The Make America Healthy Again movement has gained significant attention throughout the nation and many of the top initiatives highlighted have found their way into state legislatures this session.

Louisiana is no exception and Senator Patrick McMath, R-Covington, has, via Senate Bill 14, proposed a significant cleanup of our food supply, especially focused on kids. Backed by the popular support of the MAHA Moms, this bill has three major parts that are worth examining separately for their merits.

First is a ban of several “ultra processed” foods in school meals. In this case the term ultra processed is defined as products that contain any one of 13 specifically referenced compounds. Of these the first 7 are artificial dyes, like red dye No. 40, derived from petroleum byproducts that serve a singular role to make food more visually appealing.

We should all be asking ourselves why we ever allowed this stuff to find its way into our food in the first place. Several of these synthetic dyes have been shown to be associated with various harms ranging from ADHD to allergies and tumors.

Most of the other compounds on the list sound like they should have a skull and cross bones on the label. Take the bread additive azodicarbonamide as an example. If you thought that sounded like something you should not eat, you would be right.

It breaks down into urethane (yes, like the paint), a known carcinogen, and is banned is just about every country but the U.S.

In the case of school lunches, the child has no choice in the matter. They eat what they are provided and we have an obligation to protect them from toxic substances in the cafeteria.

Second is a labeling requirement for foods containing the substances in the school lunch ban portion, plus a few more, known to have a questionable safety profile that are banned in other countries.

It directs manufacturers to place a label on any food or drink containing these chemicals that clearly alerts the consumer of the fact that it contains something that is banned in other countries.

Last, but certainly not least, is a provision to reform of the Supplemental Nutritional Aid Program, once known as food stamps. This program is federally sponsored, and provides food assistance to families with an income below 130% of the federal poverty line. This would be about $31,200 net yearly income for a family of four.

In our inflationary economic environment, every penny counts and when it comes to food and obtaining the maximum calories for minimum dollars is a necessity. Historically, the cheapest foods happen to also be the least healthy in many cases, condemning those dependent on the program to poor health.

Soft drinks containing very high sugar or sugar substitutes are a major contributor to the chronic diseases that plague our health system like obesity and diabetes, especially in children. This bill directs DCFS to seek a waiver from the federal government allowing Louisiana to prohibit use of SNAP to purchase soft drinks.

Ultimately, the federal government should go a step further and incentivize healthier alternatives for SNAP beneficiaries, but this bill represents a major step in the right direction that can be accomplished at the state level.

The old saying goes: “You are what you eat.” We should keep this literal and obvious truth in mind when we think about how to turn the tide on chronic disease in our nation.

Let us begin by protecting the children who are too young to choose for themselves and providing better information for adults who can. SB 14 will accomplish both goals and move Louisiana to the forefront of the movement to Make America Healthy Again.

Dr. Ralph L. Abraham, M.D. is the  Louisiana Surgeon General

(The Center Square) – California Board of Parole Hearings ordered the release of convicted child murderer Herbert David Brown III, making this the second announced early release of a convicted child murderer in recent weeks.

San Luis Obispo County District Attorney Dan Dow, whose office convicted Brown for beating his 22-month-old daughter Lily to death, has requested that California Gov. Gavin Newsom use his authority to overturn the parole board’s decision. All current board members are Newsom appointees.

“Brown has done self-help programming but didn’t express responsibility for Lily’s death until Inmate Brown was told that failure to do so was a bar to being paroled,” wrote Dow. “Even then, Inmate Brown’s account lacked credibility.”

“Brown has significant mental health issues that appear to require ongoing monitoring and treatment,” continued Dow. “Inmate Brown’s relapse prevention plans are inadequate and superficial.”

Brown entered a plea of no contest and was sentenced to 15 years to life in prison for the murder. Lily was found dead with multiple injuries, including a fractured skull.

Brown was under the influence of methamphetamine when he killed his daughter. He now identifies as a woman and has served 12 years of his sentence.  

According to the most recent Comprehensive Risk Assessment on Brown from 2023, he was found to be a “higher moderate” risk for violence. 

Brown was first granted parole in October 2024, after which California Gov. Gavin Newsom, who has appointed all current members of the California Board of Parole Hearings, referred the parole decision back to the parole board for review. The board has since reaffirmed its earlier decision, and Dow is seeking residents to write to the governor to use his constitutional authority to override the parole board.

“Precious Lily deserves better. The time is now Governor Newsom, please help ensure that we have Justice for Lily Brown,” said Dow.

“The Governor has authority under California Constitution, Article V, Section 8(b) to reverse a decision to release a convicted murderer on parole, but must do so within 30 calendar days,” continued Dow. “The decision was issued on April 22, 2025.”

There is currently no release date set for Brown.

Two weeks ago, the Board of Parole Hearings’ decision to approve the early release of convicted child murderer Josue Herrera, who was found to have beaten his girlfriend’s 2-year-old son to death, sparked national outrage against the state’s apparent leniency toward murders of young children. 

Dow said Brown’s early release is possible due to Proposition 57, passed in 2016. 

Prop. 57 was written to only allow early release of “prisoners convicted of non-violent felonies.” 

However, because the state automatically classifies any crimes not specifically classified as violent to be non-violent, such as drive-by shootings and assault with a deadly weapon, many violent crimes are not technically considered “violent” per se.

Dow also noted Prop. 57 allows the Department of Corrections and Rehabilitation to award sentence credits for rehabilitation, good behavior or educational achievements, even to those who committed crimes classified as violent.

“This means that even those inmates sentenced for violent offenses, like murder of a child, are eligible to be released much earlier than under the law that was in effect prior to the passage of Proposition 57,” said Dow.

(The Center Square) – The Wisconsin Institute for Law and Liberty’s president is out with a new piece that says Milwaukee County Judge Hannah Dugan violated one of the most basic principles of our Democracy if the federal charges against her are true.

“The issue is institutional fidelity,” Esenberg wrote on X Wednesday. “A ‘independent judiciary’ does imply an unfettered power to do whatever a judge thinks is ‘right.’”

Esenberg and WILL’s Dan Lennington co-wrote a piece for the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel where they talk about how Dugan is accused of helping a Mexican foreign national charged with battery escape her courtroom to avoid ICE agents.

“There is a time and a place to express opposition to President [Donald] Trump’s immigration policies or the way some of them are being executed,” the two wrote in their op-ed. “But respect for democracy includes respect for the laws that our elected representatives have enacted. It means honoring the rule of law and not simply ignoring laws that we do not like.”

Esenberg has been critical of Dugan since her arrest last week, but not because of her opposition to President Trump’s deportation plans. Instead, Esenberg has criticized Dugan for injecting her politics into her role as a local judge.

“It’s only one case, but a state court judge obstructing federal law enforcement is interposition. It’s not normal. It’s not proper,” Esenberg wrote Monday. “I understand that [the] judge may not like border enforcement or the way in which the administration goes about it. But that’s not her call.”

In his Wednesday tweets, however. Esenberg also criticized Trump’s handling of immigration rulings from the court that the president disagrees with.

Ironically, overstepping this way in not unlike what the Trump is doing in ignoring due process requirements. He thinks that the presence of millions of people in the country unlawfully is, to use Dugan’s word regarding immigration enforcement, ‘absurd’,” Eseberg wrote. “He thinks that the limitations on his power to do what the believes to be right are unjust. But our democracy doesn’t work that way.”

Dugan is looking at two federal charges, including one felony.

The Wisconsin Supreme Court on Tuesday suspended her but made a point to say that Dugan is on paid administrative leave.