Most Recent Posts

It's been obvious ever since 2010 that Republicans and conservatives were spending a lot more slamming the Affordable Care Act than the Obama administration and Democrats were spending to defend it.

But 15 to 1?

Yes. That's the ratio calculated by Kantar Media's campaign media analysis group – CMAG to political junkies. Kantar estimates that national advertising against the ACA cost $418 million, compared to $27 million for ads supporting the law. Kantar calls the anti-ACA spending "unprecedented [and] largely unanswered."

Even in general election-focused ads this year, 76 percent of Republican ads airing from January through April attacked the health care law. In Senate campaigns in New Hampshire and North Carolina and in 13 House races, Kantar found that every GOP broadcast ad brought up the anti-ACA messages.

Kantar's Elizabeth Wilner, a co-author of the analysis, said, "Positive ads about the ACA are still so rare that whenever one appears, it gets a national news story."

This massively lopsided spending is also a complete reversal from 2008, when then-candidate Barack Obama's campaign aired one contrast ad on health-care policy 24,000 times. Kantar says that's a record for the past 10 years – at least. But in 2012, the Obama re-election campaign ran just one ad on the ACA.

Yet in 2013, when millions of Americans had to sign up for coverage, industry spending spotlighted the differences of magnitude between American politics and American commerce. In just six months, insurance companies ran ads costing an estimated $381 million, not far behind what the law's critics spent over four years. The industry ads were neutral, neither attacking nor defending the law – "Switzerland," as Wilner put it.

Overall, she said, three factors — Republican intensity against the law, the new federal role and insurers' new activity selling insurance to consumers – came together to produce "a confluence of political and product advertising never seen before."

How hard can it be for school cafeterias to swap white bread for whole-grain tortillas, cut sodium and nudge kids to put more fruit and vegetables on their trays?

Tougher then you might imagine, according to some schools.

From the Waterford school district in Wisconsin, to the Voorheesville school district in New York, to Arlington Heights in Illinois, schools have complained that the healthy school lunch standards that became law in 2012 are just too challenging. They say they need more time to figure out how to limit calories and fat and get more veggies on every plate.

And some lawmakers agree.

Congressional Republicans in charge of funding the school lunch program are proposing a waiver that would give schools a one-year reprieve from the standards if they are operating at a net loss.

The School Nutrition Association, which represents school food administrators and is supported by food service manufacturers, wants the waiver. The SNA estimates that about one million fewer students participated in the school lunch program last year - in part due to the new federal requirements.

"A temporary waiver would ease the burden on school meal programs, preventing more schools from dropping out of the National School Lunch Program altogether," SNA President Leah Schmidt writes in a release supporting the waiver.

In addition, the SNA is asking Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to relax some new regulations — such as the requirement that students must take a fruit or vegetable as part of a meal.

"Forcing students to take a food they don't want on their tray has led to increased program costs, plate waste, and a decline in student participation," the SNA writes in a statement.

The SNA says it's asking for more flexibility, but some consumer health advocates are critical of the proposed changes. Margo Wootan of the Center for Science in the Public Interest says "really they are asking Congress to significantly roll back standards."

"By allowing school districts to opt out of school nutrition standards, House Republicans are opening up the floodgates to let all the old junk food back into schools, while crowding out the fruits, vegetables, and whole grains that have been gaining ground in the program," Wootan adds.

House Agriculture Subcommittee Chairman Robert Aderholt, Republican of Alabama, disagrees. "I continually hear from my schools in Alabama about the challenges and costs they are facing and their desperation for flexibility and relief so that they can operate a [school meal] program serving healthy foods the kids will eat," he said in opening remarks at a hearing Tuesday.

USDA has said in the past that it doesn't have the authority to grant a waiver on the standards, but today announced it could grant schools more flexibility on one of them - the requirement to increase the amount of whole grains in pasta products.

Currently, half of all products served must be "whole grain-rich." USDA defines whole grain-rich as products made of at least 50 percent whole grain. By the start of the next school year, the law says schools must use only products that are whole grain-rich.

But this year, USDA heard feedback from some schools suggesting that certain whole grain-rich pastas were falling apart. "Some of the available products, such as lasagna and elbow noodles, degraded easily during preparation and service and were difficult to use in larger-scale cooking operations," a press release from the department says.

So the USDA is offering a two year extension for schools that can "demonstrate significant challenges in serving whole-grain rich pastas" to continue serving "traditional enriched pasta products" for up to two more years to as the food industry develops better whole-grain pasta products for schools.

Despite the challenges, 90 percent of schools are meeting the nutrition standards established in 2012, USDA says.

The Alliance For A Healthier Generation, a group focused on ending childhood obesity, points to several success stories at schools around the country — like the eight new veggie-based soups on offer at Dover High School in Delaware.

"As we soon close out the school year, we should be celebrating — not rolling back — the great progress that schools have made toward implementing the USDA's school nutrition standards" Howell Wechsler of the Alliance says in a statement.

A normally routine House Rules Committee meeting Tuesday could showcase the ongoing battle over immigration reform within the Republican Party.

California Republican Congressman Jeff Denham wants immigrants who were brought to this country illegally as children — often referred to as "dreamers," after a legislative acronym — to be able earn permanent residency status by serving in the military.

He's wanted this, in fact, since last summer when he first filed his ENLIST Act. So far, it's gone nowhere in the House, and now he wants to attach it to this year's Defense authorization bill — even though House Majority Leader Eric Cantor has already indicated he opposes that plan.

"The ENLIST Act provides an avenue for those who want to perform the ultimate act of patriotism – serving their county – to earn legal status. As a veteran, I can think of no better way to demonstrate your commitment to our nation," Denham said in a statement Monday.

The House Rules Committee meets Tuesday afternoon to decide which amendments will be permitted a floor vote when the defense bill is debated this week.

Denham represents a Central California district with a large Latino population. Cantor and many other Republicans are under pressure from their Tea Party wing to oppose any changes to immigration laws that permit undocumented immigrants to gain legal status.

If the prices of a margarita or guacamole have been too high for you lately, blame it on a key ingredient of the Mexican treats — the lime. Prices for limes, imported almost exclusively from Mexico, hit record highs this year, and demand remains high. But now the price is dropping and farmers couldn't be happier.

You can see it firsthand at the outdoor wholesale lime market in Apatzingan, Michoacan. Dozens of buyers stand in the dirt parking lot waiting for beat up pick up trucks full of limes to roll in. The men rush to the backs of the trucks, filled high with crates of limes. Here the round fruit is known as green gold.

Lime buyer Geraldo Fernandez scrambles up the back of the crates and peers over the top. In Spanish he says, "the trucks barely stop and the limes are sold...they're selling like hotcakes."

While Mexico's other lime producing states were hit hard by bad weather and a fungal outbreak earlier this year, as we've reported, the orchards in Michocan have been flourishing, netting record profits for the state's farmers.

But with every boom comes the bust. And prices are falling fast.

Better weather and a bountiful spring crop in the state of Veracruz have supplies back to normal.

Fernandez thumbs through another box of limes. He tells the driver he'll give him 80 pesos — about six bucks for the whole 40 pound box. He says just a month or two ago he was paying these guys as much as 35 dollars a box.

Prices in the U.S. are dropping, too. Last week the U.S. Department of Agriculture said consumers paid on average 30 cents a lime, compared to 90 a few months ago.

But Michoacan farmers aren't complaining about the precipitous price drop. Most are still enjoying their record profits. But the biggest boon to them is that for the first time in a decade, many say they are no longer at the mercy of Mexico's ruthless drug cartels.

i i