officials Applaud Healthier School Lunch Requirements

New federal rules will require more fruits, vegetables, along with calorie limits.

As kids head back to school this week they’ll see more than just new books and teachers in their classrooms. For the first time, they’ll be seeing healthier hot lunches.

Under rules that take affect this year in federally subsidized public school lunch programs, the federal government is for the first time imposing calorie and sodium limits on school lunch offerings and requiring schools to offer students more fruits, vegetables and whole grains.

The new rules, established by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, represent the first changes in public school lunch programs in 15 years. The calorie and sodium limits imposed under the new guidelines are based on a student’s age.

The changes are part of the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010 and are part of an overall effort to make federally subsidized school hot lunches healthier for kids and help reduce a growing obesity problem in the country.

The new requirements include:

  • Age-appropriate calorie limits and portion sizes;
  • Larger servings of vegetables and fruits (students must take at least one serving of produce with their school lunch)
  • A wider variety of vegetables, including dark green and red/orange vegetables and legumes
  • Fat-free or 1 percent milk (flavored milk must be fat-free)
  • Reduced sodium content

Officials with the School Nutrition Association of Connecticut said they applaud the federal school lunch changes, but added that some districts in Connecticut were already trying to make their lunches healthier before the new rules were passed.

“While these standards will be seen in schools nationwide for the first time this fall, many Connecticut school districts have already begun these efforts,” said Susan Maffe, President of SNACT. “We continue to proactively work to offer additional opportunities for healthier and nutritious lunches and are committed to ensuring a higher quality of nutritional standards than ever before as well as empowering students to make a healthier change.”

Angela August 27, 2012 at 03:52 PM
Oh boy, are we Turning into NYC? I hope not.
Andrew Ziemba August 27, 2012 at 04:19 PM
Unhealthy, overpriced, and forced down their little throats by big government. I remember back in middle school I was selling soda cans at school for $1 per can at lunch time. Why? because kids wanted them. Children will eat what children want to eat. They will not buy cafeteria lunch and will sneak stuff into the cafeteria. Soon we will have school staff searching backpacks in order to protect the unions and force children to eat that trash. Home made lunches? Yeah right. Home made lunches are dangerous! Government knows best. It's all about the money. The money matters way more than the kids. What a tragedy.
John L August 27, 2012 at 06:04 PM
No different than SRBI (Scientific Research Based Instruction (or intervention)). It's a way to send public money to the private sector. The facade is that it helps kids by providing interventions that are "Scientifically Researched", but the problem is that only people with money are having their "research" published and turned into one stop shopping "programs" that schools by. Nothing more than a creative way to flush public money to the private "program" companies. They certainly aren't helping the kids use creativity in the classroom. Out with critical thinking and in with widget makers who test well.
concerned August 27, 2012 at 08:26 PM
This is were our country is headed, socialism, the government will decide what we eat, drink, when we sleep, when we're allowed to take a breath etc. Once Government takes over/gets involved in any aspect of our country, we must bow down to their every whim....Please people, vote wisely in November...if any given candidate is up for re-election, vote him/her out. Do this every November so we don't have anymore career politicians trying to dictate our lives and the Unions, special interest groups, etc. can't bribe our politicians and be handed contracts they don't deserve.
MAC August 28, 2012 at 12:54 AM
"If any given candidate [with a "D" after name] is up for re-election, vote him/her out," because they ALL, both in Hartford and D.C., voted for the new and HIGHER TAXES! On the other hand, NONE of the Republicans in our CT legislature voted for Malloy's job and economy killing TAXES and hostile business environment! I also can't think of any "Rs" in congress who have voted for Obama's and Reid and Pelosi's job-killing TAX increases. In general I deplore "career politicians" of both parties, but when there are men and women of INTEGRITY truly "serving" the best interests of We the People--and those are admittedly a small percentage of the total in the CT general assembly and in congress--then they should be re-elected!! But the voter has to do his or her homework on the candidates--get to know them and their voting records, or their philosophy of government if they have not yet been elected. Hint: if there is a D after their name, they are for BIG government!! Every Republican running for CT's legislature is far superior in fealty to "Limited Government" to any Democrat! And in congress there are many fine (not from CT) Republican senators and congressmen/women who the voters should retain in office. They include Mike Pence, Louis Gohmert, Michele Bachmann, Marsha Blackburn, Jason Chaffetz, Darrel Issa, Jim DeMint, Steve King, Peter King, Mike Lee, Rand Paul, Dana Rohrback, Cathy McMorris-Rogers and many more.


More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »