
                         THE VIRGINIAN-PILOT
                 Copyright (c) 1994, Landmark Communications, Inc.

DATE: SUNDAY, June 12, 1994                    TAG: 9406100010 
SECTION: COMMENTARY                     PAGE: J4    EDITION: FINAL  
SOURCE: Medium 
DATELINE: 940612                                 LENGTH:

`CLINTON LITE' IN THE SCHOOL CAFETERIA

{LEAD} From the folks who brought you the politics of meaning comes now the politics of leaning: The Clinton administration is ``reinventing'' the school lunch. It wants schools to reduce the fat, cholesterol and sodium content of their lunches and use government-approved computer programs to ensure it.

Maybe this should be called ``Send Schoolkids to McDonald's Program,'' because that's where it is likely to send kids scurrying on their lunch hours.

{REST} The 123-page proposal is expensive and technical. Its beneficial effect on the nutrition and eating habits of the 25 million schoolchildren in the 92,000 schools the federal school-lunch program serves is doubtful.

These mandates, like federal mandates generally, not only intrude on local and individual choices but come without adequate federal funding for the additional equipment and personnel most school systems would need. But the federal purse - $4.7 billion for school lunches last year - is not without its power. It can mandate ground-turkey tacos instead of ground-beef.

What it can't mandate is that schoolchildren eat them. If the cafeteria becomes known as a place of unappetizing glop, the result will be more millions sold at McDonald's and kids sneaking out to Taco Bell or Wendy's.

Diet contributes in some way to five of the 10 leading causes of death in this country. Half the nation's 40 million children are overweight by an average of 8-plus pounds. But what's on the table and in the cupboards at home contributes far more to the dietary habits of children than schools ever will. And for most children as for most adults, any diet without regular exercise is only half of a healthy life.

Cutting the fat in school lunches won't hurt anybody's health. But the underlying assumption of this Clinton proposal - that the same government which required school cafeterias to use its mountains of subsidized butter and cheese should now ration them in school lunches - is nutritional nannyism at its worst.

by CNB