Sunday, February 14, 2010

Ah, memories...

Courtesy of USAToday:

New safety rules for school lunches due by July

INDIAN WELLS, Calif. — By this summer, the U.S. Department of Agriculture will have launched its most sweeping safety reforms in a decade for the food it buys for school lunches.

But much work remains to ensure that food purchased for the National School Lunch Program — in particular, ground beef — is "as safe, wholesome and high quality" as the best commercial products, USDA official Craig Morris told program suppliers at a National Meat Association conference here last week.

The first step: enacting tougher safety standards for federally purchased beef. Those rules should be in effect by July, Morris said. New safety rules are likely tofollow for other commodities bought for the lunch program, such as poultry, eggs and produce. The program feeds 31 million students each school day.

Beef industry representatives here said they could adapt to the new standards but pressed the USDA to move fast so they know what changes will be required.

The new standards follow a USA TODAY investigation that revealed that beef bought by the USDA for school lunches is not tested as rigorously for bacteria and pathogens as beef bought by many fast-food chains. The newspaper also reported that some food producers have been allowed to continue supplying the school lunch program despite having poor safety records with their commercial products.

The USDA reforms, announced Feb. 4, focus largely on how beef and other foods bought for schools are tested for salmonella, E. coli O157:H7 and other contaminants. The department will commission research, including a study by the National Academy of Sciences, to ensure that its testing standards meet those of the most selective commercial buyers, Morris said. He serves as a deputy administrator of the Agricultural Marketing Service, the USDA branch that buys meat and poultry for the school program.

Not all details of the new testing rules are set, but Morris said beef for school lunches now will be sampled off production lines every 15 minutes — at least four times more often than current rules require. The government already rejects meat that tests positive for salmonella or E. coli O157:H7, but the USDA also will reduce the amount of other bacteria that are allowed, he said.

"We know (the new bacteria limits) will be something a lot lower," said Barry Carpenter, head of the meat association. He said he hopes the USDA will "look at what the industry is able to do now for the most discriminating, large-scale commercial buyers, and then set new standards consistent with that. If they do, I'm comfortable the industry will adjust and not miss a beat."

More testing could bring costs that prompt suppliers to raise prices, he said, "But it doesn't appear from anything I've seen yet that it will be significant."

The USDA reforms also will bar companies from supplying to the school lunch program if they have a poor safety record for commercial products.

The change could prove relevant to companies such as Fresno-based Beef Packers, which is owned by Cargill. The company has a history of salmonella problems, and ground beef it produced commercially last year was recalled after it sickened consumers. USA TODAY found, however, that 450,000 pounds of ground beef made at the plant during the recall period still was bought by the USDA and sent to schools.

Under the new rules, company recalls of products sold commercially could lead to a suspension from the lunch program.

Cargill spokesman Mark Klein said the company supports "efforts to improve safety, including the review of school lunch purchasing requirements." Beef Packers has taken steps to control contamination, such as spraying cattle carcasses to remove bacteria before processing, Klein said. And Beef Packers also will be part of a Cargill "pilot project to use third-party video audits of food-safety practices," he said.

The new beef standards are the first step in reassessing safety and quality standards for "the entire range of commodities purchased" by USDA for school lunches, Morris said. Those commodities — fruits and vegetables, fish and poultry, eggs and meat — amount to 15% to 20% of all food served in schools nationwide. Schools buy the rest themselves.

The review could determine whether the USDA will continue sending schools chicken from "spent hens" — old egg-laying birds. Commercial buyers, such as KFC and Campbell Soup, won't buy the meat because it doesn't meet their standards, but USA TODAY found that USDA has bought millions of pounds of spent-hen meat for schools.

Ultimately, Morris said, the USDA wants to have cutting-edge safety and quality standards for "the entire catalog" of food it buys for school lunches.

The title is because I have fond memories of the public school lunch. Memories like running to the bathroom, heaving, after pouring my fat-free milk in my cereal and finding that there were white chunks falling into my cereal with it. Like buying a salad that had eggs and greens going bad. Like fruit that my mother wouldn't dare buy off of supermarket shelves, no matter how cheap. Pizza that was overly greasy. Undercooked hamburgers that made me retch when I realized that the meat in the middle was still cold.

And people wondered why I always brought my own stuff after dealing with that shit.

It's sad that this kind of rules overhaul has to be put in to begin with - these are our kids were talking about here. I also know from experience that having your kids on a meal plan helps the single mother out in terms of paying for food - so people in hard times have little to no choice about feeding their kids this shit that passes for food in school lunches.

...of course, knowing what I know about the government, 20 bucks says that this won't do shit to change anything. That could just be me being cynical, though.


Oh yeah, the comments for the article by the users piss me off, too.

Schools should quit serving food. The parents can be responsible for their kids, its not the governments responsibility to feed them.
No more complaining about quality, cost can be saved by eliminating the kitchens.

I agrewe if the TAXPAYERS are paying for kids to eat free, it should be sandwiches. If their parents want them to eat better, the they should send them with thier own lunch from home paid for with some of the public aide money they get.......

We are in the midst of a "you need to take care of my kids because I don't want to" movement. The government needs to stop saying "yes". Thank you.

Normally, I'd agree with this if it applied to a normal program, except that this particular one is an extremely personal topic to me (which, I won't lie, makes me a huge hypocrite in terms of government welfare programs). My mother was single and was trying to raise three kids while working her ass off morning to night, she wasn't a lazy ass keeping us for welfare money (which I'm pretty sure we never got anyway, otherwise things would've been a bit better back then). As bad as the school lunch system was, it helped us out when we were younger.

Monday, February 1, 2010

It's Personal

Oh yes, it certainly is personal now.

Obama budget would cut NASA moon plan

CAPE CANAVERAL, Florida (Reuters) - President Barack Obama is no longer shooting for the moon, with a budget plan that aborts a symbolic but expensive lunar program and spends $6 billion over five years to turn over space transportation to commercial companies.

Some members of Congress immediately promised a fight. One legislator called the plan a "death march' for human space flight. But NASA deployed astronauts and other experts to say the Constellation program, begun under former President George W. Bush to return humans to the moon, was too slow and wasteful.

The space agency's budget would grow to $19 billion in 2011 under the proposed budget released on Monday, with an emphasis on science and less spent on space exploration.

"What this does is open up (space) for more people to be going more places in a way that is not on the back of the taxpayers," NASA's deputy administrator, Lori Garver, told reporters in a conference call.

"The previous trajectory that NASA was on was simply not sustainable," added former astronaut Sally Ride, who served ion a panel that determined Constellation was behind schedule.

"The president's proposed NASA budget begins the death march for the future of U.S. human space flight," said Senator Richard Shelby, the senior Republican on the appropriations subcommittee handling NASA funding.

"Congress cannot and will not sit back and watch the reckless abandonment of sound principles, a proven track record, a steady path to success, and the destruction of our human space flight program," said Shelby of Alabama, whose state is home to NASA's Marshall Space Flight Center.

Florida Senator Bill Nelson has also promised to fight efforts to cut back NASA operations.

MORE COMMERCIAL SPACE OPERATIONS

The new budget extends operations at the International Space Station past its planned retirement date of 2016, suggesting such additions as inflatable space habitats.

Obama's proposal hands over more space operations to the commercial sector, saying it will create thousands of new jobs and hold costs down.

NASA already has spent $9 billion on Constellation and likely would owe millions more to cancel existing contracts. Prime contractors on the Ares rocket program include ATK Launch Systems, Pratt & Whitney Rocketdyne and Boeing Co.

Lockheed Martin is the lead contractor on the Orion capsule.

NASA already has contracts with Space Exploration Technologies and Orbital Sciences Corp to deliver cargo to the station. SpaceX and other firms also are developing spaceships that can carry passengers to orbit and back.

The budget proposes a revamp of the Kennedy Space Center in Florida, where staff have feared major cutbacks, as part of making NASA more efficient.

"A major focus of this effort will be to create the 21st century launch facilities and infrastructure needed at Kennedy Space Center, transforming the facility to more effectively support future NASA, commercial, and other government launches," the budget reads.

WHAT THE HELL?! So we're basically going to be sitting around, running experiments on the ISS and praying that our rovers on Mars don't mysteriously die? How are we supposed to prepare for a Mars mission when we can't even get a Moon mission to test the stuff needed for it?! We're just going to sit around and let the other space programs take care of it?! And what the hell's going to happen to the grant our school got?!

Y'know, it really makes me wonder if I should work for NASA to begin with. I mean, *I* certainly wouldn't be happy if I worked on something for several years and it got scrapped.