How DC Control of Local Districts Acts as a De Facto Tax increase that Limits Minority Participation in Some Extracurricular Activities..

What happens, what are the unintended consequences, when FEDS in DC begin to assert control over areas of local education agencies where the FEDS should have no control?

Answer--lots of bad things.

As I chronicled in a piece published Monday afternoon on watchdog.org, ripples radiate outward exacerbating existing problems in schools, making them worse than ever.

An example is the exorbitant costs borne by parents for their students' participation in most extracurricular sports; now, with new oppressive fundraising mandates being dictated downward, this problem gets worse and precludes participation by lots of poor and minority students.  This results in team sports like soccer, for instance, being weak at schools where the raw talent is ample.  A real life example is one local High School that has a track team that has won several state championships in recent years- yet their soccer team struggles chronically to compete with other area soccer teams and in fact is often-times "mercy-ruled" out of games.  Why?  Because these athletes' parents don't or can't pay for these students' participation in most minor sports like soccer, and therefore when such athletes reach HS where previously there were mechanisms that would allow such students the ability to earn part of their fees to play these minor sports----now this  ability to participate is instead further eroded due to ridiculous fundraising restrictions that we've essentially genuflected and accepted from the FEDS.  And poor students, minorities, and middle class folks get juiced again.

From this article:

"...another problem resulting from these federal machinations in local school district control has silently seeped into our schools.   As a result of the draconian controls placed on local districts by DC politicians and others, including the First Lady,  states were told that, beginning with the first day of school for the current 2014-2015 school year, most snack food fundraisers would be outlawed under the 2010 School Nutrition law. Unless a state specifically requested an exemption, there would no more PTA bake sales, candy bar sales, or cupcakes in classes. It is bad enough that this DC mandate is taking well-enjoyed snack food away from students, but there is additional fallout and unintended consequences becoming apparent as this policy is rolled out.This rule implementation now serves as a de facto tax increase on poor and lower middle-class families that utilize fundraisers to defray the costs for their children’s participation in minor sports. That’s the big problem nobody knows about.  No more candy bar sales to help the students raise money for participation in minor sports like cross-country, tennis, track, and soccer. Students who were used to raising money for their participation by selling a valued commodity in school (candy!) were now told such sales outlawed everywhere on campus all day long.  As a result, the parents are being required to write bigger checks going forward to cover the revenue loss. "

Read  DC school food policies hurt the community by going after snack food fundraisers

Smart Snacks in School:Who Will Answer All the Unanswered Questions?

 Florida has come up with regulations implementing the “smart snacks” federal guidelines, the essence of which is enumerated in the above poster.

It is no secret that I do not agree with this rule; however, it must now be implemented because, unlike Georgia and Tennessee, the politicians in Florida were terrified of the feds and acquiesced with this restrictive policy.


But now the question shifts.

 High Schools, per this poster, are allowed 15 days of non-conforming “fundraising.” But what does that mean? The flyer says local school boards will determine the precise language under these guidelines. I have already received one request from a parent requesting that all 15 non-conforming fundraising days be reserved for “project graduation.” But wait, what about the tennis teams and cross country teams throughout the district that also raise money with non-conforming snack sales? Are they just “out of luck?” Who is going to decide who gets a fundraiser “day” and who doesn’t? Will they be divided? Or will all clubs be able to

Feds Candy Crackdown, Part IV

At the NSBA 2014 conference, one of the issues that I wanted to learn more about was the issue of Federal Regulation of what snacks can be sold in schools.  At this lecture, Julie Brewer from the USDA gave a presentation about changes to the snacks that can be offered in schools under the interim final rule: nutritional standards for all foods sold in school.  This rule stems from the Healthy and Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010.

I have been vocal in my opposition to the increasing levels of Federal Intervention in schools, and in particular with respect to this topic, which I discussed here, here, and here.

What right does the Federal Government have to tell any school what foods it can sell via fundraisers outside of the lunchroom and in times other than lunch periods?  I'm amazed at the willingness of so many to just go along with this.  Two important issues came out of this conference.

1.  According to Julie Brewer from USDA--States can implement their own fundraiser exemptions, and as an example one Board Member in attendance from Wyoming stated that her state had implemented a "no more than five non-compliant fundraisers per school per year policy"