Corn Sugar or HFCS? The implications of changing a label

There's no doubt that High Fructose Corn Syrup (HFCS) has faced a surge in public scrutiny over the past few years; domestic sales slipped 11% between 2002 and 2008 while sugar sales increased by 7%. In reaction to increasing public concern, the Corn Refiner's Association has asked that the FDA rename HFCS as "Corn Sugar" on product labels. This suggested change has drawn a lot of attention, including a great NYTimes article. The FDA's response is unpredictable.

On one side, relabeling HFCS as Corn Sugar can completely undue public awareness of the product.  While the health effect of HFCs opposed to cane sugar is still debated, HFCS often serves as a litmus test for one rather vague term- processed foods. This precedent of using HFCS as a tool for distinguishing unprocessed from processed foods has both long and short term effects. In the short term, it might help to guide consumers away from nutritionally empty products. In the long run, however, it drives unhealthy foods from using HFCS and even leads to advertising cane sugar like a health product. These long term effects are already at hand- products ranging from Jones Soda to Wheat Thins have made the switch.  If you think this trick will never fly, reconsider the public perception of organic products.

Understanding the New School Lunch Act

Officially titled the Healthy, Hunger Free Kids Act of 2010, the latest renewal of the school lunch program was recently passed by the Senate and is waiting of full passage from Congress. Like its predecessors, the bill includes a wide variety of programs that address domestic hunger, primarily through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP or "food stamps"), school lunches, and the Women Infants and Children program (WIC). While the breadth of this bill makes discussing all of the programs difficult, its important to highlight a few major changes.



It is the first non-inflationary funding increase to the school lunch program since 1973.
While generally seen as a necessary for improvement, this measure has still been a bit controversial. In order for this act to remain deficit neutral, the money for this increase is being taken out of SNAP. Based on current projections, it shouldn't have a significant impact. That is, relying on decreases in unemployment, SNAP's funding needs should decrease as the funds move over to the school lunch programs. We'll see whether this plays out correctly, but being deficit neutral was probably essential to the bill being passed through unanimous consent rather than with a formal vote, difficult to attain in such a busy legislative period.