Spokane7
55°
March 29, 2010 in Opinion
Guest opinion: Food forum bill deserves support
Across the nation, people from all sorts of backgrounds, including first lady Michelle Obama, are realizing we need to change the way we think about food. One way that’s gaining momentum here in Washington is the establishment of the Washington Food Policy Forum (Substitute Senate Bill 6343), sponsored by Sen. Ken Jacobsen, D-Seattle.
The Forum would directly address issues such as food costs, access to healthy food, environmental impacts of our food choices, and finding ways to keep our working farms working and enhance our soils so they can produce healthy food for the next generations.
Currently policy initiatives including food safety, food security, farm-to-school programs, nutrition policy and agriculture programs come from their own silos. Without better coordination and collaboration, we’re not making the smartest, healthiest or most efficient decisions for our health, economy or future. That’s why Eastern Washington farmers and child advocates are joining with others to support the Food Policy Forum legislation.
There are more than 100 such Food Policy Councils across the U.S. and, in a short time, they have shown success in several key areas, from which our state could greatly benefit.
First, they bring together the many stakeholders representing each food system sector – production (e.g., farms/farmers), processing and distribution (food and trucking businesses, emergency food system providers), retailing (grocery stores, farmers markets and food cooperatives), preparation (organizations providing food and nutrition education) – and establish a forum for airing interrelated food system issues and providing real opportunity for developing solutions that meet multiple goals.
Next, they bring policy questions to the surface and stimulate research and development of better public policy in key areas, including:
•How to keep farms viable for the long-term.
•How to address childhood obesity by working to increase healthy foods available to school kids and in our communities.
•How to promote and advance food-related businesses in our state and increase access to fresh, Washington-grown foods at home and on the global market.
•How to end childhood hunger through efficient and effective programs that support healthy nutrition.
•How to increase the nutrient density of the food grown and increase the organic matter in our farmland.
•How short- and long-term policies could support farmers while reducing greenhouse gas emissions and fossil fuel use throughout Washington
The Washington Food Policy Forum provides an excellent opportunity to improve the way our food system and our state government serve the people of our state. We urge Gov. Chris Gregoire to sign SSB 6343 into law so we can get to work on building a healthy future for all of us.
Linda Stone, of Spokane, is senior food policy coordinator for the Children’s Alliance. Jim Baird is a farmer in the Royal City area.
Trudy Rubin: Egyptians say no to Islamists 
gmorton on March 29 at 5:38 a.m.
“Across the nation, people from all sorts of backgrounds, including first lady Michelle Obama, are realizing we need to change the way we think about food.”
Oh, really? And no doubt Mrs. Obama has some truly profound wisdom to share concerning food, about which ordinary humans, who merely eat it every day, are clueless.
And no doubt those intrepid food gurus have concluded, after many studies, surveys, and focus groups, that unless we immediately establish a comprehensive food policy (to go along with our comprehensive gummint-designed health care policy, education policy, energy policy, etc.), with a few thousand pages of regulations and a hefty bureaucracy to enforce them, we will all surely starve in the very near future.
“•How to keep farms viable for the long-term.”
Hmmm. Won’t farms be viable as long as people need to eat?
“•How to address childhood obesity by working to increase healthy foods available to school kids and in our communities.”
Er, isn’t a child’s health the responsibility of her parents? Or is this an example of the “it takes a village” philosophy in action? And aren’t “healthy foods” of all kinds already available to kids and their parents? Or does this mean, “We need to be sure that people only eat what we think is good for them”?
“•How to end childhood hunger through efficient and effective programs that support healthy nutrition.”
Ah, “hunger,” that nebulous and unquantifiable pretext for wealth redistribution and bureaucratic featherbedding. How many children in Washington State died of malnutrition last year?
C’mon, folks – learn to mind your own business and find something productive to do with your time.
theisena on March 29 at 9:17 a.m.
Did you even read the article? First off, this is a state bill, not a national-level initiative. Second, these state inititiatives—food safety, protecting farms, etc.—already exist; this is just making sure the stakeholders are working together. I fail to see how bringing together retailers, farmers, producers, etc. is a bad thing.
As far as making sure Washington farms are viable for the long-term, if you think our small local farms have no fear of long-term viability, I suggest you actually talk to one of the farmers.
Also, genius, “hunger” doesn’t dying of starvation. Why don’t you try eating only one or two meals a day because your parents can’t afford groceries and then tell me you’re operating at 100%?
Finally, if you really have a problem with the segments of Washington’s food economy working together for viability, here’s an idea: don’t go to the grocery store, don’t go out to eat, and don’t go to the farmers’ market. As much as you rail against “guvmint” intrusions like food-safety regulations, etc., you benefit from them every day.
Get a clue.
gmorton on March 29 at 2:19 p.m.
thesina wrote,
“if you think our small local farms have no fear of long-term viability . . .”
Ah, now it’s “small local farms.” As long as small, local farms produce products in demand at competitive prices, why would they not remain viable? Or are you suggesting that, for nostalgic reasons, they must be kept “viable” with subsidies, restrictions on competition, etc.?
“Finally, if you really have a problem with the segments of Washington’s food economy working together for viability, here’s an idea: don’t go to the grocery store, don’t go out to eat, and don’t go to the farmers’ market. As much as you rail against “guvmint” intrusions like food-safety regulations, etc., you benefit from them every day.”
Then why do we need this bill?
misjustice on March 30 at 12:03 p.m.
More community gardens and organic vegetables for everyone!
I can totally understand why some people would be against the co-ordination of different food policies, and Eastern Washington farmers, and child advocates, and soil viability, and food safety…
No, on second thought, I really can’t!
Oops, I just thought of a reason but it’s not fitting for this family newspaper forum!
gmorton on March 30 at 12:57 p.m.
misjustice wrote,
“More community gardens and organic vegetables for everyone!”
Well, one problem – most people are not interested in community gardens and overpriced “organic” vegetables. They have their own fetishes to amuse them.
“I can totally understand why some people would be against the co-ordination of different food policies . . .”
Well, it might be because we already have a mechanism for coordinating food policies –- it’s called “the market.” And it doesn’t cost taxpayers a penny.