Senator Cory Booker (D-NJ), an avid vegan and promoter of organic foods, has introduced the Safe School Meals Act.  Provisions of this legislation would include: -

• Banning PFAS, phthalates and bisphenols in food packaging for school meals.
• Directing the FDA to establish safe limits for heavy metals in school meals based on risk analysis.
• Banning of ingredients with glyphosate, paraquat, organophosphates and designated pesticide residues.
• Expanding the National Organic Cost Shares Certification program to cover up to $3,000 in expenses.

It is imprudent to establish zero tolerance residue standards for inorganic and organic compounds in foods since current and future technology is capable of detecting contamination far below biological effect levels even with bioaccumulation.  This would specifically apply to glyphosate, a herbicide used on over 90 percent of U.S. soybeans and corn.  Establishing acceptable levels for paraquat and organophosphates is justified based on their known neurologic effects.  Likewise, safe limits on heavy metals including lead, arsenic and cadmium are required. This said these are ubiquitous elements detectable in all soil and plants in therefore in foods. 

It is interesting to note that the proposed Bill exempts organic farms that should by definition meet the requirement for freedom from glyphosate and pesticides.  In this respect the exemption is self-serving. What is sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander. Certified organic ingredients should be subjected to the same intensity of assay as conventional products intended for food.  The National Organic Program is based on a review of a paper trail and lacks the assurance of structured laboratory assay.   There have been sufficient cases of fraudulent use of the organic seal, especially for imported ingredients, to justify surveillance for proscribed contaminants. 

The provision in the Bill that provides remuneration for organic cost share certification has little to do with school feeding but is obviously an incentive favoring organic production. Both near and dear to Senator Booker’s heart and his digestive tract.

In supporting the proposed Bill, Senator Booker stated, “Kids in America consume far too many harmful substances in their food.”  This sentiment that forms the basis of the proposed law should, however, be quantified and verified.  Senator Booker continued, “School meals should be a child’s safest source of nourishment, not another source of toxic exposure”.  He concluded “The Safe School Meals Act would protect our children by getting dangerous chemical food additives, heavy metals and pesticide and chemical residues out of school meals.” Then comes the commercial, “While creating a significant new market opportunity for organic and regenerative farmers.”

It is fairly obvious that the “Safe School Meals Act” is really a pro-organic bill in disguise.  Nobody in their right mind would countenance inclusion of known toxic compounds in school feeding.  What is important is to establish what may be toxic and what might be inconsequential.  Some aspects of the Safe School Meals Act are potentially protective but the disruption and added cost of compliance should be taken into account.  As presented, the Bill is designed to promote organic production and an attempt to demonize conventional food.