Who 's Serving Lunch? Essay

Offering sufficient amounts of nutritious food in schools is more significant than many comprehend. Students who consume full, nourishing meals for breakfast and lunch benefit

Although the balance of power between the national government and the states has changed over the years, the federalist system is a fundamental part of the U.S. government (The White House, 2013). The states sponsor important programs to fund education, help troubled cities and provide social services. At the local level, the municipalities control a number of other services and regulations, but never fail to be in collaboration between the national, state and local governments. The constitution was put into place to support and defend the basic right of civilians of the United States (Marchant, 2003). Although the Constitution does not refer to education, operation and management of schools is made, particularly with respect to amendments to protect individual rights of students, faculty and staff. With these set laws into place to hold our country

How much time do you usually take to eat lunch? A half an hour maybe more? Well, at the Mount Pleasant High School, we get around five minutes. Saying were rushed is an understatement, at the least. The amount of time we get, from the first bell, to the ending bell, we have "20 minute." By the time we actually get to start eating, there's five minutes left. I think the Mt. Pleasant High School should have a longer lunch period, because collectively all around it helps staff and students.

The federal government and state governments have had a long history of powers struggles. The struggle goes back and forth between who has the right to make decisions and if there is a problem who should fix it. Sometimes it is better for the federal government to fix issues and during other situations it is better for the state or local governments to fix other issues. In the PBS special of the United States Constitution, Peter Sagal travels around the states documenting the various roles and impact the government has on the country as a whole and on the individual states.

One in four American children live in food-insecure households, meaning that they lack adequate access to food of any type, not just food with significant nutritional value (Ford, 2013, p. 58). As these families are the most likely to have children who both leave for and return home from school to an empty house, they are also the most likely to have children who prepare meals for themselves. Often, children fail to nourish themselves, skipping meals when they are running late or because they find nothing in the pantry they are capable of preparing. These students ready themselves (and sometimes siblings) for school and frequently don’t take their first meal until mid-day, losing precious hours of instructional time to distraction over food, fatigue due to low levels of nourishment, and other physical ailments tied to poor nutrition. If school breakfasts were free and readily available to all public school students, morning meals would be

Indirectly, or directly, one can argue, public schools are controlled by the federal and state governments. Several issues have emerged, because of the conflict between federal and state requirements for education. “Under the Tenth Amendment, any authority not given specifically to the federal government is reserved to the states. Thus, the federal government has no authority to regulate education directly; that belongs to the states” (Underwood, n. d., p. 2). To get around this, the federal government controls the schools through funds for complying with certain initiatives, procedures, and policies (Underwood, n. d.). Ironically, both the state and federal levels of government hold the district liable for implementing different agendas and legal obligations. The federal government, however, can ensure that no citizen is denied their rights or privileges, even in a private institution, because of the Bill of Rights and other amendments. Failure to comply by these amendments or statutes can lead to the loss of federal funding and legal reproductions for schools.

Nationwide students waist over 70% of fruits and vegetables,while others are sitting around without food at all in other places(Public brief). Some students only get the 2 meals they are provided with at school ,but they often are not provided with enough to eat. Its import for low income and less fortunate families to be provided enough time to eat to make sure they are receiving there energy and daily nutrients(Godoy& Allison). Increasing the school lunch time will also save the schools a great amount of money(Public brief). School lunch food wasted to cost $1.2 billion dollars each year,which is enough for a person to buy a new car everyday of there life(Public brief). A simple increase in time could save schools a bunch of money needed to improve the school building and faculty. Many cafeteria staff and teachers have reported complaints about how students aren't eating all their food and they have to throw it away(EHHI). Most of the time in high schools foods are sold à la carte instead of a full meal to avoid having to throw away or make more food(EHHI). As a result of the food waste cafeterias started using foods with more fats and less nutritious items to get students to eat( EHHI). Cafeteria are selling french fries and not the healthy food to make there money because students aren't eating enough of the

School lunches are not the epitome of meals in the world. Raising the level of nutritional output would highly increase the healthiness of the student’s body. For example, if a child were to drink only water at school the health benefits would help that student, just by cutting out the sugar and the calorie intake. If schools were to serve grilled chicken instead of fried chicken, the student would not have that extreme carb intake just from the fried part alone. Chicken and vegetables should be the entrée for most school lunches, of course, this does not allow for a great variety of meals, but the healthiness of the students would increase over time and could possibly be the healthiest thing they eat that day, but the only thing that they eat at all. The poverty in Mississippi is abundant, which may mean that children do not get three square meals a day, but maybe only one, which is at school. Therefore, the best way to affect student’s healthiness is by putting good, nutritious, and energizing food on the plate in front of

High school food options raise problems for students. School lunches may not be the cheapest option for the students or the district. According to "Duluth high school principals want to stick with open campuses," Duluth’s principal, Tonya Sconiers, opposes a closed campus because of the financial burden. This program change would cost the school approximately $239,000 to supply what would be needed for the new food policy. In addition, the lunches provided by the school lack quality. Students report the food as bland, and portion size is not enough to fuel for the entire school day. Numerous students involved in after-school activities cannot perform their best without a sufficient amount food in their stomachs. The food should provide energy for the students throughout the day. For low-income students, this lunch might be the only reliable daily meal.

One in three Americans kids are obese or over weight which is a staggering and alarming rate at the same time. So looking 20 years into the future that number could double if nothing is said and done about what we are eating. The public school food in school lunches are unhealthy for many alarming reasons, but not much can be done immediately due to strict guidelines and budgets that schools must follow. A lot of it goes to kids not exercising, and more time watching TV, or playing on the computer. And now days more families have less time to make nutritious home made meals. So they tend to eat School cafeteria lunches that have minimal nutrition’s and harmful calories. To prevent your kid from being over weight mean adapting what you eat, and having to exercise at least 60 minutes a day. If the changes are made to change school lunches, it can help them from being obese, children can improve their lifestyle choices, and lastly it prevents them from getting harmful diseases.

Since its beginning, the United States of America has gradually and steadily expanded the oversight and power of its own federal government. This expansion has resulted in a plethora of effects on the relationship between local state government and federal government both negative and positive. However, the increased impingement from the federal government onto local and state government constitutional rights, has created an imbalance. A major part of this imbalance has stemmed from unfunded mandates being imposed upon states. This imbalance has caused enough problems between the states and the federal government that the states have not only begun to question if federal mandates should go unfunded, but also whether or not the federal government has the authority to impose these mandates in the first place.

The problem begins to surface when students are fed food in schools that have low nutritional value.

The students of our school should rally together and hang the cooks in the Cafeteria. Well, maybe that is a little too dramatic, but something has to be done about the school lunch. The stuff that they serve the students is truly awful. Students should not be forced to eat in the cafeteria because the meals are not prepared well, there are foreign objects in the deserts, and many kids have gotten ill after eating certain items.

First of all, students aren’t motivated to eat unhealthy, not-tasty food. If you observed students buying lunch in the cafeteria, you don’t often see them buying these kinds, but not limited to, foodstuffs: burritos (which are just beans wrapped in tortillas), “burgers” (meat slapped on two

INTRODUCTION: According to Politics in States and Communities (Dye and MacManus, 2009), government in the constitutional form is primarily about conflict resolution. It exists to find solutions or at least to set parameters for implementing solutions within strict limitations. At the state and local levels (which operate together under state authority), governments have the freedom to address issues and conflicts very directly through the governance policies and restrictions they put in place. For the federal government, however, decisions are tied more directly to what the US Constitution says or what it has been interpreted to mean, and it is very difficult to change.