Comments Subscribe to Personal Liberty News Feed Subscribe to Personal Liberty
 

Utah School Fined $15,000 For Selling Soda

May 21, 2012 by  

Utah School Fined $15,000 For Selling Soda
PHOTOS.COM
A vending machine cost Davis High School $15,000 in fines.

Davis High School in Utah is being fined $15,000 for allowing students access to soda during the school lunch period.

The school was allowed to have vending machines, but Federal law requires the machines be turned off during school lunch hours. Students can purchase carbonated beverages before lunch and drink them during the lunch period, but they are not permitted to purchase a carbonated beverage or candy during the lunch period.

Davis High School turned off the soda machines in the cafeteria, but the machines were left on in the bookstore.

“It is challenging when you can have a Coke before lunch and consume it during lunch, but you can’t buy a Coke during lunch,” said Chris Williams from the Davis School District.

“It’s our own decision if we want to have soda or not, and I think we should be left with that decision and not have it taken away,” said one student.

The school was using the vending machines to fund educational programs.

Bryan Nash

Staff writer Bryan Nash has devoted much of his life to searching for the truth behind the lies that the masses never question. He is currently pursuing a Master's of Divinity and is the author of The Messiah's Misfits, Things Unseen and The Backpack Guide to Surviving the University. He has also been a regular contributor to the magazine Biblical Insights.

Facebook Conversations

Join the Discussion:
View Comments to “Utah School Fined $15,000 For Selling Soda”

Comment Policy: We encourage an open discussion with a wide range of viewpoints, even extreme ones, but we will not tolerate racism, profanity or slanderous comments toward the author(s) or comment participants. Make your case passionately, but civilly. Please don't stoop to name calling. We use filters for spam protection. If your comment does not appear, it is likely because it violates the above policy or contains links or language typical of spam. We reserve the right to remove comments at our discretion.

Is there news related to personal liberty happening in your area? Contact us at newstips@personalliberty.com

  • Vicki

    Looking. Looking. Looking. Nope. I don’t find any authority in the Constitution for the federal government to order a school to turn off vending machines. Then again I don’t find any authority in the Constitution for the federal government to run schools either.

    • wandamurline

      This is why the conservative constitutionalists need to be put into office and hold majorities in both houses….we can dump the Department of Defense and a lot of others…give the states the responsibility of educating their kids….as the Constitution upholds.

      • Vigilant

        Why would you want to “dump the Department of Defense?” Did you mean Dept, of Education?

      • Vigilant

        I‘m afraid everyone got off to a wrong start on this issue, thanks to the incompleteness of Mr. Nash’s article. While the Federal Government is culpable to a degree, the blame for this sort of thing lays squarely in the lap of the state of Utah.

        Re: http://www.standard.net/stories/2012/05/16/davis-high-pulls-plug-pop-candy-machines-after-being-fined if you want the complete story:

        “Utah State Office of Education Child Nutrition Program Director Luann Elliott said…schools must meet federal guidelines in providing healthy meal choices for students, and when schools are noncompliant they must repay the program the federal dollars the school has received in advance for each school lunch meal served.”

        It was the Utah State Office of Education Child Nutrition Program that levied the fine, NOT the Federal Government. And it was a REPAYMENT of federal money already received.

        It needs to be made very clear that it was the greed of the states in accepting the federal money with strings attached in the first place. They were not forced into accepting the Federal guidelines until the moment they opted to receive Federal aid.

        This story has a long history. Barry Goldwater covered it in his “Conscience of a Conservative” in the 1960s. The whole idea of Federal funding in the area of education was born of a liberal idea that the 10th Amendment could be successfully bypassed by making the states an offer they couldn’t refuse.

        It was an idea elegant in its simplicity, and very crafty in its cynical confidence, that states would never turn down an offer of “free” funds. Of course, those “free” dollars came with a big string attached: you don’t have to accept the money, but if you do, you will be bound by the conditions for its use.

        And, of course, there is no such thing as a free lunch. The dollars redistributed were your federal tax dollars in the first place. This is money laundering of the worst sort.

        So many of these federal wealth redistribution programs are in effect that school budgets nationwide are in dire straits because they accepted the government largesse when times were good and money was flush. Now that federal budget restraints are squeezing the aid programs, school budgets are tapping the local taxpayers with higher tabs.

        So, everyone, don’t use this news to just fault the Federal Government. Look at your state legislators and agencies for the reasons why they rendered the 10th Amendment virtually null and void.

      • Vicki

        Vigilant. The federal government has been hiding behind those strings for about as long as there has been an income tax. Dangle OUR money in front of us but take it back if we don’t dance to the “federal” tune.

        I stand by my earlier comment that I find nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to buy the states behavior with the money taken from it’s citizens at gunpoint.

      • Vigilant

        “I stand by my earlier comment that I find nothing in the Constitution that gives the federal government the authority to buy the states behavior with the money taken from it’s citizens at gunpoint.”

        You may be missing the point. It was the states that capitulated to the Feds. By entering into the contract, the states relinquished their control over their own affairs. No gun was held to the heads of state officials, and the gun is still not there. The states need merely opt out of the grants and aid money to “reclaim” their states rights..

        Hillsdale College is a good example of a university with integrity. They have always refused federal funds, and as a result they are exempted from all the onerous regulations and “guidelines” that always come attached to that money.

        To borrow your words, I find nothing in the Constitution that prevents the federal government from buying the states behavior with the money taken from it’s citizens at gunpoint. Do you?

      • Vicki

        Vigilant says to me:
        —————————————————-
        You may be missing the point. It was the states that capitulated to the Feds.
        —————————————————-

        You are most certainly missing my point. Looking, Looking, Looking. Nope Still nowhere in the Constitution do I find that the Federal Government has the authority to enter into a contract with the states to take MY money (and yours) at GUNPOINT (federal income tax) and give it to the states IF they do what the Federal Government wants them to.

      • Vigilant

        “Still nowhere in the Constitution do I find that the Federal Government has the authority to enter into a contract with the states to take MY money (and yours) at GUNPOINT (federal income tax) and give it to the states IF they do what the Federal Government wants them to.”

        Shall we take this in two parts?

        (1) “to take MY money (and yours) at GUNPOINT (federal income tax)…”

        It’s called the 16th Amendment. Whether you believe it to have been duly ratified or not is another question, but it’s part of the Constitution and no one will ever be successful in challenging its application in a court of law. You can bank on that.

        (2) “…and give it to the states IF they do what the Federal Government wants them to.”

        While I admit the Constitutional grounds for this action is shaky, I repeat: the states could have long ago squelched this money laundering by simply saying “no.” It has by default become a recurring practice that has so many decades of actual use that there’s no chance in Hell that it will be reversed. And you can bank on that too.

        Our apparent source of disagreement on this issue is the placement of blame. You center your focus on the Feds, with a nonsequitur relating to income tax, and yet disregard the 9th and 10th Amendments.

        My focus is on the fact that the states, with no coercion, entered into contracts with the Feds, not excluded by virtue of the 9th and 10th amendments, to accomplish something that panders only to avariciousness.

        My point was that the states, in abdicating their responsibilities, not only could have but should have, held the Feds to their Constitutional responsibilities but failed to do so.

        It takes two to tango.

      • Vicki

        Good. You understand my point. Now all we have to do is either get states to show a backbone or the feds to stay within their chains. Or both.

    • GALT

      Is there any authority in the Constitution which says that they MUST operate under
      ( common ) law and equity jurisdictions rather than choosing to operate under admiralty and maritime exclusively? ( and the Uniform Commercial Code )

      Is there any authority in the Constitution which requires citizens to voluntarily choose to
      subject themselves to admiralty and maritime in exchange for privileges, benefits and immunities ( such as they are ) rather than the “rights” available in (common) law and equity? ( as in Bill of same )

      When one swears an Oath to preserve, protect and defend the Constitution, is there a distinction between one which operates under admiralty and maritime and the one which operates under ( common ) law and equity?

      Is ignorance of the law an excuse? Is ignorance of the distinction between these
      jurisdictions an excuse?

      “To conquer, first DIVIDE! ”

      “………one nation, with liberty and JUSTICE for ALL.”

      “Government’s derive their JUST POWERS from the ( implied ) CONSENT of the GOVERNED”

      • Vigilant

        Someone turn off GALT’s turntable. The broken record is playing again.

      • Vigilant

        Yada yada yada….

      • GALT

        Dear “volunteer”……..the government ( federal, state, and local ) very appreciates
        your co-operation with your own enslavement and the constant babbling distraction you provide in keeping your fellow ( victims ) citizens in line, by providing false and irrelevant
        causes and effects so that you all can ” complain” and “share the pain”, rather than actually doing anything about it……..we couldn’t ask for a better outcome if we tried.

        Remember, vote early, and vote often…….

      • Vigilant

        To what clinical term do we refer to describe why you are compelled to endlessly repeat the same thing, day in, day out, month in, month out? “Obssessive-Compulsive” is somehow inadequate to describe your psychological malady.

      • GALT

        Dear “volunteer”, thanks again for your continued denial of any personal responsibility in your current situation and your continued enthusiasm for your current enslavement……with enemies like you…..we don’t needs friends. Keep up the good work.

      • Vicki

        There is a vast difference between consent and informed consent. GALT’s point is that many people consent without knowing that they have a choice. Vigilant’s point seems to be that there is no choice.

        Informed consent seems to be missing though GALT (without providing substantiating links) seems to be trying to inform.

      • GALT

        Asketh and thou shall receiveth it……..posteth before…and can posteth again……
        saveth ing it, is better….and googling works for everything like UCC 1 -207, 1-203 etc.

        http://www.supremelaw.org/authors/freeman/freeman4.htm

      • Vigilant

        Well, Vicki, not quite. We have a choice in voting at state and local levels, and we have a choice as to whether we lay down for this money laundering scam or stand up and make our views known.

        An uphill battle, for sure, because special interests at all levels don’t want the practice to end. But no choice? I don’t think so.

      • GALT

        Which demonstrates that you have yet to comprehend what this so called broken record has been attempting to tell you……….and if you “vote” what are you voting for……..?

        That what exists will continue……and that you will continue to “volunteer”?

        But here is an interesting question…..does not exercising your right to vote, deprive you of
        any or all the of the other rights the Constitution says you have?

      • Vigilant

        Vicki, in view of GALT’s most recent blathering, you may want to reverse your assessment. Looks like GALT is the one who says there is no choice.

      • GALT

        Which of course is the perfect explanation for all these seemingly “unconstitutional” things the government is doing and which you are all complaining about………but which it just keeps doing?

        I wonder what possible voting strategy will make it all go back to whatever it is you imagine the Constitution says and means?

        There is no risk in being a volunteer and voting. Knowing the TRUTH here requires that
        you actually do something…….and why YOU must avoid it at all costs.

        Don’t worry vigilant ( although how that actually applies in your case is a mystery ) the
        link will only educate those who can read and comprehend it……or rather dare, to read it.

  • JimH

    I guess the Feds need money to pay off a 15 TRILLION dollar debt. Let’s fine soda machines in schools.
    With all the real problems that face our nation, school soda machines? Really? Come on.

  • Tunaman

    WELL FOLKS, IF YOU HAVEN’T FIGURED OUT THAT YOU NOW LIVE IN A DICTATORIAL POLICE STATE, NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO GO BACK AND STICK YOUR HEAD IN THE SAND! NOW WOULD BE THE TIME TO CLEAN HOUSE IN THE GOVERNMENTS EVERYWHERE! IN 2012 DON’T VOTE FOR THE LYING AND CORRUPT DEMOCRAPS, AND VETTE THE REPUBLICANS FOR RINO’S!! HAVE A NICE DAY!!!!!!!!!

  • Bruce

    Is this really a law on the books???? I own a vending company and one of my customers is a High School!

    • GALT

      public or private?

      • Bruce

        They are called charter schools that receive funding from both Florida state and I believe some federal funding.

      • GALT

        If they take even $1 of federal funds for any purpose they are subject to federal jurisdiction……..but please note….it was the school that was fined, not the vendor.

        • Bruce

          Thanks GALT, that is both good and bad news for me. The good news is that they won’t be fining me. The bad news is that it’s just a matter of time before I lose my best accounts and as a small vendor be forced out of business. This will be the second time in 5 years that I am probably going to end up taking it in the shorts due to the government / bankster regime. I was a building contractor up until 2007 and the burst of the housing bubble forced me out of that business. I at least thought that maybe the vending business would be somewhat safe. Small business does not have a fighting chance under the Obama dictatorship!

      • GALT

        You have been living under this ( admiralty/maritime ) constitution since 1939, in a process which began federally in 1935, and was completed with the passage of the UCC at the state level, ( adopted by all the ( so called states; now two letter non punctuated federal districts ) by the end of the 1950′s.

        ( see any federal reserve note issued in 1955 )

        It really doesn’t matter who is or has been president, nor will it matter who becomes
        president………..since nothing about this will change until the truth here is EXPOSED.

        ( or individuals, who have volunteered, begin to understand how to reverse the process. )

        Unfortunately, the only thing articles like THIS do…….is distract from the “solution”, by
        inciting FEAR and the HOPELESS PLIGHT of the VICTIMS……..while allowing the
        “ignorance” that enables it, to continue………

        Meanwhile…….you are being offered all manner of schemes and “shocking video’s” and critical info, and investment advice to become “wealthy” from the coming collapse…….

        You sound like a person who can adapt to whatever comes……so I’ll leave you with a couple of thoughts…….

        ( Applied ) Knowledge is power.

        The truth will set you free! ( if you act on it )

  • http://httpaol.com sean murry

    Now these kids today are living in a police state at school. In my day we didnt have this PC bullcrap.

  • teaparty13

    in my school years, (1961-1974) there were no vending machines in school..only one in my high school was in the teachers lounge(soda), why are vending machines even in schools? The cafeteria was enough to buy food at and maybe the school store would sell a few different snacks.. the gov’ts (local, state, fed) ok vending machines, now they want to fine schools, can’t have it both ways..

    • GALT

      Of course they can, silly!

  • herbdoc

    If this happened in the 60′s we kids would have boycotted the soda machines completely. now they will put a fence around the soda machines, have free soda and when all the kids go to get free soda they will slam the gate closed.

    • Vicki

      In my day we would buy a bunch of sodas before lunch and sell them at a profit during lunch.

  • Phil F

    What the hell is happening to our Constituional individual freedom to make our own decisions? What we drink or eat as free Americans is not the governments business. It’s time to throw the nanny state liberal socialist democrats out of office. Enough is enough America we must fight the taking over of our lives by government.

    • Vigilant

      PhilF, it starts with your local scool board and goes up to your state legislators. EVERY federally funded program related to education, from nutritional guidelines to the No Child Left Behind Act, would dry up and blow away tomorrow if your state simply said, “we opt to not receive another dollar of federal funds for these programs.”

      Please see my posting above.

    • Ladyhawke

      Freedom? Our freedom was flushed down the toilet a long time ago. At least you are beginning to wake up. A lot too late, though.

  • Sirian

    This “Federal Law” probably falls under the guise of a new regulation that has been whipped up and spread out by Cass Sunstein and his cronies, wouldn’t surprise me in the least. Another article on this is at:
    http://www.theblaze.com/stories/utah-school-fined-15000-for-accidentally-selling-soda-during-lunch/

    • Vigilant

      Sirian, look to the state of Utah, not the Federal Government, for the answer. See my above postings.

      • Sirian

        I see what you’re saying and understand Vigilant. It simply strikes me as things of this nature are being maneuvered into place by all the new different regulations that come out of Sunstein’s cavern. We unfortunately have way to many idiots in the states legislatures that run the same gamut. Hasn’t this area been one of Muchelloo’s primary target zones? HA, we both posted a link to the same story from two different sources. . . :)

      • Vigilant

        Sirian, you’re correct. Usage of “czars,” executive orders and regulatory agency edicts are all as unconstitutional as it comes. Not to mention the rulings of activist judges.

  • Gary L

    Once upon a time this whole issue would have sounded too stupid to be true but not in today’s America. Personally, I think they have it backward. They should only be allowd to buy soda’s during lunch and not all during the day. Why allow the purchase at any other time but lunch when that is really when you would want one.

  • Patsy Cochran

    I personally believe there should not be soda machines on school grounds for children below high school age. Children that young are not mature enough to make good choices for food and will go for the sugar every time. Even some high school children are not mature enough to make good choices.

    However, after saying all that, I also believe that the soda machines are really a non-issue. The federal government has no business telling us what to eat and when. Pretty soon they will be telling us when we can go to the bathroom and if you miss that time slot you have to wait until the next one.

    Let the parents decide that in the school district where the children are. Or better yet, pull the children out of public school and home school or send them to a Christian school.

    • Raggs

      I personally believe in FREEDOM and you are a jackass….

      • Patsy Cochran

        Raggs, you have the freedom to your opinion just as I have the freedom to voice my own opinion as well. I also believe in freedom, but parents need to take the responsibility for their children. They need to be active in the school system and make those decisions. A seven year old child should not be making the decision about his school cirriculum, what is on the lunch menu or which doctor he wants. The parents should be making those decisions, not the federal government.

      • GALT

        For the both of you………freedom of choice is a de facto ( a priori ) right.

        All choices have consequences.

        To make intelligent choices requires that accurate information be made available
        about the consequences of those choices.

        If there is no requirement that such information be provided then……………?

        “To conquer, first DIVIDE! “

    • Elevenarrows

      I understand what you are saying, Patsy, but just a note of encouragement: not all kids will go for the sugar every time. My kids drink water, water, water…OK, sometimes we also drink herbal teas and cocoa. When my kids are guests in other people’s homes, they will often choose water over any other options. Why? Because I have spent years educating my kids to the truth about our food supply and the best choices they can make to have the best health possible. It all depends on parents taking back the responsibility for their own kids. Someone is going to brainwash your kids. It might was well be you…with the values YOU want them to have. Once parents take back the responsibility for their kids, they will demand more from the schools, the communities and the government. Unfortunately, I see so many parents who can’t be bothered to care. It is too easy to just let Uncle Sam rear the kids.

      • Patsy Cochran

        I am so happy to hear that you are doing a really good job with your children. I do not have children still in school, but I have grandchildren in school and I do teach junior church. If parents do not take back control of what goes on in the schools and take responsibility for their education, Uncle Sam will indoctrinate them into something no-body wants. Congratulations again on doing such a good job with your kids. I just wish all parents were so diligent.

  • Raggs

    Just wait.. If parents send their children to skhool with a soda the parents will get fined and the child will be suspended…

    • Patsy Cochran

      Raggs, just one more comment. Have you ever been in a room with 25 children who have celebrated a classmates birthday with kool-aid and cupcakes. If you have you will know that with 25 children on a sugar high, you will not get anything accomplished.

  • George Worley

    All of the morons who elected Obama should be proud of his dictatorship and the subsequent nonsense issuing forth from his czar’s departments (education, EPA, justice, etc.).

    • Vigilant

      While I agree with your assessment of Obama, the evil of Federal aid to the states has been around for half a century. Look to the states, not the Feds, for greedily accepting the “free” money with strings attached.

  • JimH

    I wonder how many books $15000 would buy that these soda sucking students won’t get.
    Paying a fine isn’t the best use of a school budget.
    At least we might save the illiterate students from the evil’s of soda.

  • http://gillysrooms.blogspot.com GILLYSROOMS from Australia

    Have you UTAHRIANS gone mad at banning a soda vending machine so students can;t quench their thirst with their choice of drink? Starving and dehydrating your students is just plain silly torture. I beleive its Time to encourage some of your poor over governed citizens to consider excaping/ migrating to Australia

    • Vigilant

      Only rats (and most of them are wealthy looking for tax benefits) leave the sinking ship first. Much as I love Australia, the USA deserves my loyalty to help restore it to its former greatness.

    • Vigilant

      BTW, you still haven’t answered my question at http://personalliberty.com/2012/05/18/the-collapsing-eurozone/

  • RW113

    The Federal Government has no jurisdiction over school, or what happens in schools. It is a State issue under the Constitution. What input they have been allowed in actually under the Contract Clause of the US Constitution – A State may Contract to follow Federal Guidelines in exchange for Federal Dollars. Yet, recently, new laws and regulations are being passed, without agreement by the States, and the Feds now claim jurisdiction – because they have been exercising it so long. Time to oust the Feds and their overreaching from all State Agencies.

    • Vigilant

      Good comments. I think the “unfunded mandate” comes under the category of federal overreach.

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=100003624642108 Leonard W. Giddens Jr.

    You have got to be kidding me. When I was in school a Pepsi and a bag of peanuts was sometimes all I had for lunch. a nickle for a bag of nuts and a nickle for the soda. I am now 69 and not over weight. The government needs to get the hell out of our lives in this case.

  • auhunter

    You’re right parents should have the say in what their kids eat or drink, in or out of school. The problem is that the majority of parents these days consider school as a baby sitting service, making schools and teachers responsible for their kids for the better part of the day. After school they are on their own. In my day, you went to school and got the basics of learning and it was your responsibility after school, through home work, etc., to expound on what you had learned that day with or without parental help. My dad ran a tight ship, school,homework, chores, and then I was free to do as I wanted (to a point). The result was I got a college degree as did my kids and all of us earning high five figure incomes. No welfare, though I did use the GI Bill to finish off my college degree after 26 years in the military.

  • Javamann

    Let’s hope that they have enough cash in the Educational Programs fund, to pay the fine!

Bottom
close[X]

Sign Up For Personal Liberty Digest™!

PL Badge

Welcome to PersonalLiberty.com,
America's #1 Source for Libertarian News!

To join our group of freedom-loving individuals and to get alerts as well as late-breaking conservative news from Personal Liberty Digest™...

Privacy PolicyYou can opt out at any time. We protect your information like a mother hen. We will not sell or rent your email address to anyone for any reason.