Monday's SF Chronicle featured an article about the House's decision to bring local, sustainable, and organic food into their cafeterias. This more ethical food will be served on compostable plates and eaten with biodegradable silverware (which cries out for a new name... sugarware, anyone?).
This move is a boon for the people who work and eat at the Capitol; they will have access to food that is better for them, better for the environment, and (I suspect) tastier than what they are used to. The switch also benefits local growers and vendors who will help supply Restaurant Associates (the catering contractor) with their sustainable food products.
The article gives Nancy Pelosi most of the credit for the change, since she has spearheaded the "Green the Capitol" initiative. Ironically, Ms. Pelosi is also the person most responsible for the current state of the proposed Farm Bill revision. Many people had high hopes for this year's Farm Bill (which only gets revised every five years). Ever since the 1970's, the Farm Bill has included provisions that provide subsidies and other benefits to corn, soybean and (to a lesser extent) other grain farmers, while excluding most fruit and vegetable growers from those subsidies. These subsidies have been blamed for everything from the current obesity epidemic to the high price of fresh produce relative to, say, a McDonald's hamburger. It seemed that 2007 might finally be the year that the Farm Bill removed those subsidies, or provided increased benefits or support to produce growers (especially organics), or both. After all, the Speaker of the House is a Democrat from California, which grows more than 50% of the nation's fruits and vegetables. Furthermore, even the USDA has acknowledged that fruits and vegetables (taken together) are more important to a healthy diet than whole grains, codifying this belief in their revised food pyramid.
Sadly, Ms. Pelosi and her colleagues did little to change the Farm Bill's status quo. A final bill has not yet been signed (as the House and Senate passed different versions), but the version passed by the House retained the majority of the grain subsidies, while diverting only small amounts of money toward fruits, vegetables, and conservation efforts. Now, I'm sure there were lots of competing interests at stake and that Ms. Pelosi was trying her best to balance those interests. I've read speculation that Pelosi was trying to protect some of the freshman Democrats from the grain-producing states. There are always excuses, always reasons that some important piece of legislation couldn't get passed.
I'm happy for Pelosi, her fellow Representatives, and all the staffers who will get to take advantage of the new cafeteria cuisine. They should keep in mind though, as they bite into their grass fed buffalo medallions with a side of local, organic potatoes and collards, that what they have chosen for themselves, they have denied the common American.
1 comment:
Jill,
I agree with your analysis, and I am as perplexed as anyone as to why Pelosi and others did not push harder for the reforms that are so needed in our farming practices and ag subsidies.
Post a Comment