Congress did something...right? Bipartisan PB & J.

So Congress makes the laws for our country. That is the standard mantra describing the government, “congress makes, the president enforces, and the courts interpret.” However, what we tend to forget is just how many laws it takes to make a country. What is a country, if not the sum of it’s laws? In America—at least since FDR—we have a lot laws, and the government controls at least a little bit of just about everything. As it is commonly known, the government is in charge of public education (it is, in fact, public education). Although, what is perhaps slightly less commonly known—or at least consciously considered—is that it is not the gruesome and widely disliked lunch lady that is responsible for serving you 2 day old pizza and soggy broccoli, but the government.

            Believe it or not, buried deep underneath the Iran deal, the pope, potential government shut downs, oil and homeland security, is something as seemingly simple and seemingly trivial as what goes inside a school lunch. Last year, the House Republicans fought the First Lady over the possibility of temporary exemptions from school lunch policy, which would essentially allow certain schools to skirt these public youth health initiatives. This year, however, this food fight has transformed into a respectable lunch between colleagues—which is certainly more than we can usually say.  It seems that both Republicans and Democrats in Congress are interested in making a bipartisan agreement that would involve these regulations becoming clearer and more effective. And, although what constitutes “clear” and “effective” may differ between both parties, they both seem committed to coming to some sort of agreement before the law expires on September 30^th and changes can no longer be made. 

            Now, my thought is—here is a story of congressmen and women working across the isle, trying to do meaningful work for their country. But this is not a story that the American public ever hears. Republicans don’t come out and say “I support less salt in school lunches!” because, firstly, that’s not very sexy, and secondly, the American public would think “ok…what does that even mean?” These are not stories that the media covers extensively—and maybe for a reason: these are not stories that are inherently partisan, that fuel hot debate. School lunch policy is not a fixture of either the Republican or Democratic platform. Men and women in Congress don’t feel pressured to work in the name of their party on issues like school lunches. No one is going to reconsider his or her vote because of whole grains. And all this is not to say that the two parties do not disagree on the issue—there are pecuniary and logistics issues involved that separate the two parties on this—but when partisanship and media attention and electoral concerns are put aside—they seem capable of true and honest negotiation. What is most important to note here, I think, is that policies like these truly do affect the whole nation. Public school is mandatory, and many kids at those schools benefit from the lunches that are provided for them. We are talking about feeding America’s children, here. So, if nothing else, this issue serves as proof that it is possible for Congress to work together to erect positive change for the entire country. And, that’s something to get excited about, right?

http://abcnews.go.com/Health/wireStory/food-fight-congress-mulls-school-meal-standards-33852103