Proposal Could Make Oregon Kids Healthier

Critics worry that removing high-calorie, fatty foods and sugary beverages would cost schools thousands of dollars in lost fundraising revenues that support extracurricular activities.

Photo courtesy: Oregon State University

(SALEM ) - Amid concerns that Oregon schoolchildren are getting fat, state lawmakers are considering a proposal that would restrict foods and beverages sold in school cafeterias, student stores and vending machines.

Among legislators who want chips, candy and cookies replaced with healthier alternatives such as dried fruits, nuts and granola bars is Rep. Tina Kotek, D-Portland.

“Every student in the state … should have access to healthy choices in schools,” she said Tuesday at a joint meeting of the House Subcommittee on Health Policy and the Education Committee.

The proposal -- House Bill 2650 -- would set nutritional standards for all foods sold outside the federal school lunch program, including those at a-la-carte lines.

The standards would also require that foods not have more than 10-percent of total calories from saturated fats, except for snacks that are nuts, eggs and cheese.

“These numbers are the best that nutritional science has to offer,” said Nancy Becker, a registered dietitian for the Community Health Partnership and a professor at Portland State.

“This is not about strictness,” she explained in an interview. “This is about requiring reasonable, age-appropriate portion sizes.”

Additionally, snacks could have no more than 35-percent calories of fat, 10-percent of calories from saturated fat, and no more than 35-percent sugar by weight, or contain trans fats, under the bill. For kindergarteners through fifth graders, snacks would not be able to contain more than 150 calories, 180 calories for students in grades 6-8, and 200 calories for high school students.

Gaeleen McAllister, 41, is a mother of three children is Salem-Keizer schools. She said similar local restrictions on soda and junk food have worked well since their implementation in September.

“Restrictions work fine; and, they’re reasonable, and the students haven’t rioted,” McAllister said outside Tuesday’s Capitol hearing.

While there is widespread support for the proposal among health advocates and educators, some critics worry that removing high-calorie, fatty foods and sugary beverages from campuses would cost schools thousands of dollars in lost fundraising revenues that oftentimes are the sole financial support for extracurricular activities such as fieldtrips and music programs.

Amanda Purcell, policy director for the California Center for Public Health Advocacy, told lawmakers that a dip in sales would likely be experienced in the beginning, but after a “period of adjustment,” sales figures would likely climb, as she said occurred at schools in the Los Angeles Unified School District after California lawmakers restricted the sale of junk food.

“We’re talking about eliminating the worst offenders,” she said, explaining that there are many “kid-friendly,” healthy snacks that schools can sell.

This, the third effort by Oregon lawmakers to enforce nutritional standards at schools, could be a tough sale to Republicans, who in the past have questioned whether proposals like this diminish parents’ role in encouraging their children to eat a healthy diet.

David Williams of the Oregon School Board Association is concerned that the bill would seize control from locally elected school boards that have traditionally managed schools’ affairs.

“We are not here to dispute there is a problem with childhood obesity,” Williams said.

The joint hearing will continue Thursday.