“Why not give me a choice besides french fries or french fries?” Morgan Spurlock asked the American food industry and regulators in his 2004 fast food exposé Super Size Me. President Obama’s budget for fiscal year 2011 begins to answer that question.

Of particular interest to slow food activists and locavores is the administration’s plan to invest $400 million, through public-private grants into the development of super markets, farmers’ markets and other health food stores across the U.S.

The financing should help small businesses provide healthy alternatives to plastic wrapped snacks, burgers, fried chicken and shakes in communities lacking options. President Obama’s plan, made public on Feb. 1, 2010, included overall food-and-nutrition expenditures far beyond this, of course, which will have a lasting impact on our food and agricultural economy, land and health.

According to Bloomberg financial reports, the U.S. Department of Agriculture spending overall will rise 2.3 percent to $132.3 billion in fiscal 2011.

Agriculture secretary Tom Vilsack said the money would continue to pay for major nutrition assistance programs, with $1 billion split between the Women Infants and Children, and National School Lunch Program; $1 billion for efforts to reduce foodborne illnesses from USDA-inspected food products; and a whopping $75.3 billion towards the food stamps program SNAP (Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Plan).

Even though food stamp spending is rising to meet the needs of record-levels of unemployed and under-employed people in the U.S., there’s a silver lining: food stamps are increasingly allowed at farmer’s markets, these days.

Farmers’ markets, which we frequent and frequently write about at EcoSalon, reduce the fuel consumption and other environmental costs of food transportation by selling produce within 100 miles of its origin and by featuring in-season items only, eschewing huge amounts of plastic and packaging, among many other environmental benefits.

Everyone, from lunch lady bloggers to twittering accountants, had something to say about the budget this week online. Decide for yourself if the plan spends too much or not enough on food, with these basic reads and resources.

Basic Reading:

“A record 37.9 million people, or about one of every eight Americans, received food stamps in October 2009, as the jobless rate reached a 26-year high, the USDA said on Jan. 12, 2010. ‘Thank gosh we have food stamps,’ Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack said at a news briefing in Washington. ‘One, for the families who are struggling, and two, for the farmers who want to sell commodities to 300 million Americans.’ – Bloomberg news story by Alan Bjerga examining FY2011 budget in light of food programs

“Rep. Allyson Schwartz (D-PA) said. ‘Every day millions of Americans walk out their front doors and see nothing but fast food and convenience stores selling high-fat, high-sugar, processed foods. This lack of retail outlets that sell healthy food options results in higher rates of obesity, diabetes and other health-related issues. The success of the Pennsylvania initiative should be used as the model for a national plan to improve children’s health, create jobs and spur economic development nationwide.’” – A PolicyLink press release via The Medical News

“President Obama’s Budget became public recently and one of the many items in the massive $4.5 trillion expenditures is $1 billion per year for Child Nutrition split between the National School Lunch Program and the Women, Infants and Children Program. At first blush, given the economy and the call for a 3-year freeze on discretionary spending, this might seem like a win for America’s children; and groups like The School Nutrition Association, and the Center for Science in the Public Interest have applauded the proposal. I believe we need to take a closer look at what this really means and perhaps rub the shine off of this offered apple.” – A Chef Ann blog post, by “renegade lunch lady” Ann Cooper, criticizing the president’s FY2011 budget

Further Resources:

Further plans for U.S. government spending on environmental initiatives, especially in solar energy, described at OnEarth.org

Eat This, Not That, a Men’s Health guide to swapping convenient comestibles, for healthier, still-tasty green fare

A photo essay in Fast Company showing new, luxe restaurants started during the recession

A list of food-related budget items by the industry blog The Packer

This is the latest installment of EcoMeme, a column featuring environmental news, trends and tech highlights by Lora Kolodny.

Image: mckaysavage

My lovely, celebrity-style dressing room is a spare bedroom I stole in the house, a spare that once housed a maple crib, green nursing glider and armoire of precious, spit-up stained Baby Gap dresses on mini-hangers.

Today, it’s my own little retail Mecca (organic, of course). But I do allow my daughters to visit and check out the blouses and shoe rack, and yes, even borrow on occasion. That sort of thing was taboo when I was growing up. Moms were moms.  Friends were the ones loaning stuff.

My own stylish mother (here with me and Grandma Zelda) towered over me at 5-foot-9 (not counting the beehive do) and always wore at least a size 14. She wasn’t a Laker like Julia Child and her sister, Dorothy, but when she got married, she wore flats so not to surpass 6-foot dad.

I hung out in Mom’s cavernous walk-in closet while she was away at luncheons. But no way could I actually borrow one of those gowns since they hung on me like a puddled curtain. I also was drawn to her off-limits, pointy, size-10 pumps, dyed to match her Jacky suits.

I was the fourth child and the runt of the litter – considerably shorter and smaller than the rest. (My theory is mother smoked a few more cigs and sipped a few more martinis when she was preggers with me.) But to be fair, I’m also considering the DNA link to my small, Polish ancestors.

Cut to my gorgeous teenage daughter with a great sense of style, who caught up with me in stature a few years back. I provide her with her own little Nordstrom Rack down the hall. I take full credit for cultivating her sense of entitlement since I have been most gracious about loaning her items, and have only kvetched a few times when they weren’t returned on time. She is very responsible and that counts.

Combined, Syd and I have a substantial inventory. I’m proud to say a chunk of it is the ski apparel we share for our annual Mommy-Sydney ski weekends in Lake Tahoe.

I was glad to squeeze into a pair of my daughter’s skinny jeans for my birthday outing with friends in August, and only felt a pinch after the second drink. You dirty martini, you!

How does the sharing work? Sometimes we fall for the same cardigan and it can make more sense during hard times to buy one to share and take turns – you know, like college co-eds on a strict budget. Call it the The Daughterhood of the Traveling Pants.

I also prefer to loan rather than buy her a dress for the countless B’Nei Mitzvah parties and other events she seems to attend. If she wears something of mine, it feels like new to her, even though I’ve worn it a dozen times.

This whole lending thing is why those smart couture rental shops, like Boutiqueville in Chicago, do so well. Why own something costly when you can rent for the occasion? When the high is over you send it back. Thank you, it was a great date, but onto other matches.

I should point out it isn’t just us girls sharing the wealth. My daughter also gets warm and fuzzy about wearing her dad’s old sweaters. I seriously think it brings her closer to him in a very sweet way.

Guess teens have been burrowing in oversize wool since Ann-Margret sang “How Lovely to be a Woman” in Bye Bye Birdie. He doesn’t mind her using the old sweaters, or at least, has never complained.

I got to wondering if other kids and parents are comfortable with community closeting or if most families are fiercely territorial about their closets. It certainly requires trust and respect, and the right kind of green deodorant.

I did a bit of research online and found little has been written on the subject. Hurray for me!

But I did stumble upon an interesting post on How to Share Clothes with a Cross-Dressing Husband.

Okay, the ground rules killed me: Killed me! They included keeping his paws out of your underwear drawer, making him replace anything stretched, torn or stained, and drawing the line when it comes to your most precious blouses or skirts (i.e. the ones with price tags still attached). The helpful primer also suggested shopping together to make sure you have the same taste. Oy!

None of this would work in my marriage. My husband is a large man who prefers high-wasted, baggy slacks to hip jeans. If he were a cross-dresser, he’d still be swishing around in those Dean Martin pants.

I do like some of his Oxford shirts and could see slipping into one after a post-sex shower and cocktail in bed, but since we don’t schedule those kind of Hollywood encounters (we don’t eat Chinese out of the box either), it’s all just another fantasy, like wearing my mother’s Yves Saint Laurent caftans.

I do have friends who are married to dainty men with little feet and excellent taste, and I could see trading with one of those fellows, swapping Indian tunics and Moroccan slides for a tux and velvet slippers when those Victor-Victoria mood strikes.

Of course, the well-dressed gay husband is top drawer when it comes to swapping, assuming he would cooperate. His rules might be too stringent for even me. I sort my closet by color but not by texture and season and don’t iron a thing. Crisp is not in my vocabulary.

No, I think I’ll stick with sharing with the girls, my wonderful girls, grabbing a wrap for Lauren when leaving for a party, pulling a dress for Sydney for a Bat Mitzvah. Selecting a hand bag that works. Maybe a trinket or earrings to tie it all together.

Does sharing benefit my daughters more than me? Well, naturally. It goes with the territory when you’re a consummate stylist and mother – who still misses dressing her dolls.

This is the sixth installment in Luanne’s column, Life in the Green Lane.

Main Image: In Style

Image One: Luanne Bradley

In light of the recent survey finding many of us secure a better night’s sleep in separate cocoons, it might pay to return to the days of twins. You know, lie back and watch a show, roll over for fun, head home to your crib for a snooze so you can get up for work. Just like dating!

Think of the fun of sneaking into the resting chamber of your better half for a “hello stranger” kinda session, while saving all kinds of bucks on the bedding ’cause twin sets are so much cheaper than kings.

Many hotels in Europe feature twins with headboards pushed together to form one chic unit, dressing them in matching finery. I’ve slept best in a twin since summer camp and think in some ways, we were meant to have a compact cot with a narrow margin to feel safe and secure as we garner our much needed zzz’s.

So what are the most stylish ways to produce twins in your own home? Probably the best source for a cool pair is vintage. If you’re more contemporary, you can always customize upholstered headboards or beds with eco fabrics. But that’s another story!

Subtle Vintage Pairings

ebay is undoubtedly the wealthiest source for matching twins, such as these woven Scandinavian beauties from Antique Bedrooms with tapered, capped legs. $1500.

I’m a total sucker for caned furniture, and in fact picked up a set of beds for my daughters at auction when they were small. These precious French guys were harvested by French Finds.

Man, you could have fun with these circa 1970s rattan vintage twin headboards with a decorative diamond insert. Order good green mattresses on frames sans the chemicals and geometric organic bedding. From Objects in the Loft at 1st Dibs.

Pair of curvaceous, French Oak Louis twins, $990 at Abba Antiques.

Main Image: Posh Living

Image one: Rhymehatcher

Image Two: Coco+Kelley

The signs seem to be everywhere: We are becoming a more frugal nation that needs to be fed deals and discounts as we plow through increasingly difficult financial times.

According to a new report by the Associated Press, frugality is the now the new norm in America and it stems from necessity. We are working less and earning less while the costs of food, schooling and housing remain pressing obligations we struggle to meet. So everyone seems to be cutting back across the board – white collar, blue collar, affluent, illegal.

The report finds consumer spending will never return to pre-recession levels, unlike what we witnessed after all other recessions since World War II when thriftiness took a back seat to the demand for new cars and shiny goods.

But this recession has taken such a huge bite out of spending and our old ways, Baby Boomers are unlikely to return to the affluenza that got us here in the first place. While the new frugality is good for the family budget and the planet, it is hurting the national economy including everyone associated with the housing market (sellers, contractors, laborers, suppliers) as well as gardeners, handymen and domestics.

And anyone who hangs at the local mall has seen how quiet things are, as shoppers buy what they need and buy it on sale rather than loading up on seasonal items they can do without.

The auto industry has seen a huge decline, from sales of cars and trucks averaging 16 million a year in boom times to a recession level of 10 million a year. The result could be further consolidation among auto makers and a loss of new vehicle taxes that aid state and local governments.

The report cites a Gallup survey taken last month which found seven in 10 Americans are cutting weekly expenses consistently through the summer. This is linked to the worst downturn since the Depression with unemployment currently at 9.7 percent and rising to double digits before the end of the year. Those who have jobs are earning less and have lost sizable percentages of their investment nest eggs.

We have always seen frugal behavior in some Americans, those wise enough to save more than they spend, to reuse what they can, to eat leftovers and take public transportation, turn off the lights and the heat and air whenever possible. Without even knowing it, those people are the real deal when it comes to being green. And now as the rest of us jump onto that bandwagon, they can proudly say, “I told you so.”

Image: timparkinson

Every time I go to the grocery store, I’m shocked to see how much the prices keep climbing. In a moment of penny-pinching madness, it’s tempting to live off 65-cent frozen burritos. That is, until you look at the nutrition information. So, I’ve done some research to find the healthiest foods that even the strictest recessionista budgets can afford – if you’ve got a dollar, you can get at least one serving (and often several) of the following foods.

Yogurt

Rich in calcium, this nourishing breakfast or snack costs next to nothing. To get the most for your money, stick with bulk containers and stay away from yogurt that’s packaged for single servings (and packed with sugar).

Oats

Oats are a great source of fiber and can even help lower your cholesterol. Although individual packets of instant oatmeal may shave some minutes off your morning routine, stretch your dollar by buying them in bulk.

Eggs

Whoever came up with the slogan “the incredible, edible egg” really hit the nail on the head. Whether poached, scrambled, sunny-side-up or hard-boiled, this protein packed food is as inexpensive, wholesome and tasty as they come.

Bananas

A great source of potassium and fiber, bananas are one of the most economical fruits around. Eat them plain or slice them up as a healthy topping for cereal and yogurt.

Beans

Whether you prefer garbanzo, pinto, black beans or other varieties, this filling food is high in protein, potassium fiber and zinc. Thrifty tip: go for dry beans instead of canned.

Broccoli

Folate, calcium, fiber, potassium, vitamins A and C: broccoli has it all. Not only is it good for your health, it’s easy on your wallet, as well. Plus, it contains phytonutrients that can help keep diabetes and heart disease at bay.

Tofu

Unfortunately, tofu gets a bad rap when it comes to taste. But, this protein-rich meat alternative can make your mouth water with appetizing recipes like Korean-inspired soft tofu soup with kimchi or Southeast Asian tofu lettuce wraps.

Spinach

Crammed with iron and vitamin C, this low-cost, low-calorie vegetable tastes delicious in omelets and salads. Plus, it’s the perfect topping for a vegetarian pizza.

Sweet Potatoes

High in potassium, fiber and beta carotene, sweet potatoes are a cheap and healthy way to garnish salads and enjoy a snack between meals. Just don’t waste your money on cubed packages; peeling and cutting them yourself will save you some cash.

Apples

An apple a day? Yeah, you’ve heard it before, and for good reason. This juicy fruit boasts loads of pectin and vitamin C, not to mention a low price tag.

Sardines

Like salmon,  the sardine is a great source of omega-3 fatty acids. Unlike salmon, it’s relatively cheap and eco-friendly. For a healthier meal, substitute mayonnaise with a little oil and vinegar.

Nuts

Nuts are rich in protein, essential fatty acids and vitamin E. Just buy them raw, in the shell, for the best bargain and stay away from costly varieties like pecans and macadamia nuts.

Don’t miss Lower on the Food Chain, Lighter on the Wallet: 18 Easy Elements of a Sustainable Diet for more economical, eco-friendly diet tips!

Images: FotoosVanRobin, foodistablog, drewgstephens, cursedthing, clairity, colecamp, JACoulter, avlxyz, FotoosVanRobin, FotoosVanRobin, DeusXFlorida, stu_spivack, macinate