    [House Hearing, 111 Congress]
    [From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]

           H.R. 5504, IMPROVING NUTRITION FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN ACT

    =======================================================================

                                    HEARING

                                   before the

                                  COMMITTEE ON
                              EDUCATION AND LABOR

                         U.S. House of Representatives

                         ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS

                                 SECOND SESSION

                                   __________

                  HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 1, 2010

                                   __________

                               Serial No. 111-71

                                   __________

          Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor

                           Available on the Internet:
          http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html

                      U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE
    57-099 PDF                WASHINGTON : 2010
    -----------------------------------------------------------------------
    For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing
    Office Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512-1800; DC
    area (202) 512-1800 Fax: (202) 512-2104  Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC
    20402-0001

                        COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR

                      GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman

    Dale E. Kildee, Michigan, Vice       John Kline, Minnesota,
        Chairman                           Senior Republican Member
    Donald M. Payne, New Jersey          Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin
    Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey        Howard P. ``Buck'' McKeon,
    Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott, Virginia      California
    Lynn C. Woolsey, California          Peter Hoekstra, Michigan
    Ruben Hinojosa, Texas                Michael N. Castle, Delaware
    Carolyn McCarthy, New York           Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan
    John F. Tierney, Massachusetts       Judy Biggert, Illinois
    Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio             Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania
    David Wu, Oregon                     Joe Wilson, South Carolina
    Rush D. Holt, New Jersey             Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington
    Susan A. Davis, California           Tom Price, Georgia
    Raul M. Grijalva, Arizona            Rob Bishop, Utah
    Timothy H. Bishop, New York          Brett Guthrie, Kentucky
    Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania             Bill Cassidy, Louisiana
    David Loebsack, Iowa                 Tom McClintock, California
    Mazie Hirono, Hawaii                 Duncan Hunter, California
    Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania          David P. Roe, Tennessee
    Phil Hare, Illinois                  Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania
    Yvette D. Clarke, New York           [Vacant]
    Joe Courtney, Connecticut
    Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire
    Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio
    Jared Polis, Colorado
    Paul Tonko, New York
    Pedro R. Pierluisi, Puerto Rico
    Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan,
        Northern Mariana Islands
    Dina Titus, Nevada
    Judy Chu, California

                         Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director
                     Barrett Karr, Minority Staff Director

                                C O N T E N T S

                                  ----------
                                                                       Page

    Hearing held on July 1, 2010.....................................     1

    Statement of Members:
        Kline, Hon. John, Senior Republican Member, Committee on
          Education and Labor........................................     5
            Prepared statement of....................................     6
        Kucinich, Hon. Dennis, a Representative in Congress from the
          State of Ohio, submissions for the record:
            Article, ``Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing
              Contributes to Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done
              About It,'' by Jennifer L. Harris, et al, Annual Review
              of Public Health, Oct. 2008, Internet address to.......    27
            Article, ``Television viewing, computer use, obesity, and
              adiposity in US preschool children,'' by Jason A.
              Mendoza, et al, International Journal of Behavioral
              Nutrition and Physical Activity, Sept. 25, 2007........    83
            Article, ``Television viewing, fast-food consumption, and
              children's obesity,'' by Hung-Hao Chang and Rodolofo M.
              Nayga, Jr., Contemporary Economic Policy, July 2009,
              Internet address to....................................    92
            Article, ``Fast-Food Restaurant Advertising on Television
              and Its Influence on Childhood Obesity,'' by Shin-Yi-
              Chou, et al, Journal of Law and Economics, Nov. 2008,
              Internet address to....................................    93
        Miller, Hon. George, Chairman, Committee on Education and
          Labor......................................................     1
            Prepared statement of....................................     3
            Additional submissions:
                Statement of the Food Research and Action Center.....    82
                Questions submitted for the record...................   114

    Statement of Witnesses:
        Colicchio, Tom, chef and restaurateur........................    40
            Prepared statement of....................................    42
        Monroe, Paul D., major general, U.S. Army (ret.), on behalf
          of Mission: Readiness......................................    64
            Prepared statement of....................................    66
        Rector, Robert, senior research fellow, the Heritage
          Foundation.................................................    44
            Prepared statement of....................................    45
        Sanchez, Eduardo, vice president and chief medical officer,
          Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas........................    58
            Prepared statement of....................................    60
            Responses to questions submitted for the record..........   124
        Vilsack, Hon. Thomas, Secretary, U.S. Department of
          Agriculture................................................     7
            Prepared statement of....................................     9
            Responses to questions submitted for the record..........   116
        Weill, James D., president, Food Research and Action Center..    53
            Prepared statement of....................................    55
            Additional submissions:
                Child nutrition reauthorization materials............    93
                Letter, dated June 16, 2010, to the U.S. Senate
                  leadership.........................................    94

           H.R. 5504, IMPROVING NUTRITION FOR AMERICA'S CHILDREN ACT

                                  ----------

                             Thursday, July 1, 2010

                         U.S. House of Representatives

                        Committee on Education and Labor

                                Washington, DC.

                                  ----------

        The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:21 a.m., in room
    2175, Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. George Miller
    [chairman of the committee] presiding.
        Present: Representatives Miller, Kildee, Scott, McCarthy,
    Tierney, Kucinich, Wu, Davis, Loebsack, Hirono, Clarke,
    Courtney, Shea-Porter, Fudge, Polis, Tonko, Titus, Chu, Kline,
    Petri, Castle, Ehlers, Biggert, Platts, McMorris Rodgers,
    Guthrie, Cassidy, Roe, and Thompson.
        Staff present: Andra Belknap, Press Assistant; Calla Brown,
    Staff Assistant, Education; Daniel Brown, Staff Assistant; Jody
    Calemine, General Counsel; Denise Forte, Director of Education
    Policy; Ruth Friedman, Senior Education Policy Advisor (Early
    Childhood); Jose Garza, Deputy General Counsel; David Hartzler,
    Systems Administrator; Liz Hollis, Special Assistant to Staff
    Director/Deputy Staff Director; Sadie Marshall, Chief Clerk;
    Bryce McKibbon, Staff Assistant; Alex Nock, Deputy Staff
    Director; Julie Peller, Senior Education Policy Advisor;
    Meredith Regine, Junior Legislative Associate, Labor;
    Alexandria Ruiz, Staff Assistant; Melissa Salmanowitz, Press
    Secretary; Gabrielle Serra, Education and Nutrition Policy
    Advisor; Dray Thorne, Senior Systems Administrator; Daniel
    Weiss, Special Assistant to the Chairman; Stephanie Arras,
    Minority Legislative Assistant; Kirk Boyle, Minority General
    Counsel; Allison Dembeck, Minority Professional Staff Member;
    Barrett Karr, Minority Staff Director; Alexa Marrero, Minority
    Communications Director; Brian Newell, Minority Press
    Secretary; Susan Ross, Minority Director of Education and Human
    Services Policy; Linda Stevens, Minority Chief Clerk/Assistant
    to the General Counsel; and Loren Sweatt, Minority Professional
    Staff Member.
        Chairman Miller [presiding]. The Committee on Education and
    Labor will come to order. Good morning to everyone, and welcome
    to our first witness, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. We
    will be with you in a moment. We have a couple of opening
    statements.
        This morning we will discuss the new bipartisan child
    nutrition legislation we introduced earlier this month to
    address critical health and economic needs in this country. We
    are on the brink of a national health crisis that is affecting
    our youngest children.
        Childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 30
    years. Nearly 1 in 3 children are obese. The frightening
    reality in many doctor's offices is very young children are
    presenting adult onset health problems like diabetes and heart
    disease.
        At the very same time, over 16 million children are hungry
    and live in households where families are struggling to put
    food on the table. In this economy, families are faced with the
    difficult and daunting choices of paying their bills and
    keeping the lights on or putting food on the table. They simply
    do not have enough resources to make ends meet.
        For these families, the federal child nutrition programs
    provide a nutritional safety net. They help parents avoid this
    painful choice between basic necessities. This makes the role
    of these programs increasingly important.
        We cannot ignore the fact that for millions of children the
    only meals that they can count on are those that they get at
    school or in childcare. Hunger affects every aspect of
    children's lives, including their ability to keep up with their
    peers to achieve academically.
        If children are hungry, they can't focus and they can't
    learn. And if we do nothing, if we allow these children's
    health to deteriorate, to jeopardize their success in school,
    we compromise their ability to grow into healthy, productive
    adults.
        Research shows that healthy eating and a child's ability to
    focus and benefit from classroom--and benefit from classroom
    time are absolutely linked. The federal child nutrition
    programs provide us with a tremendous opportunity to help
    change children's lives and the future of this country by not
    just feeding children healthier meals, but teaching them about
    the importance of healthy choices.
        If we educate our children about the importance of
    nutrition early, they can develop healthy habits that will
    translate into a lifetime of healthy eating and healthy living.
    This is why we need to place so much emphasis on healthy
    nutrition and education in childcare, and for mothers in the
    women and infants children's programs.
        This won't be the first time we look to the classroom to
    help stop national health crises. That is how we worked to get
    people to stop smoking. We educated children about the dangers,
    and they started talking and questioning their parents about
    it. With the use of seatbelts, we told children about the need
    for seatbelts, and they started asking their parents to buckle
    up and to make the car a safer place for them to ride in.
        Education has mastered many difficult problems in this
    country. If we work in the schools to both increase nutritional
    opportunities and educate children about the food they are
    eating, we have a chance to really dramatically drive down
    future health care costs. And we have a real opportunity to
    ensure our children will be able to reach for success and live
    healthier lives.
        At Dover Elementary and Richmond Elementary in my district,
    the kids help take care of the school garden. They use it for a
    biology class, they use it for zoology class, and they use it
    for an art class. But most importantly, they are eating the
    products of their garden, they are understanding the richness
    of fresh fruits and vegetables, and they are taking what they
    learn in the garden back home with them to teach their parents
    about healthy living.
        This is the type of program we want to replicate in the
    legislation we have introduced. We want to empower schools
    across the country to start their own gardens, to run green
    cafeterias, to accept nothing but the highest quality food in
    schools in the cafeteria and in the vending machines. We want
    to empower schools to help improve meal quality, to change
    children's lives, and take the issue of children's health
    seriously.
        The Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act will
    help accomplish this task by making four important improvements
    in America's child nutrition programs.
        First, we streamline and increase access for children to
    healthy nutritional food during the school day.
        Secondly, we work to improve food safety and the recall
    process in our schools for unsafe food.
        Third, we increase the reimbursement rate for the first
    time in 30 years to better support the schools' ability to
    offer healthy school meals.
        Lastly, we provide opportunities for year-round service, on
    the weekends, during vacation and holidays, and during the
    summer, because hunger and children's nutritional needs do not
    take a summer vacation.
        This is smart policy that responds to significant needs to
    help improve children's health.
        We have many partners in this effort, including health
    organizations, anti-hunger organizations, school and nutrition
    organizations, teachers and parents, who really want better
    nutrition in our schools.
        We also have the help of Michelle Obama. With her Let's
    Move initiative, the First Lady has lent her leadership, her
    vision, and her knowledge to help end the childhood obesity
    crisis and to bring national attention to the problems facing
    our country. This bill answers her call and moves us closer to
    meeting President Obama's challenge to end childhood hunger in
    America.
        The issues of child hunger and poor nutrition require
    immediate action and a joint effort between government,
    communities, families, schools, and the unwavering support of
    advocates.
        The nation's greatest treasure is at risk; our children
    deserve a chance to reach for more and to pursue opportunities
    that will drive this country to even greater heights. It is now
    clear that the time to get America's families and children back
    on the road to healthy eating and healthier living.
        Our witnesses today will tell us what is really at stake
    and why this bill is so absolutely critical.
        And I want to thank all of them in advance for being here
    and recognize the senior Republican at this morning's hearing,
    Mr. Kline.
        [The statement of Mr. Miller follows:]

              Prepared Statement of Hon. George Miller, Chairman,
                        Committee on Education and Labor

        Good morning.
        This morning we'll discuss the new bipartisan child nutrition
    legislation we introduced earlier this month to address critical health
    and economic needs in this country.
        We are on the brink of a national health crisis that is affecting
    our youngest children. Childhood obesity has more than tripled in the
    past 30 years.
        Nearly one in three children is obese.
        The frightening reality in many doctors offices is very young
    children presenting with adult onset health problems like diabetes and
    heart disease.
        At the same time, over 16 million children are hungry and live in
    households where families are struggling to put food on the table.
        In this economy, families are faced with the difficult and daunting
    choices of paying their bills and keeping the lights on or putting food
    on the table. They simply do not have enough resources to make ends
    meet.
        For these families, the federal child nutrition programs provide a
    nutritional safety net.
        They help parents avoid this painful choice between basic
    necessities. This makes the role of these programs increasingly
    important.
        We cannot ignore the fact that for millions of children, the only
    meals that they can count on are those they get at school or in child
    care.
        Hunger affects every aspect of children's lives, including their
    ability to keep up with their peers and achieve academically.
        If children are hungry, they can't focus and they can't learn. If
    we do nothing, if we allow these children's health to deteriorate, and
    jeopardize their success in school, we compromise their ability to grow
    into healthy, productive adults.
        Research shows that healthy eating and a child's ability to focus
    and benefit from classroom time are absolutely linked.
        The federal child nutrition programs provide us with a tremendous
    opportunity to help change children's lives and the future of this
    country by not just feeding children healthier meals but teaching them
    about the importance of healthy choices.
        If we educate our children about the importance of nutrition early,
    they can develop healthy habits that will translate in to a lifetime of
    healthy eating and healthy living.
        This is why we need to place so much emphasis on healthy nutrition
    and education in child care and for mothers in the Women, Infants and
    Children program.
        This won't be the first time that we took to the classrooms to help
    stop a national health crisis.
        How did we get people to stop smoking? We educated kids about the
    dangers of smoking and they talked about it with their parents.
        Why do people use seatbelts? Their kids were educated about it in
    school and then they came home and made sure their parents wore their
    seatbelts in their cars and now they do.
        Education has mastered many of the difficult problems in this
    country.
        If we work in the schools to both increase nutritional
    opportunities and educate kids about the food they're eating, we have a
    chance to really dramatically drive down future health care costs. And
    we have a real opportunity to ensure our children will be able to reach
    for success and live healthier lives.
        At Dover Elementary and Richmond Elementary in my district, the
    kids help take care of a school garden. They use it for the biology
    class, they use it for zoology class, and they use it for the art
    class.
        But most importantly, they're eating the products of their garden,
    they're understanding the richness of fresh fruits and vegetables and
    they're taking what they learned in the garden back home with them to
    teach their parents about healthy living.
        This is the type of program that we want to replicate in the
    legislation we introduced.
        We want to empower schools across the country to start their own
    gardens, to run green cafeterias, to accept nothing but the highest
    quality food in schools in the cafeteria and in vending machines.
        We want to empower schools to help improve meal quality, to change
    children's lives and take the issue of children's health seriously.
        The Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act will help
    accomplish this task by making four important improvements in America's
    children nutrition programs:
        First, we streamline and increase access for children to healthy
    nutritious food during the school day.
        Second, we work to improve food safety and the recall process in
    our schools.
        Third, we increase the reimbursement rate for the first time in
    over 30 years to better support schools ability to offer healthy school
    meals.
        Lastly, we provide opportunities for year-round service, on
    weekends, during vacation and holidays and during the summer because
    hunger and children's nutritional needs do not take a summer vacation.
        This is smart policy that responds to a significant need to help
    improve children's health.
        We have many partners in this effort including health
    organizations, anti-hunger organizations, school and nutrition
    organizations, teachers and parents, who really want better nutrition
    in their schools. We also have the help of Michelle Obama.
        With her ``Let's Move'' initiative, the First Lady has lent her
    leadership, her vision and her knowledge to help end the childhood
    obesity crisis and to bring national attention to the problems facing
    our country.
        This bill answers her call and moves us closer to meeting President
    Obama's challenge to end childhood hunger in America.
        The issues of child hunger and poor nutrition require immediate
    action, and a joint effort between government, communities, families,
    schools, and the unwavering support of advocates. The nation's greatest
    treasure is at risk and our children deserve the chance to reach for
    more and to pursue opportunities that will drive this country to even
    greater heights.
        It's clear now is the time to get America's families and children
    back on the road to healthy eating and healthier living.
        Our witnesses here today will tell us what is really at stake and
    why this bill is so absolutely critical.
        Thank you for being here today.
                                     ______

        Mr. Kline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning to you and
    to the Secretary. Thank you for being with us here this
    morning.
        This morning's legislative hearing is the first public
    examination of H.R. 5504, the recently introduced Improving
    Nutrition for America's Children Act. The National School Lunch
    Program and the other initiatives that make up the Child
    Nutrition Act are designed to combat hunger and poor nutrition
    among low-income children and families.
        According to the Congressional Research Service, federally
    supported child nutrition programs reach more than 40 million
    children and 2 million lower-income, expectant and new mothers
    daily.
        Every 5 years or so, Congress has the opportunity to update
    and extend these programs, and that is exactly what we ought to
    be doing this year. We all recognize the role of nutritious
    school lunches, WIC supports, and other nutrition programs in
    preventing hunger and helping promote healthy children and
    families. We stand ready on this side of the aisle to
    reauthorize the programs and improve their effectiveness and
    efficiency.
        What has given us pause, however, is the almost $8 billion
    price tag attached to this bill.
        [Audio gap.]
        Our child nutrition programs are a worthy investment.
        [Audio gap.]
        This is a threat to our long-term economic security. It is
    also a threat to our national security.
        Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff,
    recently warned our national debt has become our greatest
    national security threat. As he noted, the interest on our debt
    is now roughly equal to the annual defense budget. Every dollar
    we spend and every program we create must be weighed against
    the crushing burden we are placing on future generations with
    this unchecked spending. This is a particularly valid question
    on legislation professing to improve our children's futures.
        Today's hearing will delve into specific detail about the
    proposed legislation. I hope we do not allow an important
    discussion about nutritional science and wellness policy
    reporting to detract from our larger obligation to prevent
    hunger and improve child nutrition responsibly.
        We can modernize these programs and improve their
    efficiency and reach without further bankrupting our nation.
    This is the approach to child nutrition reauthorization I would
    gladly support, and I look forward to hearing from our
    distinguished witnesses today about how we can do exactly that,
    and I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        [The statement of Mr. Kline follows:]

       Prepared Statement of Hon. John Kline, Senior Republican Member,
                        Committee on Education and Labor

        Thank you Mr. Chairman and good morning. This morning's legislative
    hearing is the first public examination of H.R. 5504, the recently
    introduced Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act.
        The National School Lunch program and the other initiatives that
    make up the Child Nutrition Act are designed to combat hunger and poor
    nutrition among low-income children and families. According to the
    Congressional Research Service, federally supported child nutrition
    programs reach more than 40 million children and two million lower-
    income expectant and new mothers daily.
        Every five years or so, Congress has the opportunity to update and
    extend these programs. And that is exactly what we ought to be doing
    this year. We all recognize the role of nutritious school lunches, WIC
    supports, and other nutrition programs in preventing hunger and helping
    promote healthy children and families. We stand ready on this side of
    the aisle to reauthorize the programs and improve their effectiveness
    and efficiency.
        What has given us pause, however, is the $8 billion price tag
    attached to this bill. That's $8 billion the majority plans to spend--
    on top of the nearly $20 billion we are already spending each year on
    these programs, on top of the more than half billion dollars in
    stimulus funds appropriated last year for nutrition, obesity, and other
    community wellness programs, on top of the $15 billion Congress added
    this year in the health care bill for community based prevention
    programs, including nutrition and exercise programs. Let me be clear:
    our child nutrition programs are a worthy investment, and one we will
    continue to prioritize. But at a time of record debts and deficits,
    creating new programs for green cafeterias and federalizing our local
    wellness policies and nutrition standards seems fiscally irresponsible.
        As introduced, the cost of H.R. 5504 is not offset; if enacted
    today, it would add to our deficit. And we all know that within this
    committee's jurisdiction, we do not have $8 billion for these purposes.
    That means we will be forced to move a bill through committee without
    paying for it, trusting the Speaker to find the money elsewhere or
    simply swipe our burgeoning credit card once again.
        Our nation's debts and deficits cannot be ignored as abstract
    concepts. The Congressional Budget Office announced this week the
    national debt will reach 62 percent of our gross domestic product by
    year's end. This is a threat to our long-term economic security. It's
    also a threat to our national security.
        Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, recently warned
    our national debt has become our greatest national security threat. As
    he noted, the interest on our debt is now roughly equal to the annual
    defense budget. Every dollar we spend and every program we create must
    be weighed against the crushing burden we are placing on future
    generations with this unchecked spending. This is a particularly valid
    question on legislation professing to improve our children's futures.
        Today's hearing will delve into specific detail about the proposed
    legislation. But I hope we do not allow an important discussion about
    nutritional science and wellness policy reporting to detract from our
    larger obligation to prevent hunger and improve child nutrition
    responsibly.
        We can modernize these programs and improve their efficiency and
    reach without further bankrupting our nation. That is the approach to
    child nutrition reauthorization I would gladly support, and I look
    forward to hearing from our distinguished witnesses today about how we
    can do exactly that. I yield back.
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. I thank the gentleman for his statement.
        Our first witness this morning will be the Honorable Tom
    Vilsack, who was appointed by President Barack Obama as the
    30th Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture,
    where he is working to improve the health of America's
    children, targeting child hunger and obesity, with efforts to
    encourage balanced meals, nutritious eating, and increased
    physical activity. He has ordered a top-to-bottom review of
    USDA's food safety standards and has begun to implement policy
    changes to ensure the safety of America's food supply.
        Prior to his appointment, Secretary Vilsack served two
    terms as Governor of Iowa and was the first Democrat elected to
    that office in more than 30 years. He received a bachelor's
    degree from Hamilton College in 1972 and earned his law degree
    from Albany Law School in 1975.
        Mr. Secretary, welcome to the committee. You are now an old
    hand at testifying before congressional committees. As you
    know, when you begin, a green light will go on. You will have 5
    minutes for your opening statement, but you make sure that you
    are comfortable imparting the information that you think the
    committee needs to know.
        Welcome.

            STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS J. VILSACK, SECRETARY,
                     U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

        Secretary Vilsack. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Representative Kline, thank you, as well, and to all
    the committee members. I certainly appreciate the opportunity
    to be here this morning.
        I am going to not use the prepared text that my staff has
    prepared. I would like to speak from the heart about this issue
    today.
        When I was asked to serve as Secretary Obama's--Secretary
    of Agriculture by President Obama, the first thing that he
    asked me to do was to improve the nutrition available to our
    children. I was struck by that and recognized that that was my
    first instruction from my boss.
        I took and take that responsibility very seriously, and
    that is why I am here today, to encourage this committee and
    this Congress to take action now to improve the nutritional
    opportunities for our children.
        You have before you a bill that will provide ten
    improvements to the current system, a bill that will expand
    access to school breakfast, an extraordinarily important part
    of starting every child's day properly, an opportunity to
    improve the quality of the meals that are available to
    youngsters in schools across the country.
        The Institute of Medicine essentially did a study of the
    nutritional value of the meals that we are currently serving to
    our children and found that there was too much fat, too much
    sugar, too much sodium, not enough fruits, not enough
    vegetables, not enough whole grains, and not enough low-fat
    dairy. There is obviously room for improvement.
        You have an opportunity with this bill to also provide
    consistency in terms of the nutritional opportunities at
    schools by providing opportunities for us to create standards
    for vending machines and a la carte lines that are also
    consistent with nutrition.
        You have a chance and the opportunity to bridge the gap
    during weekends and summer programs in summer months. As the
    chairman rightly indicated, we can do all we can do for 5 days
    during the school year, but on weekends and during the summer,
    youngsters are often left to their own design.
        You can improve the equipment and the training that is
    available in schools. You can improve the safety of food that
    is being provided to our youngsters. You can place greater
    integrity in the system. You can reconnect youngsters with
    their food supply so there is a better understanding of what
    farmers and ranchers contribute to us every single day. You can
    provide better information for students and parents so they can
    make more informed decisions. And you can continue the
    commitment to early childhood so that youngsters get a healthy
    first start.
        All of this is important for the following reasons. One,
    the research is fairly clear. Youngsters who are hungry and
    youngsters who are dealing with weight issues have a difficult
    time learning, and our youngsters are now engaged in the most
    competitive circumstances we have ever seen. It is important
    that every single youngster be at the top of their game. That
    is why it is important for us to do what is right in terms of
    school nutrition.
        So it is educational achievement and attainment. It is also
    health care. Youngsters who are obese will carry that situation
    into adulthood and, with it, rising costs associated with
    diabetes, heart conditions, and certain cancers, so it is also
    a health care issue.
        You will also find out it is a national security issue.
    Today, only 25 percent of youngsters in America today, ages 19
    to 24, are fit for military service. And one of the principal
    reasons for that is that too many of our youngsters are
    overweight.
        And then there is the whole moral issue associated with
    this particular legislation. A country as strong, as rich, as
    powerful as ours, and yet we have youngsters who are hungry,
    hundreds of thousands of youngsters who are hungry? It is one
    of the reasons why Harry Truman in 1946 established the school
    lunch program, because he recognized the country was only as
    strong as its youth.
        So I am here today to urge action on this bill. There are
    many priorities that this Congress has faced, many complex
    issues, but I believe there is none more important than this.
    This is an opportunity for us to make a clear, unconditional
    statement about the importance of our children and their
    future.
        We are urging Congress not to delay, not to delay expanded
    access, not to delay increased food safety, not to delay
    improved quality, not to delay improvements in equipment and
    training, not to delay the connection between farm and school,
    not to delay an additional commitment to early childhood.
        I talk to a lot of folks around the country. And I
    appreciate that this Congress does a lot of important work.
    And, frankly, you deal with a lot of complex issues. Health
    care was a complex issue, regulatory reform a complex issue.
    Sometimes the rest of us don't quite understand all the details
    of those programs.
        But I will tell you this: There are moms and dads all over
    this country that understand precisely what this bill is about.
    It is about making sure their youngsters are treated right in
    school, and I certainly appreciate the fiscal challenges that
    we face. I understand the importance of dealing with deficits,
    and I am committed to working with this committee and this
    Congress to find the necessary offsets, if that becomes
    necessary, to make sure that we don't delay action on this
    bill.
        This is a top priority for USDA. It ought to be a top
    priority for the American people, and I believe it is.
        So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to answering questions
    about this, but I want to impart to this committee: I know of
    no more important role or responsibility I have than the one
    that I am talking about today.
        There are tens of millions of children whose future depends
    on what we do here, tens of millions of children who will get a
    better deal in school, a better opportunity to succeed if we do
    our job right. I certainly encourage this committee to take
    this very seriously, as I know you do, and to encourage your
    colleagues to take the difficult steps to get this done this
    year.
        Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        [The statement of Secretary Vilsack follows:]

             Prepared Statement of Hon. Thomas Vilsack, Secretary,
                         U.S. Department of Agriculture

        Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the
    opportunity to discuss the pending legislation to reform and
    reauthorize the Department of Agriculture's (USDA) Child Nutrition
    Programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
    Infants and Children (WIC) program. The first task that the President
    asked me to take on when I was first selected for this job was to
    provide our children with healthier, more nutritious meals. I pledged
    then and reaffirm now--the USDA will do everything it can to support
    the health of our children and the health of the school environment in
    thousands of schools across the country.
        I appreciate the Committee's leadership on this legislation and the
    efforts to date to pass a robust Child Nutrition bill. The
    Administration is strongly committed to passing legislation this year
    that reduces child hunger and improves the quality of school meals and
    the health of the school environment. The priorities that the
    Administration has unveiled for this legislation would transform our
    school meals programs by making it easier for eligible students to
    participate in the programs, expanding program coverage to gap periods
    like breakfast, after school, and summers when some children struggle
    to access healthy meals, and significantly improving the nutritional
    quality and health of school meals and the school environment through
    upgraded meal standards and targeted increases in meal reimbursement
    rates, new standards for competitive foods, and support for school food
    service professionals through training, certification, and investments
    in school food equipment.
        I am proud to be joined in my support for this effort by the First
    Lady of the United States, Michelle Obama, as well as Education
    Secretary Arne Duncan and the Secretary of Health and Human Services,
    Kathleen Sebelius. This showing of support underlines the fact that
    reforming these programs can have a significant positive impact on
    child obesity and nutrition, as well as health and education outcomes.
    The recently released White House Report on Childhood Obesity called
    for the passage of a robust Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill as a
    key strategy to combat child obesity.
        I thank Chairman Miller for his leadership on this issue. The
    legislation he recently introduced would achieve a number of the policy
    priorities of the Obama Administration. The legislation proposes to
    invest significant resources in these programs and would reduce
    barriers to participation, improve program access, and enhance the
    quality of school meals and the health of the school environment. There
    are a number of provisions in this proposal that mirror the legislation
    that was passed unanimously by the Senate Agriculture Committee and
    reported out in early May. The strong letter of support from 221
    Members of the House of Representatives for a robust Child Nutrition
    Reauthorization, along with the bipartisan Senate action and the
    Chairman's bill show that there is broad support for this important
    legislation.
        As the number of remaining legislative days continues to get
    smaller, I urge this Committee to continue your work and to act quickly
    and forcefully on this legislation in order to provide all of our
    children with the healthy meals that are so important to their health
    and education. If we are going to support our children, we must pass a
    strong bill this year.
    Background
        A discussion of the importance of reauthorizing the Child Nutrition
    and WIC programs must begin with the recognition that these programs
    are some of the largest and most important enterprises in our nation to
    invest in and support a healthy future for our children. Operating in
    over 100,000 schools in nearly every community in America, the school
    meals programs touch the lives of millions of children every school day
    and represent a partnership between the Federal and State governments
    and local schools.
        The meals served through the National School Lunch Program (NSLP)
    and the School Breakfast Program are the main nutrition intervention in
    elementary and secondary schools. The lunch program is available to 90
    percent of the 55 million American children enrolled in elementary and
    secondary schools--that is 75% of all Americans under age 18. And these
    meals are a substantial and important part of the diets of many school
    children. For schools to contribute effectively to reshaping eating
    behaviors, the meals offered at schools must model healthful choices
    and contribute effectively to healthful dietary intakes.
        The National School Lunch Act, now the Richard B. Russell National
    School Lunch Act, (NSLA) was enacted in 1946 as a necessary response to
    the widespread malnutrition-related health problems revealed among
    young draftees during World War II. Leaders in Congress also recognized
    that nutritious lunches would contribute to success in schools. Yet,
    now--over 60 years later, a recent report showed that 75 percent of
    Americans ages 17 to 24 are not fit for military service. Unlike the
    malnurishment problems of the 1940s, today, being overweight is the
    leading medical reason that young Americans are rejected from military
    service. Our understanding of the links between nutrition, health, and
    education have grown over time, and the program has responded with
    changes that make the program more accessible to low-income children,
    and improve the content of meals to reflect the day's nutrition
    science. Through these changes, the core nutrition and education
    mission behind school meals remains just as important, if not more
    important, today; but, there is more that we can and must do to
    continue making important and necessary changes to the programs.
        Over the years, USDA has made a number of changes to bring school
    meals into alignment with the most current Dietary Guidelines for
    Americans. Given the scope and complexity of the 2005 Dietary
    Guidelines recommendations, USDA contracted with the National
    Academies' Institute of Medicine (IOM) to provide evidence and science-
    based recommendations for the foods offered in these programs. Last
    Fall, the IOM issued recommendations, including----
         increase the amount and variety of fruits, vegetables, and
    whole grains;
         set a minimum and maximum level of calories; and
         increase the focus on reducing the amounts of saturated
    fat and sodium provided.
        I am pleased to report that we will be ready to publish proposed
    changes to the school meal nutritional requirements based on IOM's
    recommendations as soon as later this year. Stakeholders and the public
    will have ample opportunity to comment on USDA's proposed rule. After
    all public comments are considered, USDA will issue a final rule to
    implement changes to school meals.
        In the meantime, USDA will continue to provide technical assistance
    to schools to increase the availability of the food groups recommended
    by the Dietary Guidelines (fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-
    fat/fat-free dairy products) in the lunch and breakfast menus.
        USDA's HealthierUS School Challenge is also helping schools move in
    the direction of the recommendations of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines.
    The awards criteria have been updated to reflect the 2005 Dietary
    Guidelines. To date, over 700 schools have received Challenge awards
    and we are working towards increasing the number of award winners to
    3,000 by fiscal year 2012.
        As we improve school meals to ensure they are promoting good
    health, we must improve other foods, sold in competition with school
    meals, as these foods can displace these more balanced meals and
    undermine healthy choices. Nutrition education, food service settings,
    and operational constraints, along with other aspects of the school
    environment, should also be strengthened.
        To sustain a food and nutrition environment that fosters children's
    healthful behaviors, we need your help to support improvements in the
    nutritional content of school meals to meet updated standards; changes
    in other foods available to ensure that all food sold at school support
    healthful diets and revisions to policies and practices in the Child
    and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and the WIC Program to ensure that
    key childhood programs also support healthy eating.
        We know that healthy eating habits are established early in the
    lives of young children, and quality food and nutrition in child care
    and after school can be a sound, effective foundation. The CACFP
    provides healthful meals through preschool child care and also includes
    after school care programs, along with other community settings.
    Currently serving about 3.2 million children on an average day in child
    care homes and centers, CACFP supports the health and education of the
    children that participate in these programs, and enhances the ability
    of child care providers to ensure quality care. We have asked the IOM
    to recommend improvements to nutrition standards for CACFP just as they
    did for the school meal programs. We expect the expert panel to issue
    their findings this Fall.
        Finally, WIC continues to serve as both a supplemental nutrition
    program and as a gateway to the health care system. WIC provides
    supplemental foods to pregnant, postpartum and breastfeeding women,
    infants and children. WIC reaches nearly 9.1 million people each month.
    About half of the infants in the United States participate and benefit
    from the WIC program.
        I am pleased to report that the new food packages now include
    fruits, vegetables and whole grains, and less fat, along with other
    changes to reflect the latest nutrition recommendations. Contracting
    with IOM to review and recommend changes to the WIC food packages
    proved invaluable in improving the supplemental foods offered under
    WIC.
        WIC offers a critical opportunity to intervene early to reduce the
    likelihood of childhood obesity. We know children who are breastfed
    during the first nine months of life are at reduced risk of childhood
    or adolescent obesity. Studies have found that the likelihood of
    obesity is 22 percent lower among children who were breastfed. The
    strongest effects were observed among adolescents, meaning that the
    obesity-reducing benefits of breastfeeding extend many years into a
    child's life.
        Despite these health benefits, although most (74%) babies start out
    breastfeeding, within three months, two-thirds (67%) have already
    received formula or other supplements. By six months of age, only 43
    percent are still breastfeeding at all, and less than one quarter (23
    percent) are breastfed at least 12 months.
        While breastfeeding is not a viable alternative for all mothers and
    babies, it can be more widespread than it is today. WIC provides an
    opportunity to increase breastfeeding initiation and duration rates.
    Providing recognition and financial incentives to State agencies and
    clinics that support breastfeeding will complement Congress' support of
    breastfeeding peer counseling in the FY 2010 appropriations.
        Given the reach of the Child Nutrition and WIC Programs and the
    substantial investment Congress has made to the national nutrition
    safety net, the tools to become an active part of the solution are
    within our grasp. Yet, absent a robust reauthorization bill, we cannot
    move forward.
        Schools need resources to improve the quality of school meals and
    to increase the number of needy children participating in the programs.
    USDA needs the authority to set nutrition standards for all food sold
    in schools. And we need funding to improve wellness activities in
    schools and in child care centers and to encourage breastfeeding in the
    WIC program.
    Challenges
        There are compelling reasons to act now. This reauthorization comes
    at a time of significant challenges. Addressing them boldly and
    decisively is critical to the future of our country.
        Our most fundamental challenge is a health crisis of the first
    order--the epidemic of obesity among our children. One in every three
    children and adolescents in the United States is overweight or obese,
    with particularly high rates among certain populations, such as
    Hispanic boys, African-American girls, and American Indian/Native
    Alaskan children. This has a negative impact on children's health and
    well-being today, and even more serious consequences for their future.
        Research shows that children and adolescents with this condition
    are more likely to be overweight or obese as adults. And that obesity
    increases health risks for coronary heart disease, Type 2 diabetes,
    cancer, stroke, and a range of other serious conditions--and causes an
    estimated 112,000 deaths per year in the United States. Experts
    forecast that one third of all children born in the year 2000 could
    develop diabetes during their lifetime.
        These devastating health impacts result in substantial economic
    costs. Excess weight is costly during childhood, estimated at $3
    billion per year in direct medical costs, and far more costly in future
    years. Obese adults incur an estimated $1,429 more in annual medical
    expenses than their normal-weight peers. Overall, medical spending on
    adults attributed to obesity topped approximately $40 billion in 1998,
    and by 2008, increased to an estimated $147 billion. We cannot let
    these costs continue to grow at a time when we must reduce health care
    costs to remain competitive. Absenteeism and lost productivity at work
    are additional costs of obesity that our nation cannot afford.
        The second major challenge we face is the need to ensure that our
    children have access to the healthful, nutritious food they need to
    support educational achievement. As the members of this Committee know
    as well as anyone, a successful educational experience for every child
    is critical to our nation's future. President Obama has said that what
    matters is what we do to lift up the next generation--and that few
    issues speak more directly to our long term success as a nation than
    the education we provide to our children.
        Yet we know that for too many families in our country, hunger
    remains a real problem. In over 500,000 families with children in 2008,
    one or more children simply did not get enough to eat--they had to cut
    the size of their meals, skip meals, or even go whole days without food
    at some time during the year. This costs us more, not to mention the
    suffering and deprivation of those families. Ask any teacher how
    students who fail to eat a healthy breakfast or lunch perform in class.
    Hungry kids don't learn as well. In fact, the damage extends beyond the
    hungry children. We want and need our children to be fully prepared for
    a competitive world and global economy. We will not succeed if our
    children are not learning as they should because they are hungry, and
    cannot achieve their potential because they are unhealthy.
        Finally, the problem of poor nutrition among our children
    represents a challenge to our nation's military readiness. As I noted
    previously, during World War II, the health effects of malnutrition
    were a common disqualifier for military service. Our leaders understood
    the importance of investing in good nutrition to ensure that the
    country would never want for healthy, strong young people to serve in
    uniform. And so, in 1946, President Harry Truman signed the National
    School Lunch Act, declaring that ``in the long view, no nation is
    healthier than its children.''
        Today, the nutrition problems are different, but the impact on
    preparedness for the military remains. A recent report showed that 75
    percent of adults age 17-24 are not physically fit for military
    service. One of the top disqualifiers for service is obesity. Because
    of these troubling statistics, a coalition of retired generals and
    admirals has formed to advocate for a strong Child Nutrition
    reauthorization bill that ensures that the programs can address today's
    nutrition issues as effectively as possible. I thank them for their
    leadership and welcome their efforts to promote this important
    legislative initiative.
        The Child Nutrition Programs can do more to address these
    challenges:
         We are working to update school meals nutrition standards
    based on recommendations from the Institute of Medicine. We must use
    the opportunity of reauthorization to strengthen our work with schools
    to improve the content of the meals they serve in ways that make them
    appealing as well as nutritious.
         We need to ensure that all food sold in school supports
    good nutrition and health by creating the statutory authority to set
    national standards for these foods.
         We must ensure, simplify, and expand access to programs
    when and where children need them
         And we must make physical activity a natural and
    compelling choice for our children, so that they can strengthen their
    bodies and develop good habits that can last a lifetime.
        So today, President Truman's belief that a healthy nation depends
    on healthy children remains as true as ever. We must respond as past
    generations have before us to improve child nutrition. Our children
    deserve more and our country's better and brighter future depends upon
    it. And with the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Programs
    scheduled this year, now is the time to act boldly.
    Priorities
        For all of these reasons, we must take steps to streamline access,
    improve the quality of school meals, increase participation, and work
    to eliminate childhood hunger in this country. For many children in our
    programs, school lunch and breakfast represents the only healthy food
    that they eat all day. We must work to ensure access to nutrition
    assistance for children, when and where they need it, particularly
    during the ``gap periods,'' when we know children struggle to receive
    the nutrition they need--summer months, during breakfast, and in after-
    school environments.
        Bold action with reauthorization must include the following
    elements:
        1. Improving access to the school nutrition programs must be a
    priority. States and local communities need to be fully engaged as
    partners in our efforts to identify innovative strategies to ending
    child hunger. We cannot rest while so many of our young children
    struggle with access to food, which is why I'm calling on Congress to
    provide tools to increase participation, streamline applications, and
    eliminate gap periods. Quite simply, we must do everything we can to
    ensure that eligible children have access to these critically important
    programs. I call on you to fund a new program of State Hunger Challenge
    Grants for States willing to take strides to reduce and eliminate
    hunger in their communities. With authorization and funding, we will
    provide competitive grants to Governors for them to implement creative
    and innovative approaches to eliminating hunger. We want States to be
    the laboratories for successful strategies and that means freeing them
    up to be creative and providing resources for innovative models that
    match program delivery with evaluation, so that we can learn what works
    and what does not. These steps will include policy modifications to
    existing nutrition programs, enhanced outreach efforts, improved
    coordination between nutrition assistance programs and family
    supportive services, such as emergency housing, child care, and family
    preservation services, counseling and support services, and work with
    community and non-profit organizations to coordinate services and
    resources. Competitive grants would be provided to States with
    comprehensive and innovative plans for reducing hunger, applications
    that target communities with higher prevalances of hunger, especially
    among children, and projects that reflect collaboration with a wide
    range of partners.
        In addition, we should offer grants to states and non-profit
    organizations to develop web-based or other systems to streamline the
    application process and expand efforts to enroll eligible students
    through direct certification. If a child already qualifies for other
    assistance programs, there is no reason why their parent should have to
    fill out one more application to qualify for school breakfast or lunch.
    Bonus payments should be offered to states and school districts that
    effectively use direct certification to enroll children who currently
    qualify but who are not participating. The object should be to ensure--
    particularly in communities where children are at high risk for
    hunger--that every child eats the food they need. I am also calling on
    Congress to provide USDA with the tools necessary to establish
    paperless application programs in school districts with very high rates
    of children with free and reduced price-eligible students. In these
    districts, the cost of paperwork and the risk of lost of forms far
    outweigh any benefits. We must ensure that communities across the
    country have access to these types of solutions in order to get more
    kids into the program and reduce the bureaucracy of filling out forms.
    Through these reforms, I believe that we will be able to increase
    participation in these programs by one million children in the next
    five years.
        2. Increasing financial support and expanding participation in
    School Breakfast is a vital part of reauthorization. I view breakfast
    as one of the critical gap periods when children struggle to access
    nutritious meals. On school days, almost two-thirds of children who
    participate in the lunch program do not participate in the school
    breakfast program. While School Lunch is served in around 100,000
    schools, the breakfast program is only available in 88,000. A healthy
    breakfast is critically important to educational achievement. No child
    should go without fueling up at the beginning of the day. Innovative
    approaches like breakfast in the classroom have been shown to reduce
    stigma and improve participation rates. This reauthorization is an
    opportunity to reduce stigma and promote participation in the breakfast
    program. The Institute of Medicine's recommendations show that the
    biggest gap between current Federal support and what will be needed to
    support healthy meals is for the breakfast program. I call on Congress
    to increase the reimbursement rate for school breakfasts and combine
    that support with USDA-purchased foods to give more children the option
    of a healthy breakfast. And, I call on K-12 organizations and States to
    work with USDA to aggressively promote the breakfast option and to
    ensure that policies and practices are in place to reduce stigma.
        3. Our efforts to combat hunger cannot end when the school bell
    rings on the last day of the school week or year. More children report
    going hungry during the summer--which is when we see a significant drop
    in participation in our programs. Working with local governments,
    nonprofit organizations and community groups, USDA must continue to
    help bridge the nutrition gap when school is out. We need to encourage
    more schools, community centers and organizations to provide meals
    during the summer, and to increase the number of days they make meals
    available. And we should expand the existing authority of the Child and
    Adult Care Food Program to all 50 states to provide after-school meals
    to at-risk kids. This important program currently provides additional
    nutrition assistance to eligible children in 14 States--it is a
    successful and popular program and there is no reason it should be
    limited to only a handful of States. This reform will increase access
    to another 140,000 school children. I commend Congress for providing
    $85 million in the in the fiscal year 2010 agriculture appropriations
    bill to test innovative methods to improve access to healthy foods
    during the summer. We have already awarded projects to two States--
    Arkansas and Mississippi--to test ways of increasing the number of
    sponsors, sites, and children served through the Summer Food Service
    Program (SFSP) with incentives to extend the duration of operations and
    funding to support improved enrichment activities. Next summer, we
    expect to award additional state projects.
        4. But no matter how many children we reach, we do them a
    disservice if we are not offering them meals that help them be their
    best. Reauthorization must substantially improve the nutritional
    quality of the meals being served to our children, which plays a
    central role in the First Lady's effort to solve childhood obesity in a
    generation. The recent Institute of Medicine study commissioned by USDA
    sounded an alarm about the nutritional value of school meals. The study
    concluded that our children are eating too much sugar, salt, and fats
    and too few fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low fat dairy
    products. This mix may help explain why one half of the calories
    consumed by children ages 6-11 in this country are ``empty'' calories.
    USDA is working as aggressively as possible to implement the Institute
    of Medicine recommendations to better align our meals with the Dietary
    Guidelines, but we also know that the improved foods will increase
    costs for local schools. The very same Institute of Medicine report
    showed that increases in reimbursement rates, training, school
    equipment, and technical assistance will be necessary to implement this
    package. This assistance is critically important if we expect schools
    and school food service professionals to successfully implement the new
    standards and our enhanced expectations for the program.
        That is why I am calling on Congress to improve meal quality by
    increasing reimbursements for schools that meet the new nutritional
    standards and providing funding for equipment upgrades and additional
    training. We must empower our schools to take important steps toward
    enhanced nutrition. Higher reimbursement rates, tied to performance,
    will help schools purchase the whole grains, fruits, vegetables, and
    low fat and fat-free dairy products that our children need to grow
    strong and healthy. At the same time, Congress should provide USDA with
    the tools we need to ensure that the reimbursements we are providing
    for schools are being used appropriately for the program, so that all
    kids have access to healthy meals. And, it is our responsibility to
    work together with schools to ensure they are serving the most
    nutritious meals possible.
        Recognizing that many schools do not have the equipment in place to
    improve food selections, our hope is that Congress will build upon the
    investments in equipment made by the American Recovery and Reinvestment
    Act and the FY10 appropriations act, and provide funding to improve
    school kitchens so schools can provide meals that meet the Dietary
    Guidelines and offer fresh fruits and vegetables. At the same time, we
    should create a credentialing program for school food service
    directors, and support school food service providers with resources for
    the critical training they need to do their jobs.
        5. The reauthorization effort should ensure that all foods served
    in schools are healthy and nutritious. A 2006 study showed that outside
    the cafeteria, children are three times more likely to be able to
    purchase cookies, cakes, pastries, and high fat salty snacks than
    fruits or vegetables. Foods served in vending machines, the a la carte
    line, and other school settings should not undermine our efforts to
    enhance the health of the school environment. That is why USDA must
    have the capacity to set standards for all foods sold in schools. It
    does not mean the end of vending machines in schools--it just means
    filling them with nutritious offerings to make a healthy choice the
    easy choice for our nation's children. Though many in the media have
    portrayed this as an area of conflict, I will tell you that I have
    heard nothing but broad support for efforts to establish standards for
    food sold in schools. From food service professionals to the National
    PTA to the food industry, there is support for this authority, and it
    is an essential component of the reauthorization bill.
        6. We also believe that every lunchroom ought to double as a
    classroom--and that schools should be challenged to make meals a
    learning experience. That is why it is important for us to build on the
    step taken in the 2004 Reauthorization bill to establish school
    wellness policies in every school by strengthening the requirement and
    raising the standard. Schools should work in consultation with parents
    to develop and implement a strong wellness policy centered on healthy
    eating, nutrition education and physical activity.
        7. Making sure that parents and students have correct and complete
    nutritional information about foods being served in schools must be
    part of the reauthorization effort as well. With better information and
    simple assessments, parents will know what is available in their
    child's cafeteria and can better assist their children in making the
    right nutritional choices. And, in addition to transparency, we also
    need to work on being smarter about how we serve food: Steps as simple
    as putting the fresh fruit in a more prominent place in the cafeteria
    can help kids eat healthier. And we should promote new approaches based
    on the most recent research.
        8. Strengthening the link between local farmers and school
    cafeterias must also remain a priority in this legislation. Supporting
    farm-to-school programs will increase the amount of produce available
    to cafeterias and help to support local farmers by establishing
    regular, institutional buyers. Many schools have found farm-to-school
    programs an important component of nutrition education and I call on
    education leaders and our State and local partners to embrace farm to
    cafeteria programs and school gardens.
        9. Guaranteeing the integrity of the nutrition programs remains
    central to a credible reauthorization. We should fund periodic studies
    to eliminate erroneous payments in the meals programs. Support for new
    technology will help schools avoid inaccuracies in eligibility
    determinations, and maintain the confidence that our help is provided
    to those who truly need it.
        In his first year in office, President Obama pulled us back from
    the brink of the greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression
    and worked to lay a new foundation for economic growth. He identified
    three key strategies to building that lasting prosperity: innovation,
    investment, and education. All three strategies require the next
    generation to be the healthiest and best educated in our history. The
    health of our nation--of our economy, our communities, and our national
    security--depends on the health of our children. We will not succeed if
    our children are not learning as they should because they are hungry,
    and cannot achieve their dreams because they are unhealthy.
        When our future was on the line after World War II, our nation's
    leaders understood the importance of well-fed and healthy youngsters.
    We would do well to remember that lesson today, and to act on it once
    again.
        Again, I would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to
    appear before you this morning to discuss the reauthorization of the
    USDA's Child Nutrition Programs and I look forward to answering any
    questions that you may have.
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, and
    certainly thank you so much for your leadership on these issues
    of child nutrition and the health of our children.
        As one who was pretty deeply involved in the health care
    debate, no matter whether I met with doctors or insurance
    companies or academics on the issue of our national health
    status, the question of childhood obesity, the question of how
    that then moves to adult onset illnesses, both in children and
    later in those children as adults, if they don't adopt a
    healthier eating pattern, as a major driver of health care
    costs was just explained over and over and over and again.
        And you see some of the larger health organizations
    struggling, including corporations, trying to get people to
    adopt a wellness policy, a healthy lifestyle policy, a dietary
    policy, an exercise regime, all of those things combined
    together, because we now know--and whether it is the business
    community or families trying to push--that those are the
    drivers, the big drivers in that cost.
        And yet we have the--as you point out--the ability to--with
    these children in this lunch program to not only feed them
    better and healthier, but also to give them information so they
    will understand what it means to them as they grow up and to
    their families.
        One of the questions I wanted to raise with you is,
    obviously, we are trying to use all our resources as best we
    possibly can. And as we go through and we look at the various
    programs that are on campus at any given time, between free and
    reduced-price lunches and paid meals and a la carte services
    and how costs get apportioned out, I just would like you to
    talk a little bit--that you have looked at that, USDA has
    looked at the relationship between paid meals and subsidized
    meals, and what you can tell us about that. Because I think
    there is a growing concern that perhaps the a la carte line and
    the paid meals are really infringing upon some of the costs
    that we would use for the free and reduced price meals.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me
    acknowledge the obvious, which is that schools are struggling
    because of state and local budgets and their own budgets. And
    so oftentimes what you see is the food budget, obviously, being
    in place where they look to either gain resources or to
    increase opportunities.
        We have taken a look at the issue of paid meals and
    recognizing the importance of making sure that every youngster
    has a fair shake. What we found is that about 80 percent of our
    reimbursement rate is the cost of a paid meal.
        In other words, school districts put out about 80 percent
    of what we reimburse for a meal for paid meals, which would
    suggest to us that there is some degree of subsidization
    between what we are providing to the free and reduced lunch
    program and what is being provided generally on the paid meal
    side.
        And, you know, that raises the question that you all will
    have to answer, in terms of whether or not that is a fair
    allocation of resources and whether that is appropriate. If you
    decide that there needs to be a rebalancing of this, obviously,
    I think you will take a look at trying to do this over a long
    period of time so that whatever adjustments are made are
    reasonable and effective and fair. But right now, there is
    about a 20 percent subsidization that takes place.
        Chairman Miller. That study was done over what population?
    Or was that looking at a number of different districts or
    states or----
        Secretary Vilsack. It was an effort to basically get a real
    sense around the country of how school districts are--I mean,
    we are dealing with over 100,000 school districts, so everyone
    has a slightly different approach. But we tried to get some
    general recognition of the extent of this, and this is what we
    came up with from the study and review.
        And I think it is important also, in terms of the a la
    carte line, that that subsidy gives the school district a lot
    of flexibility, in terms of what it does with that a la carte
    line and in terms of whether or not there are more appropriate
    choices or that, for that matter, choices that aren't as
    appropriate.
        And one of the things we want to do is make sure that there
    is consistency in what is being supplied in the a la carte
    lines, in the vending machines, and in the school lunch program
    so that there is no encouragement of a less nutritious snack or
    a less nutritious meal.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you. I think that that is helpful.
    So you think that that was a fair look across the country?
        Secretary Vilsack. Yes, it was a national sample that
    spanned the 2005-2006 school year.
        Chairman Miller. Just quickly, a local concern. In my area,
    we still--I have a pretty suburban area, but we still have a
    significant number of small farmers. And they are really, I
    think, working now with the University of California at Davis,
    but trying to figure out how they can get their products that
    are grown locally into the local programs.
        We talk about that in this legislation. We try to encourage
    that. But I think it is not just my area. As I travel around, I
    see more and more interest in this and connecting young people
    with how food is produced, but also providing some additional
    market space for those local farms.
        What is your department doing here on----
        Secretary Vilsack. Mr. Chairman, we have a program called
    Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food. It is an effort to try to
    reconnect people with agriculture of all sizes, both smaller
    commercial operations, as well as production agricultural
    operations.
        And part of that program is to create tactical teams. We
    call them tactical teams. There are 15 of them right now, and
    we are having these teams go out to 15 different school
    districts and work with them to encourage them to have a better
    understanding of what is grown and raised in their area.
        We find that there are schools that are interested in
    potentially linking up with local producers, but don't know who
    they are, don't know where they are, don't know what they
    produce, and don't know how to go about creating the quantity
    necessary to be able to do this on a regular, consistent basis.
    We are providing that kind of assistance and help.
        We are also using our rural development resources to the
    extent that we can to create the supply chain infrastructure--
    the slaughtering houses, the warehousing, the cold storage
    facilities--that are necessary to congregate enough product so
    schools, as I say, have a consistent supply.
        This is extremely important, because the rest of the
    country has got to reconnect with what farmers and ranchers do
    for them every single day. We have an extraordinary story here
    of success in agriculture that is often underappreciated, and
    it gives all the rest of us tremendous flexibility in terms of
    our take-home pay, because we spend so little for food than
    other developed nations and developing nations.
        So this is extremely important, not only to improve the
    quality of the meals, but also to reconnect people with their
    food supply.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you very much.
        Mr. Kline?
        Mr. Kline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, thank you again for being with us today. It
    is sometimes confusing to people across America and perhaps
    even us here--we are the Education Committee, and we have got
    the Secretary of Agriculture here, and so there are a lot of
    complicated ways we try to get at things.
        One thing that is not really complicated is we do have
    solid bipartisan agreement that these child nutrition programs
    are not only worthwhile, they are important, they are
    essential.
        But as I said in my opening remarks, there are concerns on
    both sides of the aisle, by many members of Congress, and I
    think by the American people that we don't have enough money to
    do everything we want to do.
        And so I have been hearing from the folks in the Minnesota
    Farm Bureau, for example, and most of them have kids. They are
    living on farms. They are very concerned about these programs.
    They are interested in farm to school and all of that.
        But they are looking at suggesting out of the Senate that
    in order to pay for this, you take $2.5 billion out of the
    Environmental Quality Incentive Program, EQIP, and they are not
    happy about that.
        That is something in your jurisdiction, as well. Have you
    got any thoughts about that as a way to pay for this?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, Representative, this is--you know,
    it is very much like asking me which of my two sons I love the
    most.
        Mr. Kline. Exactly.
        Secretary Vilsack. And these are difficult issues. But let
    me say on the conservation side that I think it is important
    for us to be able to adequately fund conservation, but to do it
    in a way where we can justify to the taxpayers that resources
    are being spent appropriately and wisely.
        I am thinking of the audit that was recently done of NRCS
    suggesting that perhaps we would sort of outpace the capacity
    of the personnel at NRCS to adequately monitor and adequately
    provide oversight in some of these programs. So what we are
    trying to do is match up appropriately the personnel that we
    have and the capacity that we have to do things right in terms
    of conservation.
        Having said that, you know, we are obviously anxious and
    interested in preserving as many of those dollars as we can.
    There may be other areas in our budget which I am more than
    happy to sit down and visit with folks about. There may be
    other places in the large federal budget that might be
    available.
        The bottom line from my perspective is that I can't think
    of anything more important than getting this done this year. So
    if we have got to figure something out within our budget, if we
    are given a target, a directive from Congress, we are more than
    happy to assist in trying to figure out how this gets paid.
        This is extremely important. And I don't underestimate the
    difficulties of your job here. And I absolutely understand the
    whole issue of deficits.
        I was a governor. I dealt with balanced budgets for 8
    consecutive years. It is not easy to do.
        Having said that, if we don't do this, this year, this is
    not going to get any easier. It is going to get much, much
    tougher in the future, and there will be 1 more year of delay
    in terms of improving the quality and nutritional value of what
    we are feeding our children.
        The Institute of Medicine study was a wake-up call for me,
    Representative. I mean, it was a wake-up call suggesting that
    we are not doing right by our kids.
        So I am committed to finding the resources wherever that
    might be and making sure that we do it in a fair and equitable
    and balanced way.
        Mr. Kline. So I think what I heard out of that is that
    taking the $2.5 billion from EQIP is probably okay with you. Is
    that right?
        Secretary Vilsack. I don't think--I think it would not be
    fair to say it is okay, because there may be--you know, $2.5
    billion, $1 billion, $500 million, $250 million, not from EQIP,
    from some other program, I think the point of this is, you give
    us a target, you basically say to us this is the target that we
    have to--we have to meet in order to get this bill through the
    process, and we will work with you to find that resource.
        Mr. Kline. Actually, I agree with that, and that is the
    point. We need to figure out what that target is--right now, it
    looks to be close to $8 billion--and make those decisions now
    before we push this legislation through out of this committee
    and onto the floor. We need to make those decisions.
        And a lot of it is going to come back on your committee--I
    mean, on your department. There is just no question about this.
    This is a suggested $2.5 billion. You are suggesting maybe
    there are other places inside of Ag where we ought to be
    looking for ways to pay for this bill.
        And it is going to be tough for all of us. I just think we
    need to be doing it now and making those tough decisions now
    and not pushing this thing through unpaid for.
        Secretary Vilsack. Here is one concern I have about that.
    This was some months ago. There was another proposal that we
    had where we offered up a series of offsets from our budget to
    try to fund it. What happened was, the proposal that was
    beneficial to USDA didn't get passed through the Congress, but
    the offset was taken for something else.
        So with due respect, Representative, let's make a deal
    here.
        Mr. Kline. Let's make a deal. [Laughter.]
        Secretary Vilsack. We get this through the committee, we
    get it on the floor, we will help you find the resource.
        Mr. Kline. All right.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Miller. I thank you.
        Mr. Courtney?
        Mr. Courtney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today.
        First of all, I just want to say that, you know, this
    committee has established its credibility in terms of pay-fors,
    pay-as-you-go budgeting. When we passed the Student Aid and
    Fiscal Responsibility Act, about $700 billion in new financing
    for Pell Grants, and for helping students with lower interest
    rates, we paid for every penny of it by reducing wasteful
    spending, in terms of bank loan origination fees.
        So I agree with Mr. Kline that this has got to be a paid-
    for measure. Under our PAYGO rules, it has to be. And I think
    everybody on this side of the aisle certainly recognizes that
    and acknowledges that.
        But on the other hand, we also have to make sure that we
    get the policy right. We have an epidemic of obesity in this
    country. The military's advice about readiness, in terms of
    young people for our--and I serve on the Armed Services
    Committee--is clearly an indication that we are not getting it
    right now and we have to make necessary changes.
        One comment that you made regarding beverages during your
    opening remarks is that low-fat milk is something that your
    department recognizes as a component of trying to get to a
    balanced, healthy meal for kids that--in breakfast and lunch.
        And I was wondering if you could comment on that. We are
    obviously seeing in the last 20 years, it is exactly the same
    time that obesity rates are climbing, that the consumption of
    soda by young teenagers is now twice as much as milk, low-fat
    milk in schools. It was reversed approximately 20 years ago.
    And I just wonder if you could maybe embellish a little bit on
    those comments.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, you know, I think, Representative,
    it is important for us to distinguish between, as they say,
    everyday foods and sometimes foods. And I think basically milk,
    low-fat milk is an everyday food. It is nutritionally dense,
    which means that you get more bang for your caloric buck, and I
    think it is important for us to continue to look for ways in
    which we can make sure that our calorie intake is appropriate
    and that we get the kind of nutrition we need from calories.
        The problem with some of our school programs is that there
    are a lot of empty calories associated with what is available
    to youngsters, and therefore it adds to the obesity issue, and
    it doesn't necessarily give them the kind of energy that they
    need to be able to be good students.
        At the same time, we also want these youngsters to be
    physically active. That requires strong bones. It requires
    nutrition that matters. And so low-fat milk is one way of us,
    together with whole grains, fruits and vegetables, that we can
    improve these programs.
        We are asking for the capacity to provide consistency in
    the schools by basically taking a look at what is available in
    the vending machines and what is available on the a la carte
    line and make sure that we are sending the right set of
    messages.
        If families want pop or soda to be available to their
    youngsters as a treat, there is no problem with that. But on a
    day-to-day regular basis, on an everyday basis, we want to make
    sure that they get adequate supplies of wholesome, nutritious
    food. And low-fat dairy is certainly one of the ways to do
    that.
        Mr. Courtney. Well, thank you. And I think, you know, Mr.
    Miller's comment about trying to strengthen the farm to
    cafeteria connection with school lunches, I mean, obviously the
    dairy component is a place that, from Maine to California, you
    can, I think, find almost school district that opportunity.
        In addition, I just would note that a number of us have a
    Healthy Milk and Dairy Choices in Schools Act, which would
    encourage a low-fat cheese meals, pizza, which obviously is,
    you know, number one, I think, across the board, as a way,
    again, of trying to introduce healthy consumption of dairy,
    again, on a low-fat basis. And hopefully you will take a look
    at that as one of the changes we can maybe make to this
    legislation.
        Lastly, I just wanted to say, the requirement for
    eligibility, the test which is now 50 percent eligibility for
    school lunch, the bill proposes lowering that to 40 percent in
    rural areas. I would just say, from a state like Connecticut,
    you know, we would like to, you know, see if we can get
    involved in that 40 percent threshold, as well, because there
    are a lot of school districts that are being excluded right now
    with that 50 percent threshold, which in historic terms is a
    higher standard and excludes more kids than certainly in the
    past. And, again, I hope that is a piece that we can work with
    the department to try and make more across the board.
        And with that, I would yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Mr. Castle?
        Mr. Castle. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here and for your
    wisdom in this area. And I agree with you on almost all of what
    you are saying.
        But I have one problem I would like to ask you about. I
    don't know, you know, what your knowledge in the area is, but
    in Delaware, in my schools, I have gone to the schools. I
    remember one particular school I went to, and they were very
    proud of how they were meeting all the nutritional standards,
    et cetera.
        And then at the end of the food line, they had a series of
    other choices that were not particularly nutritional, shall we
    say. And the kids see--and I just watched it for a while, and
    the kids seemed to be taking from that.
        My question to you is not what is in this bill and not what
    you necessarily enforce in the Department of Agriculture, but
    how it is carried out in the schools. We have good nutritional
    people in Delaware and that kind of thing, but my impression
    is--and not just the vending machines, but even in the
    cafeteria lines there are offerings that are not as healthy as
    is in this legislation or as you would advocate or as any
    health nutritionist would advocate.
        Can you tell me what oversight you have--and I am not
    saying we have to demand what people serve or whatever--what
    oversight you have or what guidance you have, as far as schools
    are concerned, in terms of what they are actually serving and
    what children are actually eating in the schools.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, Congressman, we want to establish
    a set of standard that are consistent with the Institute of
    Medicine study so that that gives school districts an
    understanding and appreciation for precisely what they need to
    be focused on, which is making sure that these calories count,
    and making sure, as I have said before, that they change the
    mix of what is available.
        We also think that this bill provides additional resources
    for training and equipment. Oftentimes, schools want to do the
    right thing, but because of budget cuts in the past or because
    of decisions made in the past, they may not have the equipment
    necessary to provide steamed vegetables, for example, but they
    may have fryers that makes French fries more readily available,
    that type of thing.
        And we also want to make sure that youngsters and parents
    have better information about what is actually being served. I
    mean, our view is that if you educate parents and you educate
    youngsters about the choices that they have to make that they
    are going to make the right set of choices more times than not
    and that they are going to demand and request of the school
    board and of the school administrators that there be a better
    mix or better, more appropriate menu for youngsters.
        Right now, in some schools, you just don't know how many
    calories you are consuming. And I think youngsters are becoming
    much more astute to this, and there has been a lot of
    discussion because of the First Lady's Let's Move initiative a
    lot of conversation nationally about this.
        We have got, as you will see in your next panel, major
    chefs, personalities who are very engaged in food--engaging
    themselves in local school districts to try to help educate.
        And then, finally, we want to make sure that folks have
    information available to them that will help them improve the
    choices they make, in terms of menus. We can do a much better
    job of providing information to schools about how to basically
    stretch that food dollar, to come up with innovative and
    creative ways to make vegetables and fruits and so forth
    delicious and appealing.
        And so there are a whole series of things that we can do to
    significantly improve, by providing standards, by providing
    equipment assistance, by providing training, by providing more
    information to children and parents.
        Mr. Castle. But do your--I don't know if agents are the
    right word--but either people who work for your department or
    others have any oversight of what is actually happening in the
    schools? Or has that all become local, once they get their
    equipment and they get their dollars or whatever it may be, or
    does--I mean, who is actually monitoring to see if the things
    that we are talking about and we put in the legislation that we
    passed 6 years ago and we are going to pass again are actually
    occurring?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, we have within our food and
    nutrition service the capacity to check and make sure that
    folks are living up to the standards. You know, obviously,
    there are over 100,000 school districts, which means that there
    are many, many, many different places that have to be looked
    at.
        So I think the candid answer is that we have got to rely
    heavily not just on our own resources, but on the capacity of
    local school administrators to understand the significance of
    this and the importance of it.
        Candidly, I think food for many was a revenue source, and
    we need to change that mindset a bit to, hey, this is an
    important part of the school day. You have got to do it right
    if you want your youngsters to perform well.
        I mean, if we are going to hold people accountable for
    results, then nutrition is part of what we should be holding
    them accountable for. And by providing parents more
    information--I will tell you--I don't know about your
    experiences--but as I travel and talk to parents, they are very
    engaged in this issue. There is an understanding, a basic
    understanding we have got to do a better job.
        Mr. Castle. Well, my time is up.
        Chairman Miller. Mr. Loebsack?
        Mr. Castle. I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Mr. Loebsack. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        And first of all, I did want to thank the chairman for
    working with me to make sure that we incorporate some
    provisions into this bill that I have offered on direct
    certification and expanding access to nutrition programs. So I
    really do appreciate that, Mr. Chairman, for your incorporation
    of those provisions into the bill.
        And, Mr. Secretary, it is still hard for me not to think of
    you as my governor. It is really wonderful to see you here
    today. I really appreciate all the great work you are doing on
    this.
        I do want to also at the outset just talk a little bit
    about the fiscal issue. We are all concerned, obviously, at the
    moment about whether we can pay for this and how we are going
    to pay for this. But I think all too often in this body we
    think in short term. We have a short-term perspective as
    politicians, especially trying to get re-elected every 2 years.
        We have to think, obviously, right now, about the fiscal
    issues that are confronting this, but I think that, when you
    talk about and others talk about how this is a long-term issue,
    especially as it relates to chronic diseases, preventing
    chronic diseases, when we talk about health care costs, long-
    term health care costs, I think it is really critical that we
    think not in the short term, and I think that is what you are
    advocating today, as well.
        This is an investment that we can make in the short term so
    that we can actually save a lot of money, I think, in the long
    term by preventing the development of chronic diseases, so it
    is a health care issue, and it is a fiscal issue, but not just
    in the short term--in the long term, as well.
        This is an issue near and dear to my heart, first of all,
    in terms of access, because as somebody who grew up in poverty
    myself, I am very determined to make sure that all those kids
    out there in America who deserve to be in this program get into
    this program. That is why I offered the direct certification
    legislation.
        So it is very important to me, and I have gone around and
    talked to a number of folks and a number of schools in my
    district over the course of this spring and into the summer.
        And I think there is so much that we can do here. You have
    already talked about, sort of, how complex this problem is and
    this issue is.
        If you would just elaborate a little bit more, this is
    really the only issue that I want to discuss with you today,
    although it may take the form of a follow-up, we will see. But
    you talked about the role of agriculture, and both traditional
    and non-traditional.
        A lot of my friends are involved in community-supported
    agriculture in Iowa. And you are very aware of what that
    program is. That is part of the farm-to-school effort or could
    be part of the farm-to-school effort.
        Can you talk to us, elaborate a little bit about
    traditional, as well as non-traditional agriculture, and the
    contributions that those two sectors can make to making sure
    that we have good, quality food in our schools?
        Secretary Vilsack. Sure. Well, I mean, I think it is
    important to recognize that all sides of agriculture
    contribute. There are--I am just thinking of your congressional
    district, of which I am quite familiar, because my home area is
    there.
        I mean, there are turkey producers, for example, in your
    district, in your congressional district. There is no reason in
    the world why those producers can't be providing lean, low-fat
    protein for school lunch programs.
        What we may need is to make sure that there is a supply
    chain available. We may make sure that--need to make sure that
    school districts that are maybe 50 miles away from those
    producers understand and appreciate that turkeys are being
    raised in Henry County, Iowa, in the southeastern part of the
    state of Iowa. They may not know that.
        The same thing may be true for pork, opportunities there
    for production agriculture to participate, but we need to make
    the connection. People just aren't thinking about that. And we
    need to make sure that we have, as I say, the supply chain.
        On the other hand, you have got folks who are transitioning
    some of their property to orchards, to vegetable production
    systems. They, too, need to be connected. And there I think the
    key is to make sure that there is sufficient numbers of them so
    that school districts have some predictability and consistency
    that they can rely on.
        I think the benefit that they currently have under the
    system is that they can order fruits and vegetables. They may
    travel 1,000 miles to get to them, but they know that they will
    always have a supply.
        Mr. Loebsack. That is right.
        Secretary Vilsack. And here, the growing season--depending
    upon the growing season--there may be some limitations. But,
    again, consistency is important.
        And then making sure that the safety issues are addressed,
    so it is about setting up a system and an infrastructure which
    we are prepared to do and anxious to do. We want to reconnect.
        It is also--as the chairman indicated--encouraging schools
    to have their own gardens. These are tremendous learning
    experiences and opportunities. I mean, it is amazing what a
    science teacher, a math teacher, an environmental teacher can
    do with a small garden, and it is amazing to see children's
    reaction when that tomato occurs or when that green bean is
    picked or that pea is consumed, and they see it in the lunch
    line. They have a sense of pride and ownership.
        So there are a multitude of ways in which we can do this
    and should be doing it. And if we do it right, all parts of
    agriculture can be connected and benefit. And most importantly
    of all, then the rest of us can better understand and
    appreciate exactly what our farmers and ranchers do, whether
    they are small commercial operations or very, very large
    production agriculture operations, they are providing something
    extraordinary to us.
        And, you know, candidly, they are very underappreciated, in
    my view, in this country.
        Mr. Loebsack. Thank you so much.
        Thank you, Mr. Secretary.
        And thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Miller. Congresswoman Biggert?
        Mrs. Biggert. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        And, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. One thing
    that is very important to me and I think goes along with the
    nutrition--and I think there is something in this bill to
    complement the nutrition--and that is physical education.
        And I come from Illinois, which is the only state that
    mandates P.E. every day. And I think all of the people from the
    other states are amazed at that, but I have continued to push
    for that since I was in the state legislature, because I think
    it has to go hand in hand with the nutrition, if we are going
    to solve this problem.
        But my question really is about the--is not about that, but
    that is just my commercial.
        In your estimation, about how many schools would be
    required to change their menus to comply with these new
    standards? I know I have gone into my schools, too, and they
    have really been working hard to provide the nutrition, but
    then they will have kind of that backup of probably low-
    nutrition calories and foods that the kids will pick up because
    they won't try the others.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, I think, first of all, if I can
    respond to your commercial, I think you are absolutely right. I
    think people would be surprised how few schools actually have
    any kind of recess or physical education component on a regular
    basis, and that is important.
        It is one of the reasons why we have teamed up with the NFL
    and the Dairy Council to the Fuel Up to Play 60 program, to get
    kids outdoors and active for 60 minutes a day.
        I think it is fair to say that every school will be
    impacted by this legislation and about what we are trying to do
    here. Every school will be challenged to re-think what they are
    doing and how they are doing it.
        For some schools, it may be a very small adjustment. For
    some schools, it may be a fairly significant shift. But we want
    to be there to be of help and assistance in making that shift.
        Again, it is important for all the reasons we have talked
    about before. I mean, educational achievement, I will tell you,
    personally I know what it is like when you are overweight and
    you are in a school and you are made fun of. I mean, that was
    my early life, and I--you know, I didn't perform as well.
        You know, I have told this story before. I can remember
    when my fourth-grade teacher accused me of not being able to do
    a math problem because I was fat. I mean, that still sticks
    with me today, and that is quite a few years ago, right?
        So this is really important for every school to understand
    the significance of this period of time in the school day, and
    I think, you know, we sort of ignored this for a long time. And
    fortunately, as a result of your work and as a result of the
    First Lady's work and of a lot of other people, we are finally
    putting the focus back on this important time during the school
    day. So I think every school is going to be impacted by this.
        Mrs. Biggert. Thank you.
        Then, you know, as a former school board president, I was--
    I have always been a fierce defender of local control. And if
    the bill passes, how will you ensure the flexibility to provide
    meals based on local tastes and preferences?
        For example, years and years ago, I volunteered for the
    Head Start program one summer. It was the first year of the
    program. And I was in an area in Chicago that was completely
    Hispanic, and I can remember that they would bring in the food
    for the kids, and it had, you know, nothing to do with their
    culture.
        And so for a week, the food would be there, and the kids
    wouldn't eat it. I mean, they were afraid to eat it or
    whatever, but finally, after a week, they said, ``Well, this is
    silly,'' and they brought in food that was part of their
    culture.
        So will these standards focus on, you know, just--will they
    have the flexibility for the cultures?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, I think they will. In fact, I am
    confident that they will.
        For example, when we say more fruits and vegetables, while
    it would be terrific if every school district all year round
    had access to fresh fruits and vegetables, the reality is that
    there are many school districts where that won't be the case
    because of weather.
        And so we don't preclude frozen fruits, frozen vegetables
    from being used or canned fruits and vegetables. The point of
    this is getting that back into the mix.
        I don't think we are so prescriptive that local tastes,
    local culture would be ignored. In fact, we would hope that
    they would be integrated in the education component of this.
        I mean, every culture has wonderful food. And the diversity
    of it is what makes this really exciting. And every culture has
    the capacity to provide nutritious meals consistent with the
    culture, so I don't think this is about prescribing that you
    have to eat, you know, so many items from a list of things. It
    is basically, here are the standards from a caloric standpoint
    and from a--you need more fruits and vegetables and whole
    grains. How you get that mix is going to be up to you.
        Mrs. Biggert. Thank you.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Mr. Kucinich?
        Mr. Kucinich. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        Secretary Vilsack, thank you for your commitment and for
    the chairman's--I want to thank the chairman for his commitment
    in this very important socioeconomic issue and health issue.
        We know that the Centers for Disease Control has estimated
    that one-third of children are obese or overweight. And we also
    know that, according to the American Public Health Association,
    that at current obesity rates, obesity will add nearly $344
    billion to the nation's annual health cost by 2018.
        Now, Franklin said a penny saved is a penny earned, while
    billions saved would be billions earned when we look at a very
    aggressive effort at targeting the root causes of childhood
    obesity.
        And, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to include the
    following scholarly articles in support of this legislation.
    The first is ``Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing
    Contributes to Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done About
    It.'' This reviews scientific literature that documents food
    marketing to children is massive. It expands in number of
    venues, such as product placement, videogames, the Internet,
    cell phones. It is composed almost entirely of messages for
    nutrient-poor, calorie-dense foods and having harmful effects.
        I ask unanimous consent to submit that.
        Chairman Miller. Without objection, that will be part of
    the file of this hearing. Thank you.
        [The information may be accessed at the following Internet
    address:]

            http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/
                          20100701hearingarticle2.pdf

                                     ______

        Mr. Kucinich. Thank you. From the International Journal of
    Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, a research article
    on television viewing, computer use, obesity, and adiposity in
    U.S. preschool children. It says that, in U.S. preschool
    children, 2 hours a day of TV or video is associated with a
    higher risk of being overweight or at risk for overweight and
    higher adiposity.
        There is another--without objection, Mr. Chairman, if that
    could be in--another one, television viewing, fast food
    consumption, and children's obesity, speaks to a number of
    studies that have examined the association between children's
    hour TV viewing or the fast food consumption and childhood
    obesity. And it says the government should encourage the food
    industry to limit TV advertising with less healthy food items
    or junk foods targeted to children.
        Finally, a scholarly article on fast food restaurant
    advertising on television and its influence on childhood
    obesity. It cites the 1997 National Longitudinal Survey of
    youth to estimate the effects of television fast foot
    advertising on children and adolescents with respect to being
    overweight. It says a ban on these ads would reduce the number
    of overweight children ages 3 to 11, and a fixed population by
    18 percent would reduce the number of oversight adolescents
    ages 12 to 18 by 14 percent.
        It says the elimination of tax deductibility of this type
    of advertising would produce smaller declines of between 5
    percent and 7 percent in these outcomes. These are all the UC
    matters, Mr. Chairman.
        We are aware, Mr. Secretary--and I know you have worked
    closely with the First Lady in the announcement of the White
    House Task Force on Childhood Obesity and the report to the
    President--that pointed out that food and beverage advertising
    to children is a big business and is a primary contributor to
    childhood obesity and calls for a shift away from marketing
    unhealthy foods to children.
        The Institute of Medicine in 2004 estimated that
    approximately $10 billion was spent on food advertising
    directed at children. So you have the federal government
    actually helping to contribute to this preying on children by
    granting a tax write-off for expenses associated with this
    advertising.
        And I know so much of this discussion is going to come down
    to budget issues. And we know that marketers and advertisers
    spend billions of dollars a year to research the developmental
    vulnerabilities of children, to exploit those vulnerabilities,
    and they do it because it is extraordinarily profitable for
    them to do so.
        So, Mr. Secretary, do you think it is fair that taxpayers
    should subsidize that marketing and advertising like they are
    now? And I would ask if you would be congenial to studying H.R.
    4310, which actually amends the IRS code to protect children's
    health by denying any deduction for advertising and marketing
    directed at children to promote the consumption of food at fast
    food restaurants or foods that are poor nutritional quality and
    to re-channel that money--it could be as much as $10 billion--
    into paying for this program?
        Mr. Secretary?
        Secretary Vilsack. Representative, in terms of the
    advertising issue, our focus has been working with the Federal
    Trade Commission to basically figure out how to better educate
    the marketplace and better educate all of us about what is
    appropriate in terms of advertising, what is appropriate in
    terms of directing information to youngsters.
        I mean, our focus here has been primarily on an education
    component. We are working, for example, with ``Sesame Street''
    and the workshop to focus on early childhood and young parents,
    to get them a textbook, if you will, or a manual for how they
    might be able to make better decisions for their children with
    better information. It is in both English and Spanish. It was
    distributed to 3 million WIC mothers.
        That is the kind of thing that we are focused on. We are
    focused on making sure that we use PSAs to focus on the dietary
    guidelines that we are in the process of reviewing. And by the
    end of this year, we will probably have revisions to those. We
    will be aggressively promoting that through the media.
        We are working on making sure that we use our SNAP-Ed
    program to, again, better educate parents, particularly parents
    who are in that program, of how they might be able to do a
    better job of stretching their dollar.
        So the focus for us is on education. I honestly have not
    had a chance to look at your bill. I would be more than happy
    to look at it. And it probably wouldn't be appropriate for me
    to comment on it without looking at it, but I will tell you
    that we are focused on this issue, at least from the standpoint
    of an educational component of it.
        Mr. Kucinich. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to
    working with you to find the money to fund this program.
        Chairman Miller. The gentleman's time has expired.
        Mr. Guthrie?
        Mr. Guthrie. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Thank you, Mr. Secretary. This may get a little bit off the
    subject, but it is tied to it. And it is tied. It is a
    different committee's jurisdiction, but the issue we are
    looking at is kids--and I like what the chairman said, was we
    have to educate kids, because when we educate kids, they got
    their parents--picked on their parents for smoking and things
    like that, and that is perfect.
        The problem is--or bigger problem, after they leave school,
    they are with their parents. You know, it is--and a lot of us
    have philosophical problems with trying to tell parents how to
    raise their kids.
        But the one thing that your department does do that we have
    spent taxpayer money on--I always say, if you take the dollar,
    then you should take the implications of it--is with the food
    stamp program. And I paid my way through--well, high school, I
    didn't pay my way through high school, but summer college,
    before I went to military, working in grocery stores, and back
    then you had the old paper dollar, so you really couldn't put a
    lot of restrictions on food stamp purchases, because it would
    just be difficult for the retailer to do.
        But now with the cards and the swiping and so forth, is
    there talk about--when I was--I mean, you would see sugar
    drinks, you would see potato chips, you would see things bought
    with food stamps that would go home for the kids to eat and the
    families to eat, where we could make them have fresh
    vegetables, fresh--you know, I am not saying you don't do, you
    know, canned corn, but tying more nutritional value to the food
    stamp program that would help these kids when they go home?
    Because not every reduced lunch has food stamps. I know that.
    But some of them do.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, part of the challenge is, even
    though we have got electronic benefit cards available to many
    of the SNAP recipients, and even though we are trying to
    encourage them to use them at farmer's markets to access fruits
    and vegetables, the problem is that there are over 300,000
    items in grocery stores across the country, and another 12,000
    new items are introduced every single year in grocery stores.
        I mean, you used to be able to go to the store and get a
    box of Triscuits and that is what you got was a box of
    Triscuits. Well, now there are 48 varieties of Triscuits. And
    so there is an operational issue here.
        Secondly, there is no indication that even if you were to
    create some kind of system, and even if it were somehow
    feasible to do it, that that would necessarily result in those
    items not being purchased. It is possible that the small amount
    of discretionary income that those folks have would be used for
    those purposes.
        And then, finally, how do you distinguish between the
    family that understands that these are treats and special
    occasion foods and those who don't? I mean, I think--to your
    point, I don't think it is--I think if we educate, we have to
    trust that people will make the right set of decisions for
    their family and for their children.
        You know, I don't know of very many parents who don't
    really at the end of the day want to make what is the right set
    of decisions for their children.
        Mr. Guthrie. Oh, I agree. And I appreciate the difficulty
    of it. I don't think that is the problem.
        But even though they would--and I think they should buy, if
    they choose with discretionary income, snacks, and the kids
    should have snacks. You said it perfectly. You said everyday
    food versus sometime food, and I think sometime food is fine
    for some time, you know, as you said.
        But they could still do that with discretionary. But if
    they were allotted so much money and only could buy fresh
    fruits--and I know the difficulty of----
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, let me say what we are----
        Mr. Guthrie [continuing]. And that they would bring those
    home, because that is what they would be able to buy.
        Secretary Vilsack. Let me say what we are trying to do,
    which is to focus on an incentive-driven program. We are
    taking--by virtue of the farm bill, we are taking resources
    this year and we are challenging states to come up with point-
    of-sale incentives to encourage fruits and vegetables, so that
    when you swipe the card and you are buying a head of
    cauliflower, instead of it being $1, which is what the grocer
    will get for that cauliflower, your card only credits you 70
    cents. You get a 30 percent discount, if you will, if you buy
    fruits and vegetables. It is a way of encouraging them to
    stretch the dollars.
        Then when you add to that the educational component of,
    ``Here is how you can use nutritious food to stretch your food
    dollar and do the right thing for your family,'' the
    combination of those two things, I think, could potentially be
    powerful in getting people to make the right set of choices
    with those SNAP resources.
        Mr. Guthrie. And I agree. And I am going to yield back,
    because I am almost losing time anyway, because we need to
    focus on this, but that would have the same technological
    issue. If you could do that technologically, you could do the
    other, as well, couldn't you?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, except that there is----
        Mr. Guthrie. There are fewer items----
        Secretary Vilsack [continuing]. You are only talking about
    a few items. That is----
        Mr. Guthrie. I will yield back, because I know we need to
    get back on this----
        Chairman Miller. We are going to send you two guys to the
    lab to work this out.
        In the meantime, Congressman McCarthy has time.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Thank you, Chairman Miller. And thank you
    for having this hearing.
        And welcome, Mr. Secretary. I am the chairwoman on the
    Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities. And we have
    actually been working on this for a number of years, and I want
    to thank, certainly, my chairman for having a number of our--my
    standalone legislation going into 5504.
        Let me say one thing. When Nancy Pelosi was made Speaker of
    the House, the day she got her gavel, she said that--and she
    brought all the children up that were there and said that my
    administration and her work here would have to do with
    children.
        And, as one of my colleagues said, we will find the money,
    because we can't afford not to find the money. My background is
    as a nurse and a number of years ago the Pediatric Association
    came out and said that children from the age of 13 to 16
    basically had arteries of those who were 40, 45 year old.
        Our military has already said that our young people are not
    fit to come into the military. As far as I am concerned, this
    is a national security--because if we don't have a healthy
    country for the future, we cannot certainly be a productive
    country.
        So with that being said, again, I want to thank George
    Miller. We had introduced the Food Marketing in Schools
    Assessment Act, and it calls for the Secretary of Agriculture
    to conduct a study on the extent and types of marketing of
    foods and beverages in elementary and secondary schools.
        One of the things that my other colleague had mentioned
    that--we have a couple of model programs in my district. And it
    is not like the--you know, we are going to go in and say,
    ``Okay, you have got to change all your whole food program
    here.''
        What the schools have done--and it took them a year--was
    introduce one side of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich with
    white bread and the other side with whole wheat. And over a
    year's time, all of the other junk food kind of things that
    they would eat were gone, and the kids really, really enjoyed
    it. It is an educational program.
        One of the things that is also in the bill is the
    Breastfeeding Support Act, mainly because we find that, if we
    can educate women to breastfeed, their children are actually
    off to a much better start.
        The Start Healthy Habits Early Act, commonsense action by
    establishing nutrition requirements for childcare, because that
    is where we want to get, the youngest children in the
    beginning, and to also educate the parents, and the Partnership
    for Wellness Act, which we can do all the nutrition that we
    want, but if we don't have physical activity that goes with it,
    and there are so many great programs.
        Again, in my district, we have five models from
    kindergarten all the way to fifth grade, and the children
    exercise 10 minutes a day, 3 times a day. They don't waste that
    time. The kids could not do it when they first started the
    physical program at their--you know, next to their desk.
        One of our hospitals came up with a great program, so it is
    an educational piece, also, while they are exercising. Those
    that are in third grade now can do more than 10 minutes 3 times
    a day, so we know that this works.
        We, as the responsibility of this committee, certainly for
    the future, take this very seriously. And I certainly want to
    thank Mrs. Obama for bringing national attention to this.
        I just wanted to ask you a question. On the next panel, in
    the testimony of one of the witnesses, basically states that
    there is little or no evidence suggesting that government
    spending on child nutrition programs can be a cost effective
    means of reducing overweight and obesity. Instead, reducing
    consumption of low--energy-dense foods may be promising means
    to limit weight gain among children.
        I think people are missing the point, and I guess I would
    like your opinion on that.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, when you realize that many
    youngsters in this country today get one and possibly two meals
    of the three that they get or perhaps only the two meals that
    they get in a school setting, and you realize that there are
    some studies that suggest that there is a significant number of
    empty calories that are currently being provided in some of our
    schools in breakfast and the school lunch program, it is hard
    for me to understand how we couldn't have a positive impact on
    this if we altered and structured this with more fruits and
    vegetables and whole grains and low-fat dairy and less fat,
    less sodium, and less sugar.
        I mean, it just seems to me common sense that you are going
    to have some impact and effect on this. If you also provide an
    educational component, then these youngsters will begin making
    more informed decisions for themselves outside of school and,
    as you say, physical education is extraordinarily important. It
    is one of the reasons why we think 60 minutes a day of physical
    activity is really important for youngsters.
        We want kids to get outdoors. They spend 6 to 7 hours in
    front of a TV and a computer screen. They could get plenty of
    computer time. That is fine. But they also need to get outdoors
    and need to reconnect with Mother Nature.
        So the combination of those things, I think, can and will
    have an impact. And then if you educate parents and if you
    start early with the WIC program and with the SNAP program and
    with some of the things that we are doing, breastfeeding, as
    you outlined, all of those things cumulatively will have a
    tremendous impact.
        And if we--we raise this to a point where youngsters
    realize that it is part of their commitment to their country--
    you know, I remember being raised in the 1960s when John
    Kennedy said physical fitness was part of what students were
    supposed to do. It was part of our responsibility to our
    country.
        It is what Harry Truman recognized when the school lunch
    program was established. So with due respect to scholarly
    studies, I think it will have an impact, and I think it will
    make a difference. And I will tell you, if it makes a
    difference in one child's life, it is important.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Looking forward to working with you.
        I yield back the balance of my time.
        Chairman Miller. Mr. Thompson?
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member.
        Secretary Vilsack, good to see you. Just different to see
    you outside the realm of the Ag Committee, where we normally
    get together, and very proud of the fact that sitting before me
    is the former Iowa Governor and the Secretary of Agriculture
    who got a start in Pennsylvania.
        Secretary Vilsack. That is right.
        Mr. Thompson. I want to just thank you for your support of
    nutrition. Obviously, nutrition is extremely important. It is
    an underpinning for health and wellness, which leads to
    prevention, and that is the most cost-effective care that we
    can provide, obviously, is prevention, when it comes to disease
    and illness.
        And I also really appreciate your commitment for assisting
    with the offsets. And I say assisting because I know what an
    impact $8 billion would have on the agriculture budget. For
    what agriculture provides, you know, for what--it is very cost-
    effective for what we invest in it.
        And wearing two hats, this committee and obviously the
    Agriculture Committee, the fact that production agriculture
    really provides us the quality and the affordability of food is
    fundamental to the nutrition of all Americans. We are blessed
    with what we have in this country.
        So I am confident, as you work with us, to find the $8
    billion offsets, and we need to do that. That is the right
    thing to do, that we will keep that in mind, the importance of
    production agriculture and make sure that we are doing our best
    to continue to provide--meet the nutrition needs of everyone.
        You had talked about some of the national partnerships on
    nutrition, which were really interesting, the NFL, Dairy
    Council, very exciting. My question is, when it comes to the
    USDA nutrition programs, have you reached out to organizations
    such as the National School Board Association, that really
    represents those who truly have the governing responsibility in
    our schools, in terms of either education or advocacy or, you
    know, preparing those policy--the ones that really are the
    policymakers. That is the local elected school board members.
        Is that something USDA has done or are there plans to do
    that?
        Secretary Vilsack. We have made an effort to reach out to
    anybody and everyone who might have a connection with this
    particular issue to see if we could get them to support this
    effort, from school administrators to school boards, to folks
    who are responsible for the food preparation in schools to
    teachers.
        Everyone in the school system--and by that, I include the
    school board members--understand and appreciates the importance
    of nutrition in terms of educational achievement.
        You cannot learn if you are hungry. You cannot learn if you
    are worried about your self-image. And the reality is, we have
    got too many kids in both of those categories, and one way we
    can address that is by passing a bill that provides significant
    resources to change the direction of our school lunch and
    school breakfast programs.
        I am concerned, Representative, that we have over 100,000
    schools participating in school lunch, but only 88,000
    participating in school breakfast. What do we need to help
    those additional 13,000, 14,000 schools to get into the school
    breakfast program? Because you know and I know, that is really
    important. Youngsters have got to have a good start.
        And how do we create a system where school breakfast
    doesn't create a stigma? You know, everyone goes to the
    cafeteria for school lunch. Not everybody goes or needs school
    breakfast. So if you have it in the cafeteria as opposed to the
    classroom, are you creating the kind of situation where you are
    discouraging kids from participating?
        So these--it is a set of complex issues, and it absolutely
    requires everyone, from the teacher, the food preparation
    folks, to the school board to be engaged.
        Mr. Thompson. All right. With the USDA proposed nutrition
    programs, I mean, the past year-and-a-half, I don't know what
    the total is, but I think the ranking member actually in his
    opening remarks really covered well the amount of just
    tremendous--billions of dollars in investments we have made
    related whether it was a stimulus or the patient protection
    care act.
        And much of that--a lot of that was slated at nutrition.
    Have we assessed--do we have mechanisms in place to assess how
    effective those--obviously, some of those have not been
    implemented yet, but some of those have gone into operation.
    Have we assessed the baseline of what difference those have
    made?
        I think that--to me, that seems to be important
    information, as we look at a new bill that looks at investing
    $8 billion, to make sure we know where the baseline is, in
    terms of need, and we have done a tremendous amount of
    investment up to this point. I think measuring that
    effectiveness to know where we truly are in a baseline seems to
    be important.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, the stimulus resource was
    primarily in three categories. It was additional support for
    WIC, which I think this committee is well aware of. It was
    additional SNAP payments. And it was also primarily equipment
    money for schools. And it was a relatively--given the need--a
    relatively small amount in the stimulus that went to school
    districts for upgrading their equipment.
        If memory serves me correct, for every dollar that we had
    available, there was four or five or six dollars of
    applications. And that is one of the reasons why part of this
    component is to help schools with the equipment needs, because
    if you have a French fryer, but you don't have something that
    can steam or produce vegetables, it just makes it a little bit
    more difficult for you to comply.
        So I am not sure that those resources go to the issue here.
    The issue here is, how do we help school districts be able to
    afford the cost of fruits and vegetables, recognizing that
    there may be some additional costs associated with those items?
        They may be a little bit more expensive than some of the
    processed food that can be purchased that is high in calories,
    has high fat content, high sodium, sugar, and so forth. So I
    think it is sort of apples and oranges here.
        We have invested the resources and equipment. We know that
    that is making a difference, but it is a very small part of a
    very large set of issues that we are dealing with here.
        Mr. Thompson. Okay, thank you.
        Chairman Miller. It is the intent of the chair to go--we
    now have a vote on the floor of the House, to go as deep into
    this vote as our little legs will carry us and not to miss it.
        So next I have Ms. Titus, Mr. Cassidy, hopefully back to
    Ms. Chu, but when we do leave for the vote, I--the Secretary
    will be done. I will not ask him to wait through the vote to
    come back.
        And then as soon as we come back from the vote, we will
    begin with our next panel.
        Ms. Titus?
        Ms. Titus. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Secretary, in the remarks that you have made over the
    past year regarding the Obama administration's priorities for
    reauthorization of this act, you have noted that you are
    concerned that too many low-income children lack access to food
    when school is out, when they go home on the weekend or during
    the holidays or during the summer.
        This is certainly a problem in southern Nevada. We have got
    45 percent of the schoolchildren who rely on free lunch. That
    is why I am pleased that a bill that I have sponsored is part
    of this act. It is called the Weekends Without Hunger Act, has
    22 bipartisan co-sponsors of it.
        It would establish a 5-year pilot program. In that program,
    we would provide commodities to eligible institutions like
    schools or food banks that could do backpacks that you could
    take--children could take home over the weekend, and that would
    help to feed them, be sure they get their nourishment when they
    are not at school, where they depend so much on those meals.
        I just wonder if you would comment on that, if you would be
    supportive of that kind of program.
        Secretary Vilsack. Representative, that is a very important
    component of this. You know, we can do everything right for 5
    days, but if we don't do everything right for 7 days, we may
    not get it right.
        The sad reality is that there are a lot of youngsters who
    are living in families where they are not necessarily going to
    get nutritious snacks and/or meals during the weekend. And then
    they come to school very, very hungry and not able to perform.
        So programs like the one you are talking about that will
    help us bridge that gap are important. It is equally important
    for us to focus on the summer months, which is one of the
    reasons why we are working hard to take resources that are
    available to us to create demonstration projects to try to
    figure out where the best practices in the country are.
        There are a number of communities that are doing this, and
    we need to make sure that we get the best practice models out.
    We need to engage the faith-based organizations. We had a
    meeting with them recently, how they can help and assist us in
    bridging these gaps, very, very important.
        And so my hope would be that we do make a commitment to
    programs like the one that you are sponsoring.
        Ms. Titus. Well, I appreciate that. In southern Nevada, we
    have Three Square that is doing a good job. It is just that in
    these economic times, when they depend on charitable
    contributions, sometimes they can't spread their resources as
    far as they are needed, so some support would be helpful.
        Secretary Vilsack. We have seen food banks very, very
    stretched during this difficult time.
        Ms. Titus. Thank you.
        I will yield back.
        Chairman Miller. Mr. Cassidy?
        Mr. Cassidy. Thank you, Secretary Vilsack.
        I am going to follow up with where Mrs. McCarthy spoke of.
    I am not advocating these positions, but I think intellectually
    we have to consider it.
        It does seem the more money we put at food stamps, the more
    money we put at this program, the worst nutritional outcomes we
    get. I mean, empirically, our kids are heavier now than they
    used to be, as we are putting more money towards food stamps
    and more money towards school nutrition programs.
        I think when you were in--I forget if I said this--when you
    were in Ag Committee and we were discussing the Food Stamp
    Program, but I keep on thinking of the Pogo quote, ``We have
    met the enemy and he is us.''
        So how would we--you know, it is a correlation. It may not
    be causal, but it still seems to be a correlation. What would
    be your response to someone pointing out that the evidence is,
    the more money we put here, the worse results we get?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, I think it is a combination of a
    lot of things. Part of it is the fact that we are asking
    schools to do a tremendous amount, and it makes it more
    difficult for them to squeeze the time out of the school day
    for physical education. That is clearly an issue.
        We have got to get our kids more physically active. That is
    why the First Lady's initiative is very important.
        And I think more schools are recognizing that. I think that
    getting the relationships with the NFL and the Dairy Council to
    heighten the awareness of folks about this.
        I think, secondly, it is how we use our food dollars. It
    isn't so much the fact that we have increased the resources,
    that we have increased the resources because food costs have
    gone up, doesn't--but now what we need to do is make sure that
    people understand how they can stretch those dollars more
    effectively and get more nutritional value out of those
    dollars, and that hasn't necessarily been part of the equation
    until recently.
        Mr. Cassidy. Is it possible that the more federal control
    we put in there, the less--and going back to what Ms. Biggert
    said--the more federal control we put in there, the less--the
    more hidebound the program becomes, the less able it is to
    adapt to local circumstances, buy local foods, for example.
        Secretary Vilsack. I don't think so. I think basically what
    we need to be able to do is have a set of guidelines and a set
    of standards that everybody understands are important. I mean,
    when you have got an Institute of Medicine study that says you
    have got too much sodium, too much salt, too much sugar in what
    we are feeding youngsters, then it is pretty obvious that we
    need to do a better job of reducing those and increasing fruits
    and vegetables and whole grains.
        The problem is that there are resource issues associated
    with that. When you have more fruits and vegetables and whole
    grains and you want to integrate more fresh fruit and
    vegetables and more local products, there can be a cost
    associated with that, which is why we are asking for some
    additional resources here.
        My sense is that we are approaching this in a much more
    comprehensive and cohesive way. Instead of bits and pieces,
    this is a holistic approach to this. It is about physical
    education. It is about bridging the gap between weekends and
    summer. It is about making sure that fruits and vegetables and
    whole grains are associated with the diets. It is about
    education of parents and students. It is about providing the
    local producers an opportunity to engage. It is about expanding
    significantly the knowledge of how you can do a better job of
    making and preparing food that is more nutritious.
        And it is about making sure that the country understands
    that national security is an issue, health care costs in the
    future an issue, educational achievement is an issue. And we
    haven't really talked about the fact that there are still
    500,000 to 600,000 youngsters who are living in families where
    they absolutely don't get fed at some point in time during the
    month.
        Mr. Cassidy. Well, there is a little bit of a discordance
    here, because we are speaking concomitantly of obesity and
    hunger. Now--and I--you know, I mean, you mentioned that, and I
    have no doubt that there are kids who go to school hungry, but
    I have to admit, you know, every time I hear that we have an
    obesity problem and everybody is going hungry, how do you
    reconcile those two?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, the hunger and obesity may have
    the same parent. I think if you study both of them, you are
    going to find that there is a correlation between low-income
    families that are trying the best they can to take care of
    their children and stretch scarce food dollars by focusing on
    foods that are processed, foods that are, you know, bulk, if
    you will, and youngsters who are just flat-out not getting fed
    because their parents don't have the resources to feed them.
        Mr. Cassidy. I am not quite sure I follow. Obviously, if
    somebody is eating red beans and rice, they can eat a very, you
    know, full meal. And so--now, if you want to say there is a
    correlate between poor food decisions and obesity and poverty,
    I will accept that correlate, but since we are integrating
    these two as a rationale, I am still not----
        Secretary Vilsack. It is not so much poor decisions as it
    is we need to do a better job of educating folks about the
    decisions that they make and give them an understanding that
    there is a way in which they can stretch those food dollars
    more effectively and still not compromise the nutritional
    quality and value of what they are feeding their youngsters.
        I mean, it is hard for parents. I mean, parents are working
    a couple jobs, you know, part-time jobs.
        Mr. Cassidy. Well, I accept that.
        Secretary Vilsack. There is also the issue of----
        Mr. Cassidy. I accept that, but I am still not sure I
    figured out how hunger and obesity are both goals that we are
    achieving here.
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, the hunger issue----
        Mr. Cassidy. I yield back. Thank you very much.
        Chairman Miller [continuing]. Mr. Cassidy.
        Congresswoman Chu?
        Ms. Chu. Thank you, Mr. Chair.
        Secretary Vilsack, I appreciate your comments regarding the
    prices charged to children who don't qualify for the free or
    reduced-price meals, and you referred to the study that found
    that the average charge for paid lunches is approximately 75
    cents less than the federal reimbursement for free meals.
        Now, on the surface, there is a simple logic to asking
    families who can afford to pay it to pay at least the full cost
    of the meal that they are receiving. At the same time, there is
    an argument to be made that many families at 185 percent of the
    poverty line can't even afford these subsidized prices for
    these paid meals, and that is particularly true in areas like
    Los Angeles, which is an area I represent, where the cost of
    living is well above the national average.
        So given these competing interests, how can we balance
    protecting the financial solvency of the free and reduced lunch
    program with the needs of school districts to price meals so
    that they are affordable for all families in a school district,
    considering the variation and the cost of living across this
    country?
        Secretary Vilsack. Well, you know, we are not--I don't know
    that there is a great deal of data that will tell us precisely
    what the impact will be if you were to adjust over time a more
    equitable distribution between paid meals and the federal
    reimbursement.
        In other words, if we ask some of those parents to pay more
    over time, I don't know that we necessarily know that there
    will be less participation or families will find it difficult
    to afford it, depending upon how we phase this in and how we do
    it.
        I think at the--on the other end, if we are trying to
    improve the capacity for all of these youngsters to have a
    better opportunity, then there obviously has to be some degree
    of equity in the system. And whether it is competitive foods
    that are being subsidized by the free and reduced program or
    whether it is the paid meals that are being subsidized, I think
    there needs to be some rebalancing here, but doing it in a fair
    way and doing it in appropriate way and making sure that we are
    sensitive to folks who are sort of on the bubble.
        A substantial percentage of the folks--a majority of the
    folks we are talking about are probably at 300 percent or more
    of poverty that would be impacted by this, and they might--that
    is a--you know, a family of four is about $66,000, so they may
    be able to afford just, you know, a little bit more, but I
    think we need to be sensitive in terms of how we address this
    and how we phase it in, if this is ultimately the decision you
    make.
        Ms. Chu. In fact, can you give me a sense of the diversity
    of prices that schools are charging for paid meals, why they
    are charging the different prices, and what that means for the
    quality of food offered? And is there any school district that
    is charging 100 percent of the subsidized price that the
    federal government pays?
        Secretary Vilsack. You know, I don't know the answer to
    that question. If I can have permission to get you a written
    response to that, I will be happy to. I am sure that there are
    schools that are doing the right thing and have the right
    balance. Today, as I testify, I can't give you a school
    district, but we will find them for you.
        Ms. Chu. Okay, thank you.
        I yield back.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your testimony and for the
    time before the committee and the willingness to respond to
    members' questions. There may be members who have questions who
    are not able to articulate them in this hearing, but we will
    submit them to you, and we would appreciate you responding to
    those questions that the committee would submit.
        With that, the committee will recess for the purposes of
    meeting these votes on the floor. As soon as we return, we will
    begin with our second panel.
        [Recess.]
        Chairman Miller. The committee will reconvene, and thank
    you again for your patience. It is a part of our multitasking,
    voting and trying to hold hearings and cover important
    subjects.
        I want to welcome the second panel. Our first introduction
    will be made by Congresswoman Titus of Nevada.
        Ms. Titus. It is my pleasure and privilege to introduce and
    welcome to our committee today Chef Tom Colicchio. Chef
    Colicchio is a world-renowned culinary chef and restaurateur.
    He has also served as the lead judge on the hit television
    series ``Top Chef,'' and he has cooked at many of the prominent
    New York restaurants.
        Chef Colicchio's talents and skills have been recognized
    with top awards in his highly competitive field. These include
    the James Beard Foundation's Best Chef New York Award, the 2010
    Outstanding Chef Award, as well as the Best New Restaurant
    Award for Craft, his restaurant in New York. And I am proud to
    say that we have one of Mr. Colicchio's restaurant in Las
    Vegas, Craftsteak at MGM Grand.
        Mr. Colicchio's mother worked in a school cafeteria, so he
    has come by his calling in a very natural way. He also learned
    at a very early age the importance of the school lunch program
    and good nutrition for children. As a result, not only is he
    known for his restaurants and his cooking, but also for his
    charity.
        He and his restaurants have given back to the community by
    supporting such charities as Share Our Strength, Children of
    Bellevue, City Meals on Wheels, City Harvest, Pediatric AIDS
    Foundation, HealthRight International, and Groove with Me. I am
    curious to know more about Groove with Me.
        Mr. Chairman, I and the committee thank Chef Colicchio for
    all his good works and for being here to lend his celebrity to
    help us highlight the need for this important legislation to
    promote nutrition and fight obesity among our children.
        Thank you, Chef, for being here.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you, Congressman Titus, for that
    introduction.
        I am going to introduce the rest of the panel, and then we
    will hear from Chef Colicchio as our first witness on this
    panel.
        And welcome to the committee, Mr. Colicchio.
        Robert Rector is well known to this committee. He is a
    senior research fellow on welfare and family issues at the
    Heritage Foundation. Mr. Rector has authored two books and over
    100 articles and research studies on these topics. He joined
    Heritage Foundation in 1984 and previously worked as
    legislative assistant to the Virginia House of Delegates and as
    a management analyst at the U.S. Office of Personnel
    Management. Mr. Rector has served as Commissioner on the
    congressionally mandated Millennial Housing Commission.
        James Weill is the president of the Food Research and
    Action Committee, known on the Hill as FRAC, a leading anti-
    hunger public policy group in America. Prior to joining FRAC,
    he was at Children's Defense Fund as program director and
    general counsel. Mr. Weill is also the chair of the board of
    directors of the Alliance for Justice Action Council and is a
    member of the board of OMB Watch and the National Center on
    Youth Law.
        Dr. Eduardo Sanchez is a vice president and chief medical
    officer at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas. Prior to this, he
    was the director of the Institute of Health Policy at the
    University of Texas School of Public Health. Dr. Sanchez also
    chairs the advisory committee to the director--to the director
    of the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention and as chair
    of the National Commission on Prevention Priorities. He has
    also served on the Institute of Medicine Committee on Progress
    and Preventing Childhood Obesity and currently serves on the
    Institute of Medicine's Standing Committee on Childhood
    Obesity.
        Major General Paul D. Monroe, Jr., serves as executive
    advisory council on Mission: Readiness, Military Leaders for
    Kids, a nonprofit bipartisan organization of more than 100
    senior retired military leaders. Mission: Readiness was founded
    in 2008 to ensure continued American security and prosperity
    into the 21st century by calling for smart investments in the
    upcoming generation of American children.
        Mr. Monroe is a retired major general, having served 46
    years in the U.S. Army and the California Army National Guard.
    He is a distinguished and decorated Army officer who has
    performed a variety of high-level command and staff positions
    during his career.
        Welcome to the committee. Thank you for taking your time. I
    am sorry for the interruptions and the vote. I think we are
    going to have another vote in a while, but we are going to try
    to make sure we get your testimony in.
        And, Chef Colicchio, we are going to begin with you. As you
    may have heard me explain, when you begin to testify, a green
    light will go on. When you have a minute remaining, an orange
    light, and then you could think about starting to sum up, but
    do it in a manner in which you convey your thoughts and your
    topics to the committee.
        Welcome.
        I am going to have you push your microphone, the----

           STATEMENT OF TOM COLICCHIO, CHEF AND RESTAURATEUR

        Mr. Colicchio. There we go.
        Thank you, Chairman Miller.
        And thank you, Representative Titus, for the introduction.
        My restaurant in Las Vegas also supports Three Square in
    your district, as well, so thank you for doing the work that
    you do there.
        Ladies and gentlemen of the Education and Labor Committee,
    I am here today to express my support for the Improving
    Nutrition for America's Children Act, sponsored by Chairman
    Miller, and to urge you to follow--urge you and your fellow
    representatives to do everything in your power to find the
    funds to push this crucial piece of legislation through.
        I am wearing a few different hats today at this hearing.
    First off, there is my public one. As host and judge of a
    popular television program, I find myself in the slightly
    surreal position of being able to comment on issues of
    importance to me and a public willing to listen.
        I have decided to use this advantage to the millions of
    American children who rely on school, preschool, after-school,
    and summer feeding programs for adequate nutrition, children
    who don't have lobbyists with deep pockets at their disposal
    for advocating on their behalf.
        I am also here as a chef. There was a time when my job
    wasn't public at all. The chef stayed in the kitchen. Early in
    the next morning, they would trawl farmer's markets and stalls
    and fish markets to choose today's food, the day's food. Nobody
    really cared what we had to say, just cared what we did on our
    plates.
        Today that is changed a bit. Chefs are frequently called
    upon to cook at fundraisers or food pantries, food-based
    charities to help meet the needs of those who struggle with
    hunger. As a group, chefs have never been more active and never
    raised more money than we do now, and yet studies show that
    more people are hungry or food insecure in this country today,
    more than any other time in history.
        It is frustrating, and has spurred me to ask a question,
    why? Why in this great country, where we produce enough food,
    are children going hungry every day?
        I am also here as a business owner. At my restaurants, I
    have dozens of employees who work long hours, and I understand
    how urgently many of them need to know that their kids receive
    healthy nutrition at schools and daycare centers where they
    spend a large part of each day.
        It is hard enough to make a living in today's economy. No
    working parent should have to worry whether their child has
    enough to eat.
        I am encouraged that Chairman Miller's bill allows for
    additional meals for children who are in daycare longer than 8
    hours, as so many are, or spending time in after-school
    settings.
        Chairman Miller's bill supports working families. I will
    say that again: This bill supports working families.
        In addition, this bill makes important strides to ensure
    that low-income children don't go hungry during summer months
    when school is out.
        I am also here as a father to 17-year-old, Dante, and to an
    11-month-old, Luka. My children, like children everywhere, are
    more than happy to slurp down junk food with empty calories:
    pizza, sodas, candy, and deep-fried anything. But the fact that
    they would eat this whenever doesn't give me permission to
    shrug my shoulders and say, ``Well, that is what they want.''
    It is my job as a parent to make sure that they have a variety
    of real, nutritious foods served to them at every meal so that
    they grow into robust, healthy kids capable of meeting their
    full potential in life.
        And yet, I hear people say, ``We would like to improve the
    school lunch program, but the kids, all they want to do is eat
    pizzas and burgers. If we give them good food, they won't
    eat.''
        Come on, people. We are adults here. It is up to us to do
    better. My kids would happily live in front of the Xbox and
    never take a shower for as long as they live, but that is not
    going to happen, either.
        When I give them healthy, delicious food, they eat it with
    gusto.
        On a recent ``Top Chef'' episode, we challenged our
    contestants to prepare healthy, nutritious lunch for
    schoolchildren right here in D.C. What do you know? The kids
    ate it, they asked for seconds, they asked for thirds.
        I am also here as the son of a lunch lady. My mother,
    Beverly Colicchio, worked for decades as a cafeteria supervisor
    in Elizabeth, New Jersey, where I was born. Elizabeth is not a
    wealthy town, and at the high school where she worked, almost
    70 percent of the students qualified for free or reduced-price
    breakfast and lunch.
        My mother told us that often the meals she served those
    kids was the only food they got to eat all day. It was
    upsetting to her that the budgetary constraints imposed by low
    federal reimbursements meant that schools couldn't afford much
    in the way of fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains,
    legumes, and high-quality proteins.
        The cheapest food, contracted out to the lowest bidder, was
    usually the food that was on the menu, and the kids who ate it,
    and they didn't have a choice or an option of refusing.
        On a diet that may have met the nutritional guidelines
    without being truly healthy and whole, we expect our kids to
    learn, behave, socialize appropriately, and develop into
    healthy teens and adults, and we are quick to label and punish
    them when they don't.
        Without regular exposure to real food--made from whole
    ingredients in a variety of textures, shapes, and colors--these
    children never develop a preference for healthy food and thus
    perpetuate a cycle of poor nutrition that can lead to a
    lifetime of costly, debilitating health problems, like obesity
    and diabetes, not to mention their lost potential as active,
    healthy citizens.
        Schools today are forced to supplement their meager budgets
    with vending machines that supply empty calories from soft
    drinks and junk food. I ask you: How many of here today--how
    many of you here today would be content to let the bulk of your
    children's daily calories come from soda, chips, or branded
    fast food? And yet we are sitting by and allowing that to
    happen for families who are struggling and who rely on us to do
    better.
        As thinking adults, as fellow parents, this is an egregious
    abdication of our responsibility towards kids. And if it is at
    all within our means to fix it--and I believe it is--I urge you
    to make it right now.
        Let's fund school lunch programs and breakfast programs at
    a spending level that significantly raises the quality and
    variety of what schools can afford and get rid of the junk food
    in vending machines once and for all.
        Let's fund healthy snacks and meals in daycare centers and
    after-school programs.
        Let's expand access by broadening area eligibility
    requirements for summer feeding programs and expanding direct
    certifications to eliminate redundant paperwork for families
    and schools.
        There could be no better investment, no better stimulus to
    our economy than feeding this nation's children healthy and
    well. If we give kids in this country delicious, nutritious
    food, we will instill in them a lifetime preference for eating
    healthy that will translate into vast savings in health care
    costs down the line.
        Providing the building blocks for millions of children to
    grow and develop as they should, this will mean a population of
    robust, productive adults and a more competitive America.
        Malnourished kids are not capable of vision and ideas. And
    without that, we are relegating this great nation to a future
    of mediocrity and poor health. I think we could do better, and
    I urge you today to get behind Chairman Miller's bill and make
    it happen.
        Thank you for the opportunity.
        [The statement of Mr. Colicchio follows:]

           Prepared Statement of Tom Colicchio, Chef and Restaurateur

        Ladies and Gentlemen of the Education and Labor Committee: I am
    here today to express my support for the Improving Nutrition for
    America's Children Act sponsored by Chairman Miller, and to urge you
    and your fellow Representatives to do everything in your power to find
    the funds to push this crucial piece of legislation through.
        I'm wearing a few different hats at this hearing today: First off,
    there is my public one; as host and judge of a popular television
    program, I find myself in the slightly surreal position of being able
    to comment on issues of importance to me to a public willing to listen.
    I've decided to use this to the advantage of the millions of American
    children who rely on school, preschool, after-school and summer feeding
    programs for adequate nutrition, who don't have lobbyists with deep
    pockets at their disposal advocating on their behalf.
        I'm also before you as a chef. Once upon a time my job wasn't
    public at all--we stayed in the kitchen cooking, and then early the
    next morning we trolled the farmer's stalls and fish markets to choose
    the day's food. Nobody gave a hoot what we had to say, just what we
    sent out on the plate. Today that's changed a bit, and chefs are
    frequently called upon to cook at fundraisers for food pantries and
    food-based charities to help meet the needs of those who struggle with
    hunger. As a group, we chefs have never been more active and never
    raised more money than we do now, and yet studies show that more people
    are hungry or food insecure in this country today than at any other
    time in history. It's frustrating, and has spurred me to ask * * * why?
        I'm here, too, as a business owner. At my restaurants, I have
    dozens of employees working long hours, often more than one shift. I
    understand how urgently many of them need to know that their kids are
    receiving healthy nutrition at the schools and day care centers where
    they spend a big part of each day. It is hard enough to make a living
    in today's economy; no working parent should also worry whether their
    child has had enough to eat. I am encouraged that Chairman Miller's
    bill allows for additional meals for children who are in day care
    longer than 8 hours, as so many are, or spending time in after-school
    settings. In addition, Chairman Miller's bill makes important strides
    to ensure that low-income kids don't go hungry during the summer months
    when school is out.
        I'm here before you as a father to 17 year-old Dante and 11 month-
    old Luka. My kids, like kids everywhere, are more than happy to slurp
    down junk food and empty calories--pizza, sodas, candy and deep-fried
    anything. But the fact that they would eat this whenever doesn't give
    me permission to shrug my shoulders and say, `well, that's what they
    want!' It's my job as a parent to make sure they have a variety of
    real, nutritious foods served to them at every meal so that they grow
    into robust, healthy kids capable of meeting their full potential in
    life. And yet, I hear people say, ``we'd like to improve school lunch,
    but all the kids want to eat are pizzas and burgers. If we give them
    good food they won't eat it'' Come on, people! We're the adults. It's
    up to us to do better. My kids would also happily live in front of the
    Xbox and never take another shower as long as they live. Not gonna
    happen. When I give them healthy, delicious food they eat it, with
    gusto. On a recent Top Chef episode, we challenged our contestants to
    prepare healthy, nutritious lunch for schoolchildren here in D.C. that
    was also delicious. What do you know? The kids ate it, happily, and
    they asked for seconds and thirds.
        I'm also here before you as the son of a ``lunch lady.'' My mother,
    Beverly Colicchio, worked for decades as a cafeteria supervisor in
    Elizabeth, NJ, where I was born. Elizabeth is not a wealthy town, and
    at the High School where she worked, almost 70% of the students
    qualified for free or reduced price breakfast and lunch. My mother told
    us that often the meals she served those kids was the only food they
    got all day. It was upsetting to her that the budgetary constraints
    imposed by low federal reimbursements meant that the schools couldn't
    afford much in the way of fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains,
    legumes and high quality proteins. The cheapest food, contracted out to
    the lowest bidder, was usually what was on the menu, and the kids who
    ate it didn't have the option of refusing. On a diet that may have met
    nutritional guidelines without being truly healthy and whole, we expect
    our kids to learn, behave, socialize appropriately, and develop into
    healthy teens and adults, and we are quick to label and punish them
    when they don't. Without regular exposure to real food--made from whole
    ingredients in a variety of textures, shapes, and colors--these
    children never develop a preference for healthy food, and thus
    perpetuate the cycle of poor nutrition that can lead to a lifetime of
    costly and debilitating health problems like obesity and diabetes, not
    to mention their lost potential as active, healthy citizens. Schools
    today are forced to supplement their meager budgets with vending
    machines that supply empty calories from soft drinks, and junk food. I
    ask you: how many of you here today would be content to let the bulk of
    your children's daily calories come from soda, chips, or branded fast
    food? And yet, we are sitting by and allowing that to happen for
    families who are struggling and relying on us to do better. As thinking
    adults, as fellow parents, this is an egregious abdication of our
    responsibility towards kids, and if it is at all within our means to
    fix it--and I believe it is--than I urge you now to make it right.
        Let's fund school lunches and breakfasts at a spending level that
    significantly raises the quality and variety of what schools can
    afford, and get rid of the junk food in vending machines once and for
    all. Let's fund healthy snacks and meals in day care centers and after
    school programs. Let's expand access by broadening area eligibility
    requirements for summer feeding programs, and expanding direct
    certification to eliminate redundant paperwork for families and
    schools.
        There can be no better investment--no better stimulus to our
    economy--than feeding this nation's children healthily and well. If we
    give the kids in this country delicious and nutritious food, we will
    instill in them a lifetime preference for healthy eating that will
    translate into vast savings in health care costs down the line.
    Providing the building blocks for millions of kids to grow and develop
    as they should, will mean a population of robust and productive adults,
    and a more competitive America. Malnourished kids aren't capable of
    vision and ideas, and without that we are relegating this great nation
    to a future of mediocrity and poor health. I think we can do better,
    and I urge you today to get behind Chairman Miller's bill and make it
    happen.
        Thank you.
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Mr. Rector?

    STATEMENT OF ROBERT RECTOR, SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOW, WELFARE AND
                 FAMILY ISSUES, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION

        Mr. Rector. Thank you for the opportunity to be here.
        This hearing is to examine proposals to expand spending on
    school nutrition programs. However, it is misleading to examine
    spending on one or two government programs in isolation. In
    fact, the federal government creates over 71 and funds 71
    different means-tested programs assisting low-income families,
    providing cash, food, housing and medical care.
        Most families that receive subsidized school meals and WIC
    and other programs also receive benefits from many other
    programs. A proposal to expand funding on a single program must
    be examined holistically in the context of the overall growth
    of extraordinary government spending.
        It is therefore important to consider school nutrition
    spending in the context of overall means-tested assistance to
    low-income families with children. In fiscal year 2011, such
    means-tested aid will come to an astonishing $475 billion. This
    is over $30,000 in assistance for each family with children in
    the lowest-income third of the population.
        I have spent my entire career on this type of population
    and this type of spending, and I can tell you, I have
    absolutely no idea where all that money goes. And before you
    propose spending even more money, you ought to at least have a
    reasonable accounting of where this money is currently going in
    70 different programs, all of them going effectively to the
    same population.
        At the same time, the federal budget in fiscal year 2011
    will be--the deficit will be 1.2 trillion, or 8.3 percent of
    the gross domestic product. As the national debt is now raising
    very rapidly toward 100 percent of GDP, it is quite clear that
    we are marching toward natural bankruptcy, and therefore to
    call for additional permanent increases in spending at this
    time in that budget context is extraordinarily irresponsible.
        A few other points I would like to make. There will be a
    lot of talk here about food insecurity. Food insecurity is a
    problem, but among children, it is relatively limited.
        For example, according to the last data we have, about 1
    child in 150 will miss even a single meal in a given month
    because of lack of resources within the family. Also, when you
    go to try to explain why food insecurity is occurring in
    particular families, you have to also explain why other
    families with even less income during the same period do not
    have food insecurity, and there really has been no effort to
    try to understand or explain this.
        I would also say that there is considerable evidence that
    all of the federal nutrition programs, food stamps, the school
    programs, WIC and so forth, are actually associated with
    increased obesity. The evidence on this is mixed, but there is
    a lot of research that goes in that direction.
        And even if you were to take the most positive evidence,
    which would be--on school programs, which would be the
    Mathematica study of the school breakfast program, what you
    find is that that program concluded that school breakfast had
    no effect in reducing obesity, school lunch had no effect.
    School breakfast did have a very modest effect in reducing body
    mass index, but it is equivalent to taking maybe three pounds
    off of a middle school child, and that is not a cumulative
    effect. You have to fund it over and over and over again, year
    after year.
        So what we are talking about there is the most positive
    effect that you could get from that program--and other studies
    show the opposite--but the most positive effect is that you
    would spend up to $4,000 subsidizing school breakfast in a
    population from kindergarten through high school, and the
    effect of that would be that you would get about three or four
    pounds reduction in weight each year non-cumulative.
        That is an extraordinary rate of spending, and I wonder how
    many middle-class parents would be willing to spend $4,000 over
    the course of life of the childhood in order to just take three
    or four pounds off.
        But we will find that is that that kind of empirical fact
    that shows very low effectiveness in any of these programs will
    be put up against grandiose claims about their effectiveness.
        I would say that, in respect to all of these programs, that
    the evidentiary base here is extraordinarily flimsy. In
    particular, in reviewing for this testimony, I was quite
    shocked to find that there are, in fact--even though there are
    continuing claims that school breakfast programs increase
    academic performance, there are, in fact, no studies with
    control groups that show that whatsoever, zero.
        I might contrast that to other programs here in Congress,
    such as the federal abstinence education program, where there
    are--where over 20 studies with control groups, 16 of which
    showed positive effects, and Congress just abolished those
    programs for lack of scientific evidence.
        But here we have a program that has been going for decades,
    not a single scientific study that I could find with a control
    group, let alone with random assignment, showing any kind of
    effect from this program.
        I think that that is not a legitimate basis, and it is
    irresponsible to call for greater spending in these programs
    without a better evidentiary base.
        Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Rector follows:]

          Prepared Statement of Robert Rector, Senior Research Fellow,
                            the Heritage Foundation

        My name is Robert Rector. I am a Senior Research Fellow at The
    Heritage Foundation. The views I express in this testimony are my own,
    and should not be construed as representing any official position of
    The Heritage Foundation.
        This hearing is to examine proposals to expand spending on school
    nutrition programs. However, it is misleading to examine spending in
    one or two government program in isolation. Most families receiving
    subsidized school meals also receive benefits from many other programs.
    Proposals to expand spending in a single program must be examined
    holistically, in the context of overall growth of government spending.
        It is therefore important to consider school nutrition spending in
    the context of overall means-tested assistance to low income families
    with children. In FY 2011, such means-tested aid will reach around $475
    billion, or roughly $33,000 for each family with children in the lowest
    income third of population.
        At the same time, the federal budget deficit in FY2011 will be $1.2
    trillion, or 8.3 percent of the gross domestic product. As the national
    debt rises rapidly toward 100 percent of GDP, it is clear that the
    current growth of government spending is unsustainable. In that
    context, calls for long-term increases in spending on school meal
    programs are irresponsible.
    Understanding the Means-tested Welfare System
        Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent
    vast sums on welfare or aid to the poor; however, the aggregate cost of
    this assistance is largely unknown because the spending is fragmented
    into over 70 separate programs. (See the table at the end of this
    testimony for a list of these programs.)
        Even before the present recession, means-tested welfare or aid to
    poor and low-income persons was the third most expensive government
    function. Its cost ranked below support for the elderly through Social
    Security and Medicare and below government expenditures on education,
    but above spending on national defense. Prior to the current recession,
    one dollar in seven in total federal, state, and local government
    spending went to means-tested welfare.
        Means-tested welfare spending or aid to the poor consists of
    government programs that provide assistance deliberately and
    exclusively to poor and lower-income people. By contrast, non-welfare
    programs provide benefits and services for the general population. For
    example, food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, and Temporary
    Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), the Women Infants and Children
    Food program (WIC), the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and
    the Summer Food Program are means-tested aid programs that provide
    benefits only to poor and lower-income persons. The free meals and
    reduced price components of the National School Lunch Program (NSLP)
    and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) are also means-tested. On the
    other hand, Social Security, Medicare, police protection, and public
    education are not means-tested; they provide services and benefits to
    persons at all income levels.
        In the typical year, around 71 percent of means-tested spending
    comes from federal funds and 29 percent from state funds. Nearly all
    state means-tested welfare expenditures are matching contributions to
    federal welfare programs. Ignoring these matching state payments into
    the federal welfare system results in a serious underestimation of
    spending on behalf of the poor.
        In FY 2008, 52 percent of total means-tested spending went to
    medical care for poor and lower-income persons, and 37 percent was
    spent on cash, food, and housing aid. The remaining 11 percent was
    spent on social services, training, child development, targeted federal
    education aid, and community development for lower-income persons and
    communities. Roughly half of means-tested spending goes to disabled or
    elderly persons. The other half goes to lower-income families with
    children, most of which are headed by single parents.
    Growth of the Welfare State
        Welfare spending has grown enormously since President Lyndon B.
    Johnson launched the War on Poverty. Welfare spending was 13 times
    greater in FY 2008, after adjusting for inflation, than it was when the
    War on Poverty started in 1964. (See chart 1.) Means-tested welfare
    spending was 1.2 percent of the gross domestic product (GDP) when
    President Johnson began the War on Poverty. In 2008, it reached 5
    percent of GDP. Over the next decade, total means-tested spending is
    likely to average roughly 6 percent of GDP.

        Annual means-tested welfare spending is more than sufficient to
    eliminate poverty in the United States. The U.S. Census Bureau, which
    is in charge of measuring poverty and inequality in the nation, defines
    a family as poor if its annual income falls below official poverty
    income thresholds. If total means-tested welfare spending were simply
    converted into cash benefits, the sum would be nearly four times the
    amount needed to raise the income of all poor families above the
    official poverty line.
        Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent
    $15.9 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars) on means-tested
    welfare. In comparison, the cost of all other wars in U.S. history was
    $6.4 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars).
    Welfare Spending Increases under the Obama Administration
        Table 1 shows the growth in means-tested spending over recent
    years. In FY 2007, total government spending on means-tested welfare or
    aid to the poor was a record high $657 billion. By fiscal year 2011,
    total government spending on means-tested aid will rise to $953
    billion, nearly a fifty percent increase.

                                        TABLE 1.--GROWTH IN MEANS-TESTED SPENDING
                                                [In billions of dollars]
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
                                                                       Federal
                                                                       Spending      State Spending   Total Spending
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    FY 2007......................................................          $468.7           $189.2           $657.9
    FY 2008......................................................          $522.3           $191.6           $714.1
    FY 2009......................................................          $612.7           $167.2           $779.9
    FY 2010......................................................          $695.3           $192.7           $888.0
    FY 2011......................................................          $735.4           $218.0           $953.4
    ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

        President Obama's increase in federal means-tested welfare spending
    during his first two years in office is two and a half times greater
    than any previous increase in federal welfare spending in U.S. history,
    after adjusting for inflation.
        Supporters of the President's spending might counter that these
    spending increases are merely temporary responses to the current
    recession. But that is not the case; most of Obama's spending increases
    are permanent expansions of the welfare state. According to the long-
    term spending plans set forth in Obama's FY 2010 budget, combined
    federal and state spending will not drop significantly after the
    recession ends. In fact, by 2014, welfare spending is likely to equal
    $1 trillion per year.
        According to President Obama's budget projections, federal and
    state welfare spending will total $10.3 trillion over the next 10 years
    (FY 2009 to FY 2018). This spending will equal over $100,000 for each
    taxpaying household in the U.S.
    Means-Tested Welfare Spending on Lower-Income Persons
        With more than 70 overlapping means-tested programs serving
    different low-income populations, it is difficult to determine the
    average level of benefits received by low-income persons. One way of
    estimating average welfare benefits per recipient would be to divide
    total means-tested spending by the total number of poor persons in the
    United States. According to the Census Bureau, there were 39.8 million
    poor persons in the U.S. in 2008, the most recent year for which data
    are available. An additional 1.5 million persons lived in nursing
    homes. (These individuals, though mostly poor, are not included in the
    annual Census poverty and population survey.) Total means-tested
    spending in 2008 was $708 billion. If this sum is divided by 41.3
    million poor persons (including residents in nursing homes), the result
    is $17,100 in means-tested spending for each poor American.
        However, this simple calculation can be misleading because many
    persons with incomes above the official poverty levels also receive
    means-tested aid. Although programs vary, most means-tested aid is
    targeted to persons with incomes below 200 percent of poverty. Thus, a
    more a accurate sense of average total welfare spending per recipient
    can be obtained, if total welfare aid is divided among all persons
    within this larger group. Dividing total means-tested aid by all
    persons with incomes below 200 percent of poverty results in average
    welfare spending of $7,700 per person, or around $30,000 for a family
    of four.
    Means-tested Spending on Families with Children
        Another way of examining spending levels is to look at welfare
    spending on families with children. In FY 2011, total means-tested
    spending will be $950 billion. About half of this spending ($475
    billion) will go to families with children. (Around one-third of this
    spending will go to medical care.)
        If the $475 billion in welfare spending were divided equally among
    the lowest income one third of families with children (around 14
    million families), the result would be around $33,000 per low income
    family with children.
        In addition, most of these lower-income families have earned
    income. Average earnings within the whole group are typically about
    $16,000 per year per family (though in the midst of a recession,
    earnings will be lower). If average welfare aid and average earnings
    are combined, the total resources is likely to come to between $40,000
    and $46,000 for each lower-income family with children in the U.S. It
    is very difficult to reconcile this level of spending with conventional
    claims that millions of lower-income families are chronically hungry,
    malnourished, or ill-housed.
    Food Insecurity in America
        Last November, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released
    its annual report on household food security in the United States.
    According to USDA, some 17 million households, or 14.6 percent of all
    households, experienced ``household food insecurity'' at some point in
    2008 and some 49 million people lived in households with some form of
    food insecurity.\1\ Most of these households were low income.
        While these numbers sound ominous, it is important to understand
    what ``food insecurity'' means. According to the USDA, ``food
    insecurity'' is usually a recurring and episodic problem rather than a
    chronic condition.\2\ In 2008, around two-thirds of food insecure
    households experienced ``low food security,'' meaning that these
    households managed to avoid any disruption or reduction in food intake
    throughout the year but were forced by financial pressures to reduce
    ``variety in their diets'' or rely on a ``few basic foods'' at various
    times in the year.\3\
        According to the USDA, the remaining one-third of food insecure
    households (around 6 percent of all households) experienced ``very low
    food security,'' meaning that at least once in the year their actual
    intake of food was temporarily reduced due to a lack of funds for food
    purchase.\4\ At the extreme, 1.5 percent of all adults in the U.S. went
    an entire day without eating at least once during 2008 due to lack of
    funds for food.\5\
        Poor children are generally shielded from food insecurity. Around
    one million children, or 1.5 percent of all children experienced ``very
    low food security'' and reduced food intake at least one time during
    2008.\6\ Around one child in 150 missed at least one meal in the
    preceding month due to food shortages in the household.\7\ One child in
    a thousand went a whole day without eating at least once during the
    year because the family lacked funds for food.\8\
        Political advocates proclaim that the USDA reports suggest there is
    widespread chronic hunger in the U.S.\9\ But the USDA clearly and
    specifically does not identify food insecurity with the more intense
    condition of ``hunger,'' which it defines as ``discomfort, illness,
    weakness, or pain * * * caused by prolonged involuntary lack of food.''
    \10\
    Food Insecurity and Obesity
        While temporary food shortages are a concern, what is rarely
    discussed is that the government's own data show, paradoxically, that
    the overwhelming majority of food insecure adults are, like most adult
    Americans, overweight or obese. Among adult males experiencing food
    insecurity, fully 70 percent are overweight or obese.\11\ Nearly three-
    quarters of adult women experiencing food insecurity are either
    overweight or obese, and nearly half (45 percent) are obese. Virtually
    no food insecure adults are underweight.
        Food insecure men are slightly less likely to be overweight or
    obese than men who are food secure (70 percent compared to 75 percent).
    But food insecure women are actually more likely to be obese or
    overweight than are women who are food secure (73 percent compared to
    64 percent).
        Thus, the government's own data show that, even though they may
    have brief episodes of reduced food intake, most adults in food
    insecure households actually consume too much, not too little, food,
    over the long term. To improve health, policies must be devised to
    encourage these individuals to avoid chronic over-consumption of
    calories and to spread their food intake more evenly over the course of
    each month to avoid episodic shortfalls.
    Eating Too Much, Not Too Little
        Yet most proposed policy responses to food insecurity call for
    giving low-income persons more money to purchase food despite the fact
    that most low-income persons, like most Americans, already eat too
    much. Such policies are likely to make the current situation worse, not
    better. One commonly proposed policy, for example, is to expand
    participation in the Food Stamp program. Participation in the Food
    Stamp program, however, does not appear to reduce food insecurity.
    Households receiving food stamps do not have improved food security
    compared to similar households with the same non-food stamp income who
    do not participate in the program.\12\ Moreover, participation in the
    Food Stamp program does not appear to increase diet quality. Compared
    to similar households who do not receive food stamps but have the same
    non-food stamp income, households receiving food stamps do not consume
    more fruits and vegetables but do, unfortunately, consume more added
    sugars and fats.\13\
        While the Food Stamp program has little positive effect on food
    quality, considerable evidence indicates that the program has the
    counter-productive effect of increasing obesity. For example, a recent
    study funded by USDA found that low-income women who participate in the
    Food Stamp program are substantially more likely to be obese than women
    in households with the same non-food stamp income who did not receive
    food stamps. Over the long term, food stamp receipt was found to
    increase obesity in men as well.\14\ While other research has failed to
    confirm this link between food stamps and obesity, the possibility that
    this program has harmful effects remains quite real.\15\
        Similarly, the research on the relationship between school meal
    programs and obesity is mixed and cautionary. Some research indicates
    that participation in the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) leads to
    higher obesity among young students in kindergarten and first
    grade.\16\ Other studies have found this effect for the School
    Breakfast Program (SBP) but not for the NSLP.\17\
    Dispelling Misconceptions
        Developing a rational policy on nutrition and poor Americans will
    require dispelling common misconceptions concerning poverty and
    obesity. For example, one common misconception is that poor people
    become obese because they are forced, due to a lack of financial
    resources, to eat too many junk foods that are high in fat and added
    sugar. According to this theory, poor persons struggle to obtain
    sufficient calories to maintain themselves and are forced to rely on
    junk foods as the cheapest source of calories, but because junk foods
    have high ``energy density'' (more calories per ounce of food content),
    these foods paradoxically induce a tendency to overeat and thereby
    cause weight gain.\18\
        One problem with this theory is that junk foods are not a
    particularly cheap source of calories. For example, soft drinks are
    high in added sugar and are generally associated with weight gain, but
    as a source of calories, brand name soft drinks such as Coca-Cola and
    Pepsi are often more expensive (in terms of calories per dollar) than
    milk. Snack foods such as potato chips and donuts cost two to five
    times more per calorie than healthier staples such as beans, rice, and
    pasta. Financially strained families truly seeking to maximize calories
    per dollar of food expenditure would focus not on junk and snack foods
    but on traditional low-cost staples such as beans, rice, flour, pasta,
    and milk. These foods are not only less expensive but actually have
    below-average energy density and therefore a lower potential to promote
    weight gain.\19\
        In reality, poor people are increasingly becoming overweight for
    the same reason that most Americans are becoming overweight: They eat
    too much and exercise too little. Like the rest of America, the poor
    appear to eat too many high-fat foods and foods with added sugars, but
    they do this for the same reason the average American over-consumes
    these foods: They are highly palatable. While it would be desirable for
    poor people (like all Americans) to drink fewer soft drinks and eat
    more broccoli, simply expanding the Food Stamp program and other
    nutrition programs would not accomplish that goal.
    Child Nutrition Programs and Childhood Obesity
        As noted, research on the effects of school meal and child
    nutrition programs on children's weight is mixed, with some studies
    showing harmful effects. The most positive study of the effects of
    child nutrition programs on children's weight was conducted by
    Mathematica Policy Research.\20\ This analysis found that participation
    in the National School Lunch Program had no overall effect on
    children's weight, but participation in the School Breakfast Program
    (SBP) did have positive effects.
        The study found that participation in the school breakfast program
    had no impact on obesity per se, but did reduce the average body mass
    index (BMI) of students. The research concluded that the BMI of full
    time participants in the School Breakfast Program (SBP) was 0.75 lower
    than the BMI for similar non-participating students. This BMI reduction
    is equivalent to 3 to 4 pounds for a middle school student.
        Unfortunately, the cost of the SBP (around $325 per student per
    school year) is quite large when compared to the weight loss achieved.
    This means it costs over $300 per student to produce a weight reduction
    of three to four pounds. Moreover, this weight reduction is neither
    permanent nor cumulative. A student must participate in the SBP in each
    subsequent year in order to maintain the small effect.
        The full cost for a student to participate in the SBP each year
    through primary and secondary school would be over $4,000. While the
    Mathematica study suggests that participating students may weigh a few
    pounds less in each year, $4,000 is a high price to pay for that modest
    impact. One wonders how many middle class parents would pay more than
    $4,000 so that their child could weigh a few pounds less during primary
    and secondary school. One wonders, as well, whether there are more cost
    effective means to achieve this same result.
    Limiting School Distribution of Low Nutrient Energy Dense Foods
        One promising alternative is simply to limit the amount of low
    nutrient energy dense (LNED) foods, such as soft drinks, candy, chips
    and french fries that schools provide or make available to students.
    There is accumulating evidence that the consumption of LNED foods may
    lead to weight gain among children and youth. A logical response is for
    local schools to limit the amount of LNED food offered to students.
    (There should be no limit on the choices parents make in providing food
    for their children.) Changing the composition of foods offered by
    schools may have positive results on children's weight and would not
    impose added costs on the taxpayer.
        A great many schools are already adopting this sort of policy. What
    is needed here is flexibility and experimentation. There is, no need
    for mandatory national standards, nor for the U.S Congress to assume
    the role of national ``cookie czar'', dictating food policies for local
    schools. Such a usurpation of power would be unwise and unwarranted.
    Conclusion
        Fiscal policy with respect to the poor must be viewed holistically.
    It is misleading to examine a few nutrition programs in isolation as if
    no other aid were given to low income children. This is particularly
    important since financial resources are fungible within each household.
    One extra dollar in government spending on food and child nutrition
    programs for a family will rarely result in one extra dollar of food
    expenditure by the family. Instead, the main effect may be to displace
    cash spending on food within the household.
        The federal government operates 71 different means-tested aid
    programs, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and social
    services to poor and low income families. In FY2011, government will
    spend around $475 billion on means-tested aid for families with
    children. This amounts to over $30,000 for each low income family with
    children. At the same time, the federal budget deficit in FY2011 will
    be $1.2 trillion, or 8.3 percent of gross domestic product. The nation
    simply cannot afford the current level of spending. In this context,
    the call for even more funding for school nutrition programs is
    unsupportable.
        Moreover, there is little or no evidence suggesting that government
    spending on child nutrition programs can be a cost effective means of
    reducing overweight and obesity. Instead, reducing consumption of low
    nutrient energy dense foods may be a promising means to limit weight
    gain among children. Schools can accomplish this by limiting the amount
    of such food they provide to students. This can be accomplished without
    added costs to taxpayers. The implementation of such policies should be
    determined by local schools and should not be mandated by the federal
    government.

                                    endnotes
        \1\ Mark Nord, Margaret Andrews, and Steven Carlson, Household Food
    Security in the United States, 2008., ERR-83 U.S Department of
    Agriculture, Economic Research Service, November 2009
        \2\ Ibid., p. 9.
        \3\ Ibid., p. 4.
        \4\ Ibid.
        \5\ Ibid., p.45.
        \6\ Ibid., p.7.
        \7\ Ibid., p. 47.
        \8\ Ibid,p.42.
        \9\ See Food Research Action Council, ``Hunger in the United
    States,'' January 17, 2007, at www.frac.org/html/hunger--in--the--us.
        \10\ Nord et al., ``Household Food Security in the United States,
    2008,'' p. 52.
        \11\ The shares of food secure and food insecure individuals who
    are underweight, overweight, and obese was calculated using body mass
    index (BMI) data and food security data from the 2003--2004 National
    Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The BMI cutoff points
    for underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese were calculated
    using the BMI ranges for adults as reported by the Centers for Disease
    Control. Specifically, an adult with a BMI of less than 18.5 is
    underweight; between 18.5 and 24.9 is within the normal weight range;
    between 25 to 29.9 is considered overweight; and at or above 30 is
    obese. See Centers for Disease Control, ``National Health and Nutrition
    Examination Survey,'' November 2007, at www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm,
    and Centers for Disease Control, ``About BMI for Adults,'' May 22,
    2007, at www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/adult--BMI/about--adult--BMI.htm.
        \12\ Craig Gunderson and Victor Oliveira, ``The Food Stamp Program
    and Food Insufficiency,'' American Journal of Agricultural Economics,
    November 2001.
        \13\ Parke E. Wilde, Paul E. McNamara, and Christine K. Ranney,
    ``The Effect of Income and Food Programs on Dietary Quality: A
    Seemingly Unrelated Regression Analysis with Error Components,''
    American Journal of Agricultural Economics, November 1999.
        \14\ Charles Baum, ``The Effects of Food Stamps on Obesity,'' U.S.
    Department of Agriculture, Contractor and Cooperator Report No. 34,
    September 2007.
        \15\ Michele Ver Ploeg, Lisa Macino, Biing-Hwan Lin, Food and
    Nutrition Assistance Programs and Obesity:1976-2002, ERR-48, U.S
    Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, September 2007.
        \16\ Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, ``Do School Lunches Contribute to
    Childhood Obesity?'' Chicago Illinois, Harris School Working Paper 5-
    13, October 2005.
        \17\ D.T. Millimet et al., ``School Nutrition Programs and the
    Incidence of Childhood Obesity,'' IZA DP:3664, Bonn Germany, August
    2008
        \18\ Adam Drewnowski and S.E. Spencer, ``Poverty and Obesity: The
    Role of Energy Density and Energy Costs,'' American Journal of Clinical
    Nutrition, January 2004, pp. 6--16.
        \19\ Barbara Rolls and Robert A. Barnett, The Volumetrics Weight-
    Control Plan (New York: HarperCollins, 2000), pp. 124--25.
        \20\ Phillip Gleason, et al., School Meal Program Participation and
    Its Association with Dietary Patterns and Childhood Obesity, Final
    Report, Mathematica Policy Research Inc. July 2009.
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Mr. Weill?

                STATEMENT OF JAMES D. WEILL, PRESIDENT,
                  FOOD RESEARCH & ACTION CENTER (FRAC)

        Mr. Weill. Yes, good morning.
        Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Kline, members of the
    committee, we at the Food Research and Action Center are
    pleased to have been invited to testify here today. We believe
    that the introduction of H.R. 5504 is a huge step toward
    getting a strong reauthorization this year, and this hearing
    today should create more momentum to move this important
    process forward. It is important to the nation's children--and
    to the nation's future--to move expeditiously to strengthen the
    programs.
        Those programs, of course, already are very strong. There
    is a huge research base which I don't have time to go into this
    morning on the health, early childhood development, and
    educational impacts of the program. These programs are among
    the very best public investments that this nation has. Study
    after study has shown their positive effects on reducing
    childhood hunger, but also improving health, reducing obesity,
    and improving school achievement.
        These multifaceted strengths of the program have led to
    their very wide support by the American public and also their
    bipartisan support in Congress, some of which has been
    discussed this morning. Indeed, both the House and the Senate
    bills introduced this year by the committee chairs have the
    support of the ranking member of the subcommittee, in the case
    of the House, and of the full committee, in the case of the
    Senate.
        And in the last reauthorization, then-Chairman Boehner and
    you, Mr. Chairman, as ranking member then, teamed up to produce
    a bill that passed the House unanimously. In this cycle, 341
    members of the House voted in favor of a sense of the House
    resolution supporting the president's full funding request.
        But as good as the programs are, they need to be
    strengthened. They have to be more effective to address the
    problem that nearly 1 in 5 of the nation's children lives in a
    household struggling with food insecurity. Seventeen million
    kids in the most recent data live in such households, and the
    evidence is substantial that that has negative effects on
    children's health, mental health, and learning.
        And the programs have to be strengthened to be more
    effective, because the nation also has a very serious
    persistent and growing childhood obesity problem. A strong bill
    will reduce childhood hunger and reduce childhood obesity.
        Given the short amount of time I have, I am going to focus
    on the hunger and access and participation side of the
    equation, but I want to note at the outset that getting
    children participating in the programs independently
    contributes to healthier eating. This also has been shown by a
    raft of research, has been recognized by the White House Task
    Force on Obesity in its report last month, and has been pointed
    out by the Institute of Medicine.
        So for all of these reasons, it is essential to increase
    participation by children in these programs. For example, right
    now, of every 100 low-income children who eat school lunch
    every day, only 47 eat breakfast, and only 16 children get a
    summer food program, summer food lunch on a typical summer day.
        There are a number of excellent steps in H.R. 5504 that
    will address these particular problems. I am going to go
    through a number of them just very, very briefly.
        We applaud the provisions that allow schools in high
    poverty areas to offer free meals to all students without
    collecting paper applications, that provide competitive grant
    funds to promote the expansion of school breakfast, that
    improve direct certification from SNAP and Medicaid to school
    meals, which reduces red tape while getting more children who
    are already eligible participating in the programs, provisions
    that lower the area eligibility tests for summer food to 40
    percent in rural areas, letting the schools provide meals after
    school, on weekends, and on school holidays, adding the option
    which hasn't been mentioned this morning of serving an
    additional meal or snack to children who are in childcare for
    more than 8 hours a day, strengthening policies to prevent the
    overt identification of low-income children who do participate
    in the meal programs, and reducing paperwork and simplifying
    program requirements in CACFP and in WIC.
        There also, of course, are a number of nutrition provisions
    that we support that will improve the health and well-being of
    children such as giving the Secretary the authority to
    establish nutrition standards for competitive foods. These all
    are excellent steps, and we do urge that some of them be
    expanded further. Some of the provisions in the bill are
    authorized only for a limited number of states, and we will be
    seeking as the process goes forward to get broader coverage, to
    reach more states.
        And the summer food area eligibility provision only applies
    to rural areas. We believe that it should be broadened out to
    suburban and urban areas, as well, as Mr. Courtney discussed
    earlier this morning.
        And one particular priority for us which also is in
    Secretary Vilsack's written testimony as a priority as the bill
    moves forward is expanding to all states the after-school meal
    program that currently is available only in 13 states and the
    District of Columbia.
        Children whose parents are working long or non-traditional
    hours, perhaps in a restaurant, and who are struggling often
    with low wages, need access to nutritious suppers when the
    children are in care late in the day and on weekends and during
    school holidays.
        But ultimately the key point here is that 5504 is an
    excellent bill, and we applaud your work, Mr. Chairman. We urge
    you, Mr. Chairman and the committee members, to mark up and
    report out the bill and to include the additional program
    improvements we have indicated as soon as possible. This bill
    will move the nation towards the goals we all have of ending
    childhood hunger and dramatically reducing childhood obesity,
    and we need it this year.
        Thank you.
        [The statement of Mr. Weill follows:]

                Prepared Statement of James D. Weill, President,
                        Food Research and Action Center

        Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee: We at the Food Research
    and Action Center are pleased to have been invited to testify today on
    key issues in Child Nutrition Reauthorization. The introduction of H.R.
    5504, in particular, is a huge step toward getting a strong
    reauthorization this year, and having this hearing at this juncture
    will hopefully create strong momentum to move the process forward and
    finish it with the best possible outcome.
        As the Committee knows, it is important to the nation's children--
    and to the nation's future--to move expeditiously to strengthen the
    child nutrition programs. Those programs, of course, already are very
    strong, with a range of positive outcomes--they are among the very best
    public investments in children that this nation has.
        Study after study has shown that the programs not only reduce
    childhood hunger, but they improve health, early child development and
    school achievement.
         For low-income schoolchildren, the school lunch and
    breakfast programs reduce hunger and obesity, provide a substantial
    share of the key nutrients children need each day, reduce school nurse
    visits and improve attendance, student behavior, educational
    achievement, and test scores.
         The out-of-school time nutrition programs (summer food and
    afterschool food) draw hungry children into school-based and community-
    based programs that keep them safe and engaged, reduce obesity, and
    provide basic nutrients at key times when children can't get them from
    school meals programs. Food insecurity among families with children
    increases in the summer, as does children's weight gain. The summer
    food program helps avert these bad summer outcomes. Afterschool and
    summer food dollars help make out-of-school time programming
    sustainable.
         The Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) pays for
    food for low-income children in Head Start, child care centers, and
    family child care. It improves preschoolers' nutrition, reduces
    obesity, strengthens the quality of care, and, in some states, is the
    only monitor of family child care for many children.
         Participation of women, infants and young children in the
    WIC program boosts rates of prenatal care, reduces low birthweight and
    infant mortality, reduces childhood anemia and obesity, and saves money
    in health systems.
        It would take a few days rather than a few minutes to go through
    the research on this, so I will just point to the most recent example--
    a report last week in the Journal of Policy Analysis and Management by
    Dr. Peter Hinrichs finding that participation in the National School
    Lunch Program leads to a significant increase in educational attainment
    and opportunity.
        The versatile strengths of the programs have led to their very wide
    support by the American public, as seen most recently in the poll by
    the Child Nutrition Initiative, which found that 83 percent of
    Americans support or strongly support expanding the Child Nutrition Act
    to cover more children and provide healthier food, and have led as well
    to broad bipartisan support among policymakers. Indeed, it is not an
    accident that both the House and the Senate bills introduced this year
    by the committee chairs have the support of the ranking member of the
    subcommittee (in the House) and of the committee (in the Senate). That
    is a testament to great personal leadership in both parties, but it is
    also a manifestation of the importance of the reach and positive impact
    of the programs.
        This bipartisanship is a tradition in child nutrition. Indeed, in
    the last reauthorization then-Chairman Boehner and then-Ranking Member
    Miller teamed up to produce a bill that passed the House unanimously.
    In this reauthorization cycle, 341 members of the House recently voted
    in favor of an amendment expressing the sense of Congress supporting
    President Obama's $10 billion over 10 years funding request for child
    nutrition reauthorization.
        But the programs, as good as they are, need to be strengthened
    further. They have their shortcomings, and those problems need to be
    fixed both because America's children need stronger programs, and
    because the existing structural strengths give them the potential to do
    more with extraordinary payoff for the nation.
        America's children need this first because there is far too much
    childhood hunger and food insecurity. Even before the recession 12.4
    million children in the U.S. lived in food insecure households,
    according to the official federal data. In 2008, at the front end of
    the recession, that number rose to 16.7 million. The government hasn't
    released 2009 data yet, but the Food Research and Action Center's
    analysis of a large Gallup poll showed that in 2009, 24.1 percent of
    households with children reported that there have been times in the
    past twelve months when they did not have enough money to buy food that
    they or their family needed.
        ``Reading, Writing and Hungry,'' a report written by FRAC and
    Children's Health Watch for the Partnership for America's Economic
    Success, points out that ``[f]ood insecurity in early childhood can
    limit a child's cognitive and socio-emotional development, ultimately
    impairing school achievement and thus long-term productivity and
    economic potential.'' The report continues, that ``[d]ata has shown
    that, by the third grade, children who had been food insecure in
    kindergarten saw a 13% drop in their reading and math test scores
    compared to their food-secure peers. Hungry children are also more
    likely than their non-hungry peers to suffer from hyperactivity,
    absenteeism, generally poor behavioral, and poor academic
    functioning.''
        In Feeding America's, ``Child Food Insecurity in the United States:
    2005--2007,'' report author John Cook, Boston Medical Center and Boston
    University School of Medicine, states that ``[c]hild hunger is robbing
    us of the best of America's imagination and ingenuity.'' He continues,
    ``[t]he impact of child hunger is more far reaching than one might
    anticipate. Child food insecurity creates billions of dollars in costs
    to our society. Child hunger affects a child's health, education and
    job readiness.''
        At the same time that the nation has a serious, persistent and
    growing child hunger problem, the nation also has a serious, persistent
    and growing childhood obesity problem. Childhood obesity has more than
    tripled in the past 30 years. About a quarter of 2-5 year olds and one-
    third of school-age children (including adolescents) are overweight or
    obese. Childhood obesity has both immediate and long-term health
    impacts, including increased risk factors for cardiovascular disease,
    such as high cholesterol or high blood pressure, and greater risk for
    bone and joint problems, sleep apnea, and social and psychological
    problems such as stigmatization and poor self-esteem.
        A strong reauthorization will reduce childhood hunger and reduce
    childhood obesity. To do that, it is important that Congress both reach
    many more children with the benefits of these programs, and make the
    nutrition provided through the programs healthier. We strongly support
    provisions that will reach both of these goals.
        Given the short amount of time I have, I will focus today on the
    access/participation side of the equation. But at the outset I would
    point out that getting more children enrolled in the programs
    independently contributes to healthier eating--greater access means
    less obesity.
         Just this past March, an analysis published in the journal
    Health Affairs reported that, for young children, ``subsidized meals at
    school or day care are beneficial for children's weight status, and we
    argue [in this paper] that expanding access to subsidized meals may be
    the most effective tool to use in combating obesity in poor children.''
    *
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        *Rachel Kimbro and Elizabeth Rigby, ``Federal Food Policy and
    Childhood Obesity: A Solution or Part of the Problem?'' Health Affairs
    29(3), 411-418.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
         The White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity final
    report, unveiled by the First Lady in May, pointed out that to
    ``[i]ncrease participation rates in USDA nutrition assistance
    programs'' is itself a key aspect of reducing childhood obesity. To
    support the success of this recommendation, the Task Force proposed
    that action be taken to ``ensure ready access to nutrition assistance
    program benefits, especially for children.''
         The Institute of Medicine's report, Local Government
    Actions to Prevent Childhood Obesity, recommendations also included a
    strategy to ``[i]ncrease participation in federal, state, and local
    government nutrition assistance programs (e.g., WIC, School Breakfast
    and Lunch Programs, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, the
    Afterschool Snacks Program, the Summer Food Service Program, SNAP).''
         A FRAC analysis issued earlier this year which reviewed
    ``How Improving Federal Nutrition Program Access and Quality Work
    Together to Reduce Hunger and Promote Healthy Eating'' ** summarized
    the ways in which increasing participation in school breakfast and
    lunch, WIC, the Child and Adult Care Food Program and afterschool and
    summer food can help reduce obesity.
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        **Food Research and Action Center Issue Briefs for Child Nutrition
    Reauthorization, Number 1, February 2010, available at http://frac.org/
    pdf/CNR01--qualityandaccess.pdf
    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
        Given these strengths, it is crucial to boost participation. For
    every 100 low-income children eating school lunch each day, only 47 eat
    school breakfast. For every 100 low-income children eating school lunch
    each day during the regular school year, only 16 get to have a summer
    lunch on a typical summer day. This past Tuesday FRAC released a new
    report focusing on the struggles of summer nutrition programs and
    showing that, scandalously, the nation has been losing ground during
    the recession in feeding children in the summer. When summer food
    participation needed to be rising, there instead was a dip of 2.5
    percent--or 73,000 low-income children--from July 2008 to July 2009.
        So, what are the key ways to increase participation?
        Many of them are embodied in H.R. 5504:
         Lowering the area eligibility test for Summer Food to 40
    percent in rural areas. The current 50 percent threshold is higher than
    it was in the programs' earlier stages and keeps many communities with
    significant numbers of low-income children from qualifying.
         Creating a year-round program allowing community-based
    sponsors to serve summer food and afterschool food during the school
    year through a unitary program with a single set of paperwork. The
    provision will significant reduce administrative work and red tape,
    causing more community organizations to run the program, which will
    increase the number of low-income children who receive nutritious meals
    and snacks after school, on weekends, on school holidays, and during
    the summer.
         Allowing schools in high-poverty areas to offer free meals
    to all students without collecting paper applications. This will
    increase the number of low-income children who receive the benefits of
    participating in the School Breakfast and National School Lunch
    Programs, and it will significantly reduce administrative work for the
    schools.
         Improving direct certification from SNAP to school meals
    and authorizing direct certification from Medicaid. This will allow
    many more eligible children to receive free meals and bypass the paper
    application process, making the process easier for both families and
    schools.
         Providing competitive grant funds to promote the expansion
    of the School Breakfast Program. Less than half of the low-income
    students who eat school lunch every day eat school breakfast. The
    grants will increase school breakfast participation, which boosts
    academic performance and reduces absenteeism, nurse visits, discipline
    problems, and obesity.
         Expanding the afterschool meal program so that schools can
    provide meals after school, on weekends, and school holidays through
    the National School Lunch Program. The program is needed to ensure that
    low-income children can access adequate, nutritious food at their
    afterschool programs which run into the late afternoon and evening in
    order to provide care while their parents work and commute long hours
    and hold non-traditional jobs.
         Requiring school food authorities to coordinate with
    Summer Food sponsors on developing and distributing Summer Food
    outreach materials. This provision will help increase summer food
    outreach so that more children participate.
         Adding the option of serving an additional meal or snack
    to children who are in child care for more than eight hours/day. This
    will ensure that young children who are spending more of their waking
    hours in child care on work days as parents work longer hours to make
    ends meet will receive the full complement of meals they need while in
    care.
         Strengthening policies to prevent overt identification of
    low-income children in school meal programs. This will help ensure that
    stigma/embarrassment does not keep low-income children from receiving
    the nutritious school meals that their bodies need.
         Reducing paperwork and simplifying program requirements in
    CACFP. By reducing red tape in CACFP, more low-income children will
    have access to the nutritious meals and snacks they need while they are
    in child care.
         Allowing state WIC agencies the option to certify children
    for up to one year. This will increase access for children and reduce
    paperwork for families and WIC administrators.
        In addition to the access provisions, there are a number of key
    nutrition provisions that will improve the health and well-being of
    children, including:
         Granting the Secretary of Agriculture the authority to
    establish national nutrition standards for all foods sold on the school
    campus throughout the extended school day, including the time before
    and after school.
         Adding a performance-based increase in the federal
    reimbursement rate for school lunches (six cents per meal) to help
    schools meet new meal standards for healthier school meals.
         Strengthening Local School Wellness Policies by providing
    the Secretary authority to oversee local wellness policies to promote
    improved implementation and transparency, and requiring opportunities
    for public input.
         Revising the nutrition standards for meals, snacks and
    beverages served through CACFP to make them consistent with the most
    recent U.S. Dietary Guidelines.
         Providing education and encouragement to participating
    child care centers and homes to provide children with healthy meals and
    snacks and daily opportunities for physical activity, and to limit
    screen time.
         Increasing USDA training, technical assistance and
    educational materials available to child care providers, helping them
    to serve healthier food.
        These are all excellent steps forward. As the Committee knows,
    because of budget constraints, some of these provisions are authorized
    in the bill only for some states. We will be seeking, as the process
    goes forward, to get broader coverage for these key provisions--to
    reach more states and in some instances, like the summer food
    provision, which only applies to rural areas, to broaden it out to
    suburban and urban areas. And one particular priority for us as the
    bill moves forward is expanding the Afterschool Meal Program to all
    states. The program is currently available in only 13 states and the
    District of Columbia. The program helps ensure that children whose
    parents are working long or non-traditional hours and are struggling
    with low wages can be sure that their children have access to healthy
    nutritious meals, and it helps support high quality educational and
    enrichment programs after school, on the weekends, and during school
    holidays.
        Moving forward on a reauthorization bill that provides critical
    support for low-income children can't wait. We urge you, Mr. Chairman
    and Committee members, to mark up and report out H.R. 5504, and to
    include the additional program improvements mentioned earlier--and the
    funding necessary--to strengthen the child nutrition and WIC programs.
    This will ensure significant movement towards the goals we all have of
    ending child hunger and dramatically reducing childhood obesity.
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Dr. Sanchez, welcome.

     STATEMENT OF DR. EDUARDO J. SANCHEZ, VICE PRESIDENT AND CHIEF
          MEDICAL OFFICER, BLUE CROSS AND BLUE SHIELD OF TEXAS

        Dr. Sanchez. Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, members
    of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify
    today on children's health, childhood obesity, child nutrition,
    and the importance of passing H.R. 5504. My comments are a
    summary of my written testimony.
        My name is Eduardo Sanchez. I am a father of four. I have
    practiced medicine in a federally qualified health center. I
    directed the Texas Department of Health and Texas Department of
    State Health Services over a 4-year span, and now I am the
    chief medical officer for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas, a
    division of Health Care Service Corporation, a non-investor-
    owned health insurance company that operates plans in Texas,
    Illinois, New Mexico, and Oklahoma.
        Healthy children are key for national security, economic
    competitiveness, and to bring down the cost of medical care in
    our nation. The prescription for a healthy America is healthy
    eating and moving more. The Improving Nutrition for America's
    Children Act is a vital part of getting the prescription right.
        There are roughly 10 million obese children and adolescents
    age 5 to 19 in the United States. That is more children than
    there are people in 40 of the states in the United States.
        It is 20 million children and adolescents if we include
    overweight and obesity. And the poor and some racial ethnic
    groups have higher rates of obesity than others.
        Most of these children attend public school. This bill will
    make it possible for more children in school to have access to
    the healthiest food options possible.
        The economic impact of childhood obesity is unreal and
    cannot be understated. Obese children are more likely to become
    obese adults. Obese adults are more likely to have a whole host
    of other medical conditions. Nationally, obesity-related
    medical costs are nearly 10 percent of all annual spending and
    are estimated--or were estimated to be $147 billion in 2009.
    The aggregated cost of obesity in the United States over the
    next 10 years will approach, if not exceed $2 trillion.
        In Texas, we estimated the cost of adult obesity in 2005 at
    $10 billion--that is roughly $500 per Texan per year--and
    projected that the cost would be approximately $40 billion by
    the year 2040, four times the cost, but only two times the
    population.
        The bill we are talking about today is estimated to cost
    about $8 billion over 10 years. That is less than one-tenth of
    the price of obesity in just the state of Texas over the same
    10 years.
        Arkansas has looked at the cost impact of obesity in its
    Medicaid and SCHIP programs and sees higher rates of illness,
    more doctor visits, and higher costs as early as 10 to 14 years
    old--in fact, 8 percent higher costs--and among 15-to 19-year-
    olds, 29 percent higher costs.
        The annual cost of childhood obesity in the United States
    is just over $14.3 billion. But with 4,000 children and
    adolescents who are diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes annually.
    That is something we used to call adult-onset diabetes now
    occurring in children. These costs will grow.
        I have painted a bleak picture, and you have a unique
    opportunity to make a difference. In communities across the
    country, we are seeing the positive results of comprehensive
    efforts to improve the health of children with nutritious food
    and physical activity, but these are isolated success stories
    that can only be repeated with passage of this bill.
        Schools provide a natural setting to promote healthy
    habits, but research shows that schools aren't as healthy an
    environment as they can be. Children spend a lot of time in
    school and eat 30 percent to 50 percent of their calories there
    on school days.
        In medicine, we sometimes talk about lost opportunities,
    when a child or an adult is in the office, for example, is due
    for a screening test or a vaccine, but leaves without that test
    or vaccination. Not providing children healthy food is a lost
    opportunity.
        The Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act is a
    strong bill that includes a number of important provisions to
    help shift the balance and make it easier for children to make
    healthy choices at school. H.R. 5504 will improve meal quality,
    update nutrition standards for all foods and beverages at
    school, strengthen local wellness policies, and provide needed
    resources for training, technical assistance, and nutritional
    education.
        It increases the reimbursable rate for lunches by 6 cents.
    The bill also includes a number of provisions to increase
    access and make it easier for kids to participate in child
    nutrition programs throughout the year, not just during the
    school day.
        This is a smart bill that can realize a fairly quick return
    on investment. I urge you to work with your colleagues in the
    House to secure funding and pass this bill soon, as time is
    running out and our children deserve our attention. The health
    of America's children depends on a prescription for healthy
    food and more physical activity.
        This bill will improve the quality and healthfulness of
    food in America's schools, improve the health of America's
    children, reverse the childhood obesity epidemic, reduce the
    burden of diabetes, heart and other chronic diseases, and
    therefore demand for very expensive medical care, and finally,
    improve the readiness, willingness and ability of our future
    civilian and military workforce to compete for jobs and defend
    our nation.
        I thank you for your time, and I thank you for your
    interest.
        [The statement of Dr. Sanchez follows:]

           Prepared Statement of Eduardo Sanchez, Vice President and
           Chief Medical Officer, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas

        Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, Members of the committee,
    thank you for inviting me to testify today on children's health,
    childhood obesity, child nutrition, and the importance of passing H.R
    5504 to strengthen child nutrition programs.
        My name is Eduardo Sanchez, Vice President and Chief Medical
    Officer for Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, a Division of Health
    Care Service Corporation, which operates three additional Blue Cross
    and Blue Shied Plans in Illinois, New Mexico, and Oklahoma. HCSC is the
    nation's largest non-investor-owned health insurance company serving
    12.4 million members.
        I am a physician trained in family medicine and in public health. I
    practiced medicine for ten years in Austin and served as Commissioner
    of the Texas Department of Health and then the Texas Department of
    State Health Services from 2001 to 2006. I have long been interested in
    childhood obesity and the incredible burden it places not only on
    individual children themselves, but on schools, their families, the
    workplace, governments, and, of course, our health care and economic
    systems. As Commissioner of Health in Texas, I worked closely with my
    agriculture and education state agency counterparts to address
    childhood obesity. And because the scope of my responsibilities in
    Texas included oversight of the Women, Infants, and Children program,
    WIC, I have a keen appreciation for the importance of the Improving
    Nutrition for America's Children Act. Although I will be speaking about
    childhood obesity, I want to make clear that childhood hunger and
    obesity are counter-intuitively linked. The access, availability, and
    affordability of healthy food for families are all critical factors for
    promoting health, preventing hunger, and combating obesity.
        You are, no doubt, familiar with the alarming statistics on
    childhood obesity in all of our states and in all of our communities.
    The recently released F as in Fat report from Trust for America's
    Health highlights that we have a long way to go to comprehensively
    address and reverse this epidemic. And sadly, wide disparities remain
    among different racial and ethnic groups. There are roughly 10 million
    obese children and adolescents age 5 to 19 in the United States. That
    is more children than there are people in each of 40 states across the
    country.
        In my home state of Texas, the incidence of obesity is higher than
    the national average--in fact, we rank seventh in obesity rate among 10
    to 17 year olds--tipping the scales at over 20% compared to the
    national average of about 16%.\1\ And, while all categories of children
    are impacted, the poor, African Americans, Hispanics, American Indians,
    and Pacific Islanders are disproportionately more overweight and obese
    than their white counterparts. In a state like Texas, with a
    dramatically shifting demographic profile and significant numbers of
    families and children in poverty, we feel this burden even more. This
    has tremendous relevance nationwide, as the demographic profile of our
    communities, our states, and indeed, our nation, shifts.
        Obesity threatens the health of our young people, their future
    potential, and our nation's global competitiveness. Obese children miss
    more days of school than their healthy-weight peers.\2\ They're at
    increased risk for a variety of serious health conditions, including
    asthma, heart disease and type 2 diabetes.\3\ Some experts warn that if
    obesity rates continue to climb, today's young people may be the first
    generation in American history to live sicker and die younger than
    their parents' generation.\4\ And as we have heard from Major General
    Monroe, childhood obesity is threatening our military readiness. The
    27% who are too overweight to serve in our military did not become so
    overnight, and they represent our entry level workforce. Obese children
    become obese adults. If current trends continue, that 27% cohort of
    young people becomes more overweight with each passing decade.
    Childhood obesity challenges local, state, and national budgets and
    will put U.S. businesses at a competitive disadvantage by reducing
    worker productivity and increasing health care costs.\5\
        The impact of obesity on public health and children's well-being is
    real and bears significant cost. From a national perspective, obesity-
    related medical costs are nearly 10 percent of all annual medical
    spending\6\ and were estimated to be $147 million in 2009.\7\ Very
    conservatively speaking, the aggregated cost of obesity in the United
    States over the next ten years will approach, if not exceed, two
    trillion dollars. Put another way, in the state of Texas, we estimated
    the cost of obesity in 2005 at $10 billion (a cost of $500 per Texan
    per year) and projected that the cost would be approximately $40
    billion in 2040--a quadrupling of the cost but only a doubling of the
    population. The bill we are talking about today is estimated to cost
    about $8 billion dollars over 10 years--that is less than one tenth the
    cost of obesity in just the state Texas over the same ten years!
        Our sister state, Arkansas has examined the cost of obesity among
    its own state employees--something every employer (including government
    agencies and large corporations) should consider. For the State of
    Arkansas, the yearly claims cost associated with obesity now exceeds
    that of tobacco, with obese employees costing over 50% more than their
    counterparts who don't smoke, have a normal BMI, and do some
    exercise.\8\
        These costs start early in life. Arkansas has looked at the cost
    impact in its Medicaid and SCHIP programs and sees higher rates of
    illness, more physicians' visits, and increases in costs as early as 10
    to 14 years of age.\9\
        For the nation, childhood obesity is associated with annual
    prescription drug, emergency room, and outpatient costs of $14.1
    billion, plus inpatient costs of $237.6 million.\10\ Given that
    approximately 4000 children and adolescents are diagnosed with type 2
    diabetes annually in the United States,as a consequence of childhood
    obesity, these costs will grow significantly.\11\
        I realize that I have painted a bit of a bleak picture of the
    health of America's children, about child obesity, and the threat it
    poses not only to children, but to our nation's well being. But I am
    hopeful. With the nation's attention on health costs, the recent
    passage of health care reform legislation with an emphasis on
    prevention and wellness, First Lady Michelle Obama's focus on childhood
    obesity, the report from the White House Task Force on Childhood
    Obesity and the phenomenal efforts of the private sector such as the
    Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and advocates across the country, we
    have a unique opportunity to make a difference. And we are beginning to
    see the positive results of comprehensive efforts to improve the health
    of children with nutritious food and physical activity in communities
    and states across the country. Of particular interest is research from
    the Diabetes Prevention Project that shows that healthy eating and
    regular physical activity can reduce the likelihood of developing
    diabetes in adults by over 50%.
        Healthy eating and physical activity promote heart health, bone
    health, and prevent diabetes in children, and schools provide a natural
    setting to promote healthy habits. Given that kids spend so much time
    there and eat 30-50% of their calories there on school days, we have a
    captive audience. The research shows that fit kids are smart kids--
    promoting health in children improves academic performance, behavior,
    and reverses childhood obesity. Having access to healthy food is an
    important aspect of promoting children's health.
        Addressing the challenges of poor nutrition and obesity will take
    action from all levels of government, businesses, health care
    organizations, public health advocates, schools, families, and
    individuals--we all have a stake in making real changes, including hard
    choices, to improve the health of this generation and generations of
    children to come. The child nutrition and WIC programs are critical
    tools for making this change.
        Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas (BCBSTX) is pleased to be a
    part of the system response to childhood obesity in Texas. BCBSTX and
    HCSC take the long view when making commitments to programs such as
    those focused on childhood obesity. While addressing this problem today
    may not provide an immediate return on investment in the traditional
    sense, we fully understand the generational impact of action or
    inaction when it comes to childhood obesity.
        In the school environment, we have supported OrganWise Guys, a
    program that brings science-based nutrition, physical activity, and
    other lifestyle behavior messages to children in school settings and
    effects healthy changes, and we are providing modest financial support
    to the school district in Seguin, Texas to provide the Coordinated
    Approach to Child Health (CATCH) program, another evidence-based
    coordinated school health program.
        We provide financial support to MarathonKids, a program that
    encourages physical activity and healthy eating among elementary school
    children in Texas. It is one of the arrows in the quiver to promote
    health and prevent childhood obesity. More than 100,000 children
    participate in this four month program in Texas. We are supporting
    MEND, a community-based, family-centered childhood obesity treatment
    program in Dallas, Texas provided through a partnership with the YMCA.
    We are in the second phase of providing the Blue Cross and Blue Shield
    Association Pediatric Obesity and Diabetes Prevention Toolkit for
    physicians and their patients in Texas. As a health plan, we are
    addressing adult overweight and obesity in the workplace and at home.
    We understand that the key to better health overall is living healthy
    by eating smart and moving more.
        So, here we sit today, debating and discussing one of the most
    important pieces of legislation that, if enacted--let me restate that--
    when enacted, has the potential to impact millions of our nation's
    children in a positive way. I applaud you, Mr. Chairman, your
    Committee, and your staff for your leadership. The ``Improving
    Nutrition for America's Children Act'' (H.R. 5504) is a strong bill
    that includes a number of important provisions to help shift the
    balance and make it easier for children to make healthy choices at
    school.
        More than 50 years ago, our nation launched the National School
    Lunch Program. Interestingly, the language that characterized the
    rationale for the policy and program in 1946 is still quite relevant
    today:\12\
        ``The educational features of a properly chosen diet served at
    school should not be under-emphasized. Not only is the child taught
    what a good diet consists of, but his parents and family likewise are
    indirectly instructed.''
        ``It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress, as a measure
    of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the
    Nation's children and to encourage the domestic consumption of
    nutritious agricultural commodities and other food. * * *''
        H.R. 5504 will improve meal quality, update nutrition standards for
    all foods and beverages at school, strengthen local wellness policies,
    and provide needed resources for training, technical assistance and
    nutrition education. The bill also includes a number of provisions to
    increase access and make it easier for kids to participate in child
    nutrition programs throughout the year--not just during the school day.
    And program access goes hand-in-hand with healthy food and beverages
    choices. For example, improving meal quality and reducing unhealthy
    options in vending machines often results in increased participation in
    school meal programs--a win-win situation. In Texas, Susan Combs,
    former Commissioner of Agriculture, understood that relationship and I
    know that Jim Weill will talk about important investments to improve
    access.
    Meal Quality
        While schools across the country are working hard to provide
    nutritious meals to children, inadequate reimbursement rates and
    limited training and technical assistance hamper their efforts. In
    fact, the majority of meals served in schools today fail to meet the
    2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. For example, in the 2004-2005
    school year, nearly one-third of schools served whole milk, one of the
    largest sources of saturated fat in children's diets. An analysis by
    USDA of school food service operations across the country found that
    French fries were one of the most frequently offered vegetables to
    students, regardless of grade. Only 5 percent of schools offered whole-
    grain breads, and a majority of schools offered only a limited variety
    of fruits and vegetables.\13\ This bill goes a long way in improving
    meal quality. First and foremost, it calls for increasing the
    reimbursement rate for lunches by 6 cents. It also provides much needed
    training and technical assistance resources to food service operators,
    replaces high fat milk with healthier low fat options, strengthens
    accountability and program transparency, and continues efforts to
    improve commodities.
    National School Nutrition Standards
        This bill grants USDA the ability to update the nutrition standards
    for all foods served and sold--like those in vending machines, school
    stores, and a la carte in the cafeteria--to ensure they are health
    promoting and consistent with current dietary recommendations and
    nutrition guidance. The existing standards must be revised. While a
    number of states and districts have made strides in improving standards
    for competitive foods, many fall short of current recommendations.
        According to a report by Bridging the Gap, in the 2007--08 school
    year (the latest year for which we have data), 62% of public elementary
    school students were able to purchase competitive foods or beverages
    through school stores, vending machines and a la carte cafeteria lines.
    Such venues typically offered less-healthy items. The picture is worse
    for middle and high schools.\14,15\
    Training, Technical Assistance and Nutrition Education
        I cannot underscore the importance of training and technical
    assistance resources, as well as nutrition education and promotion
    priorities outlined in the bill. We all get that improving meal quality
    and providing only healthy options are key--what we sometimes forget is
    the work behind the scenes to make sure that food service operators
    have the skills and knowledge to make needed changes, and that kids are
    given opportunities to fully benefit from healthier options through
    education and promotion. The old saying ``If you build it they will
    come'' may work for baseball fields but we know it does not work for
    kids and food. How many times have we all tried to get our kids to eat
    the healthier options only to find it hidden under the table or thrown
    in the trash? It does no good to invest in improving meal quality
    without also investing in the necessary training, technical assistance
    and nutrition education and promotion that go hand-in-hand with
    increased reimbursement rates and meal standards.
    Local Wellness Policies
        H.R. 5504 builds on the local wellness policies introduced in the
    last reauthorization and calls on school districts to implement their
    policies in a transparent way that involves parents. The bill also
    ensures there is a wellness committee for each school district so that
    the success of the wellness policies are periodically reviewed and
    updated as necessary. This particular piece is important and consistent
    with our experience in Texas where every independent school system is
    required by law to have a School District Health Advisory Council
    (SHAC). SHAC's are often the entity tasked with developing and
    implementing local wellness policies and provide a permanent
    infrastructure to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of the
    policies. This has worked well in Texas and it is important to carry
    this nation-wide as H.R. 5504 proposes.\16\ The bill further dedicates
    funding to the USDA to provide technical assistance to districts to
    assist them in overcoming challenges to establishing and implementing
    effective policies.
        I know you and your colleagues have many pressing issues these days
    but renewal of the child nutrition programs cannot wait any longer--
    this has already been delayed for more than a year and our children's
    health and well-being cannot be put on hold. This is a smart bill and I
    urge you to work with your colleagues in the House to secure funding
    and pass this bill soon--time is running out and our children deserve
    our attention. The health of America's children depends on a
    prescription for healthy food and more physical activity. This bill can
    play a significant role in improving the health of America's children,
    reversing the childhood obesity epidemic, reducing the burden of
    diabetes, heart and other chronic diseases and demand for expensive
    medical care, and finally, improving the readiness, willingness, and
    ability of our future civilian and military workforce--to compete and
    defend our nation.
        I thank you for the time and your interest.
                                    endnotes
        \1\ F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future, June 2010
        \2\ Geier, A, Foster G, Womble L, et al. ``The Relationship Between
    Relative Weight and School Attendance Among Elementary
    Schoolchildren.'' Obesity, 15(8): 2157--2161, August 2007.
        \3\ Overweight and Obesity, Health Consequences. Centers for
    Disease Control and Prevention, 2009. www.cdc.gov/obesity/causes/
    health.html (accessed June 2009) (No authors given.)
        \4\ Olshansky S, Passaro D, Hershow R, et al. ``A Potential Decline
    in Life Expectancy in the United States in the 21st Century.'' New
    England Journal of Medicine, 352(11): 1138--1145, March 2005.
        \5\ Christeson W, Taggart AD, Messner-Zidell S. Ready, Willing, and
    Unable to Serve. Washington, DC: Mission: Readiness, 2009.
        \6\ F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America's Future, June 2010
        \7\ Finkelstein E, Trogdon J, Cohen J, Dietz W. ``Annual Medical
    Spending Attributable to Obesity: Payer- and Service-Specific
    Estimates.'' Health Affairs, 28, July 2009.
        \8\ Unpublished data, Arkansas Center for Health Improvement.
        \9\ Card-Higginson P, Thompson JW, Shaw JL, Lein S. Cost and health
    impact of childhood obesity among Medicaid/SCHIP enrollees. 2008
    AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting, Washington, DC, June 9, 2008.
        \10\ Cawley J. ``The Economics of Childhood Obesity.'' Health
    Affairs, Vol. 29 (No. 3): 364-371, 2010.
        \11\ Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes
    Fact Sheet, 2007. Atlanta, Ga: US Dept of Health and Human Services;
    2007.
        \12\ http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/AboutLunch/
    ProgramHistory.htm
        \13\ Condon E, Crepinsek M, Fox M. School Meals: ``Types of Foods
    Offered to and Consumed by Children at Lunch and Breakfast.'' Journal
    of the American Dietetic Association, 109(2): S67-S78, February 2009.
        \14\ Chriqui JF, Schneider L, Chaloupka FJ, Ide K and Pugach O.
    Local Wellness Policies: Assessing School District Strategies for
    Improving Children's Health. School Years 2006-07 and 2007-08. Chicago,
    IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute for
    Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2009.
        \15\ Turner L, Chaloupka FJ, Chriqui JF and Sandoval A. School
    Policies and Practices to Improve Health and Prevent Obesity: National
    Elementary School Survey Results: School Years 2006--07 and 2007--08.
    Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute
    for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago,
    2010.
        \16\ http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/schoolhealth/sdhac.shtm
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        General Monroe?

     STATEMENT OF PAUL D. MONROE, MAJOR GENERAL, U.S. ARMY (RET.),
             EXECUTIVE ADVISORY COUNCIL, MISSION: READINESS

        MG Monroe. Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, thank you
    for this opportunity.
        My name is Paul Monroe, and I am a retired Major General. I
    served this great nation for over 48 years in the United States
    Army and the California Army National Guard. Currently, I am
    the founder and principal of Monroe Executive Associates, which
    advises developing organizations on leadership and diversity.
        I am testifying today on behalf of Mission: Readiness, a
    national nonprofit organization of over 150 retired admirals
    and general officers who are dedicated to ensuring our nation's
    continued security and prosperity through smart investments in
    the upcoming generation of American children.
        I have written remarks that I would submit for the record.
    For the next few minutes, I would like to tell the committee
    members why more than 150 retired generals and admirals feel so
    strongly about this bill and its importance to our future
    military readiness.
        Make no mistake: Childhood obesity does threaten our
    nation's security. When 1 in 4 of our young adults is too
    overweight to defend our country, then something is seriously
    wrong.
        A decade ago, only one state had 40 percent or more of its
    young adults overweight or obese. Today, that is true in 39
    states, according to the Centers for Disease Control and
    Prevention. You can see the figures for each state on a chart
    and a report we recently released with Senator Dick Lugar and
    Secretary Vilsack, ``Too Fat to Fight.''
        Military concerns about the health and fitness of our
    children are not new. The National School Lunch Act of 1946 was
    originally passed as a matter of national security. At the
    time, General Lewis Hershey and many of our other military
    leaders recognized that poor nutrition was a significant
    factor, reducing the pool of qualified candidates for military
    service.
        In the past, retired admirals and generals stood up to make
    it clear, as Secretary Vilsack said, that America is only as
    healthy as our nation's children. Now childhood obesity is
    undermining our national security, and we need to start turning
    it around today.
        The trends are truly alarming in the context of American
    military readiness. Since 1995, the nonprofit--excuse me, the
    proportion of recruits rejected during their physical exam
    because they were overweight has increased by nearly 70
    percent. Today, otherwise excellent recruit prospects, some of
    whom may have generations of sterling military service in their
    family history, are being turned away because they are simply
    too overweight.
        What can we do to address this problem? We cannot and
    should not legitimate the choices that parents make with their
    children at home. It is up to parents to decide what children
    are fed outside of school and in their packed lunches.
        But we can do more to make sure that the food and beverages
    of our schools provided to our children are nutritious. As much
    as 40 percent of a child's daily calorie intake occurs at
    school. And the school setting plays an important role in
    shaping the eating, exercise habits of our youth.
        Mr. Chairman, Mission: Readiness supports efforts by you
    and members of this committee to get new legislation on the
    books that would achieve three basic goals.
        First, we need to get the junk food out of our schools.
    Second, nourish more children who need access to healthy meals.
    And, three, educate kids and their parents to help them adopt
    lifelong healthy eating and exercise habits.
        You may hear today that the United States military is
    currently meeting its recruitment goals, and that is true, not
    only because of the severity of the recession, but also because
    of a strong sense of patriotism among many of our young people.
        However, if history is any guide, the challenges of finding
    and recruiting qualified young adults will again become much
    more challenging when the economy recovers. The truth is, we
    cannot depend on a weak economy to build a strong military.
        When you look at the long-term scenario, it is clear that
    too many young people are not reaching their full potential,
    and a major factor is what they eat and drink each day. One
    study found that even an extra 130 calories per day make a
    difference between whether a young child grows up----
        Sorry. The clock is ticking. We urge Congress to take
    action as soon as possible, since the current child nutrition
    law will expire at the end of September. It is a hopeful sign
    that the House approved a sense of Congress resolution as part
    of the defense appropriation bill supporting full funding of
    the child nutrition package, in part because it addresses the
    national security concerns of our retired military leaders.
        It is also a hopeful sign to see members here today,
    because Congress cannot afford to put this off. We cannot
    afford to raise another generation where 1 in 4 of our young
    adults is too overweight to serve the country.
        This is not just about looking good in uniform. It is about
    being healthy and fit to do the work of the nation. The grim
    reality is that we live in a dangerous world. As long as
    outside threats to our national security exist, we are well
    served to maintain a high level of military readiness.
        The admirals and generals of mission readiness are in
    strong support of H.R. 5504, and we respectful request, in the
    interests of national security, that the distinguished members
    of this committee work to move this important legislation
    toward enactment. Doing so will help improve the health of our
    nation's children and ultimately strengthen national security.
        Thank you for this opportunity to speak before the
    committee this morning.
        [The statement of General Monroe follows:]

              Prepared Statement of Paul D. Monroe, Major General,
               U.S. Army (Ret.), on Behalf of Mission: Readiness

        Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, and distinguished members of
    the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify at this hearing on
    H.R. 5504, the ``Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act.'' I am
    honored to have the opportunity to speak today in support of this
    historic legislation.
        My name is Paul Monroe and I am a retired Major General. I served
    this great nation for over 46 years in the United States Army and the
    California Army National Guard. Currently, I am the founder and
    principle of Monroe Executive Associates, which advises developing
    organizations on leadership and diversity.
        I am testifying today on behalf of MISSION: READINESS, a national,
    non-profit organization of over 150 retired Admirals and Generals, who
    are dedicated to ensuring our nation's continued security and
    prosperity through smart investments in the upcoming generation of
    American children. We are concerned by recent data from the Department
    of Defense indicating that 75 percent of all young Americans aged 17 to
    24 are unable to join the military primarily because they failed to
    finish high school, have criminal records, or are physically unfit.
    This disquieting reality threatens to diminish our military strength
    and put our national security interests at risk.
        Military concerns about the fitness of our children are not new. In
    fact, the National School Lunch Act of 1946 was originally passed as a
    matter of national security. At that time, there were legitimate
    concerns that malnourishment would render American youth unfit to
    defend the nation. Today, it is obesity that threatens the overall
    health of America and the future strength of our military. It is
    imperative that we act now, as we did in 1946, to ensure that our
    children grow up fit to defend our nation, if need be.
        Obesity is the leading medical reason young adults are not
    qualified to serve. Obesity rates among children and young adults have
    increased dramatically in recent decades. By now most of us have heard
    that in the past 30 years, child obesity rates have more than tripled.
    New data from the CDC paints an even starker portrait. In the last
    decade alone, between 1998 and 2008, the number of states reporting
    that 40 percent or more young adults were overweight or obese rose from
    one state to 39. To put this problem into perspective, today's young
    Americans between the ages of 18 and 24 would have to collectively lose
    390 million pounds in order to be at a healthy weight.
        As retired Generals and Admirals, my colleagues at MISSION:
    READINESS and I are deeply troubled by the negative effect that obesity
    is having on our ability to recruit qualified candidates for military
    service. At least 9 million young adults, or 27 percent of all young
    Americans ages 17 to 24, are too overweight to enlist. Since 1995, the
    proportion of candidates who failed their physical exams due to weight
    problems increased by a staggering 70 percent. This all-too-common
    disqualifier is limiting the pool of available recruits and eroding our
    military readiness. Make no mistake about it; the obesity epidemic
    poses a genuine threat to our national security.
        Beyond its harmful impact on the overall number of youth who are
    able to qualify for military service, obesity also imposes a great
    fiscal burden on our nation. Every year, the military discharges over
    1,200 first-term enlistees before their contracts are up because of
    weight problems; the military must then recruit and train their
    replacements at a cost of $50,000 for each man or woman, thus spending
    more than $60 million a year.
        Turning the tide of obesity in this country is certainly not an
    easy task. We do not pretend there is one single action that we as a
    nation can take to remedy this problem. However, it is crystal clear
    that one pivotal step we must take is to improve the quality and
    nutritional value of food and beverages served in our schools.
        The school setting is critical for shaping the lifelong eating and
    exercise habits of our youth. Research published in Health Affairs
    shows that as much as 40 percent of a child's daily caloric intake
    occurs at school. What children eat in school can either be part of the
    problem, or part of the solution.
        Fortunately, this Committee is poised to consider legislation that
    effectively addresses the issue of nutrition in schools. H.R. 5504 the
    ``Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act,'' includes provisions
    that will raise the quality of all foods and beverages served on school
    grounds. Specifically, it will require the Secretary of Agriculture to
    establish a new set of nutrition standards for foods and beverages
    served through the school breakfast and school lunch programs that are
    consistent with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. The
    bill will also require the Secretary to establish similar science-based
    standards for all foods and beverages sold competitively. Further, H.R.
    5504 will provide an additional 6 cent per meal reimbursement, on a
    performance basis, to help schools; make necessary equipment upgrades;
    train and hire staff; and purchase fresh fruits, vegetables, lean
    meats, whole-grains and low-fat dairy.
        Current nutrition standards for the school lunch and school
    breakfast programs have been in place since 1995. We are long overdue
    for an update.
        In addition to making improvements to nutrition standards and
    overall meal quality, H.R. 5504 also includes provisions to promote
    nutrition education. The bill will direct the Secretary to provide
    funds, equal to one half cent per reimbursable lunch served, to states
    for nutrition and wellness promotion. It will also instruct the
    Secretary to award competitive grants for the purpose of supporting
    community partnerships that are designed to promote wellness. Nutrition
    education is vital to maintaining a healthful environment for youth. In
    many cases, the habits that children form in their early years persist
    into adulthood. The journal Health Affairs reports that 80 percent of
    children who were overweight at ages 10-15 were obese at age 25.
    Properly managed, nutrition education programs can provide children and
    their families with the knowledge, skills, and motivation needed to
    make lifelong healthful choices.
        Last, H.R. 5504 includes proposals that will help simplify
    enrollment and increase access to child nutrition programs. Increasing
    access to nutritious food is equally important as improving the quality
    of school meals. While it may seem counterintuitive, it is well
    documented that hunger and food insecurity also contribute to obesity.
        Many children who experience persistent hunger are also obese,
    because they more frequently have access to unhealthy foods or snacks
    instead of regular, nutritious meals. Recent research by Rachel Tolbert
    Kimbro of Rice University and Elizabeth Rigby of the University of
    Texas at Houston, published in Health Affairs has shown that subsidized
    meals can help low-income children maintain a healthy weight.
        Increased access to school lunches and breakfasts can help remedy
    this problem by helping to ensure that children regularly get enough
    food to eat and the food they eat will be nutritious enough to help
    them develop healthy eating habits to avoid obesity.
        The grim reality is that we live in a dangerous world. As long as
    outside threats to our national security exist, we are well served to
    maintain a high level of military readiness. The Admirals and Generals
    of MISSION: READINESS are in strong support of H.R. 5504 and we
    respectfully request, in the interest of national security, that the
    distinguished members of this Committee work to move this important
    legislation toward enactment. Doing so will help improve the health of
    our nation's children and, ultimately, strengthen national security.
        Thank you.
                                     ______

        Chairman Miller. Thank you very much.
        It is the intent of the chair to recognize those who did
    not have an opportunity to ask questions of the Secretary, the
    previous panel. So we will begin with Mr. Scott, then Mr.
    Platts, Mr. Tierney, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Kildee, and then we will
    come back around to the chair and the ranking member.
        Mr. Scott?
        Mr. Scott. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Dr. Sanchez, a previous question was asked about the
    relationship of hunger and obesity. Can you explain how the
    choice of healthier foods will not only address hunger, but
    also reduce obesity?
        Dr. Sanchez. First, thank you for the question. Childhood
    obesity and childhood hunger, in my estimation, are two sides
    of the same coin, and it is the reality for children who are
    poor or in some way disproportionately affected by obesity
    because of race, ethnicity, other factors that, in those
    families--sometimes the healthier foods are the more expensive
    foods, and it is not inconceivable that a child who may
    outwardly look to be overweight or obese might go a day or two
    without having any food. And in America, hunger sometimes looks
    different than we have thought about hunger in the past.
        So those two things are not incompatible, and you can have
    a child who maybe is getting the foods that he or she ought to
    be getting during the week and perhaps on the weekend, that
    food is more difficult to attain.
        My church is seeing record numbers of families coming to
    get food assistance, and I think that that is the reality
    across the nation. But healthy--if you had a question, I
    apologize.
        Mr. Scott. No, go ahead.
        Dr. Sanchez. Healthy food is--healthful food, nutritious
    food is going to address both the issue of childhood obesity--
    of childhood obesity, because those healthy foods would be the
    preferred food choices. The Blue Cross Blue Shield association
    is working with pediatricians and family physicians across the
    nation, providing them a toolkit that has a simple 5-2-1-0
    message, which incorporates the notion of five fruits and
    vegetables a day for all kids, limited sweets, limited amount
    of screen time, 1 hour of physical activity.
        Those are healthful and healthy food messages that we are
    delivering that are meant to be the foods that one prioritizes
    over less healthy options. Healthy foods for children who are
    hungry are going to reduce hunger and promote health in the
    long run.
        Mr. Scott. Thank you.
        Mr. Weill, can you talk about the value of automatic
    enrollment to reduced--free or reduced breakfast and lunch and
    the idea of, if you have a high-poverty school, where you spend
    more in administration than you would save on the few people
    who actually pay, letting everyone have the free or reduced
    meals?
        Mr. Weill. On the direct certification question, which is
    the first one, which is taking kids who are currently receiving
    TANF or food stamps or under the bill, also Medicaid, and
    making sure that they are automatically enrolled without the
    need for a separate application in the school meals program,
    that the issues here are that there are many kids who are
    eligible under current law, but not getting school lunch,
    school breakfast because the paperwork doesn't get done for any
    number of reasons. You know, schools put it in backpacks, and
    it doesn't get home, or whatever, language issues.
        So direct certification--the bill tightens up the direct
    certification process, so many--fewer of those kids fall
    through the cracks, and we make sure that these kids who are
    already eligible are certified eligible for the program.
        The paperless proposal, which is also an excellent
    proposal--like the direct certification one--would say that in
    high-poverty areas, we would do away with paper applications
    altogether and allow school districts or bunches of schools to
    use alternative methods of determining what share of the kids
    should be free and get federal reimbursement on that basis,
    reduced price and pay.
        This has been tried in Philadelphia--it has worked well--
    where they do a household survey, so the use of census data or
    other survey data----
        Mr. Scott. Do they actually end up saving money in that
    process?
        Mr. Weill. I am sorry?
        Mr. Scott. Do they end up saving money in that process?
        Mr. Weill. Yes, it saves money on the paperwork side, and
    it increases participation in the program among eligible
    children.
        Mr. Scott. And let me ask one last question. Is the
    reimbursement rate for the meals sufficient?
        Mr. Weill. No. And the bill, which improves the
    reimbursement rate for lunch in schools that meet IOM standards
    takes an important step forward there. And as Secretary Vilsack
    indicated earlier, probably the shortfall in reimbursement is
    greater in breakfast than it is in lunch.
        Chairman Miller. Congressman Platts?
        Mr. Platts. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Certainly honored to be a co-sponsor with you of this
    legislation and the reauthorization and appreciate your holding
    this hearing. I thank all of our witnesses for being here.
        I will be fairly brief, and that is just to thank each of
    you for partnering with the committee to share your knowledge
    and the importance of this issue. I mean, we are certainly in
    extremely difficult financial times, so we have got to do a
    good job of prioritizing.
        And when it comes to domestic issues, the health and
    education of our nation's children, I think, is one of our
    highest priorities here on the domestic front, and that is what
    this legislation that we are looking at is all about.
        And I look at it as kind of preventative care. We can pay a
    little now and save a lot later and do right by the kids in the
    meantime, or we can, you know, pay less now and pay a lot more
    later and not do right by the kids.
        And so I hope that, with your assistance and your
    expertise, to help educate us committee members and the full
    House and Senate will be successful in the reauthorization and
    the advancements that are in here.
        And, Dr. Sanchez, I think you in your written testimony
    highlight what we really are talking about here in the short
    and long term. And I am going to quote just one of your
    sentences or one paragraph here about how many obese children
    and the huge percentage of our nation's children that are obese
    today--and you reference your home state, 20 percent above the
    national average of 16, and how they are more likely to miss
    school. That harms their education.
        They are at increased risk of a variety of serious health
    conditions, including asthma, heart disease, and Type 2
    diabetes, and that if we don't change the direction we are
    heading, that this generation will be the first to live sicker
    and die younger than their parents' generation. That is not
    acceptable.
        And I think what we are after here is to change that
    direction and do right by children and ultimately do right by
    every American who is paying taxes into the federal government,
    that they are getting a better return, that we do better in the
    meals we are providing.
        As you referenced, eating healthy is more expensive in many
    instances. And so we have lower income who are buying more
    processed food, less healthy and more obese, more health care
    costs, less prepared to do well in school. You know, that is a
    formula that is just not acceptable.
        And so my main point here, as I say, thanks for your being
    here and each of you bringing your perspectives, insights, and
    working with the committee as we go forward, and that we
    acknowledge the additional cost of doing right by our children,
    but also acknowledge the benefit to those children and
    ultimately to our nation, as the general reflected, the
    military readiness benefit, as well as the long-term economic
    benefit in so many ways.
        So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Mr. Tierney?
        Mr. Tierney. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Weill, I was hoping that you might address for me just
    briefly at least the issue that you testified about, access
    year round to school meals on that, and tell me--well, if you
    will speak to that. You know, how many children are actually
    currently in the summer school food program? And what are your
    thoughts about increasing that?
        Mr. Weill. The summer food program has struggled to reach
    kids, in part because there aren't enough summer activity and
    educational programs to serve the meals and in part because
    there is too much paperwork. And the bill starts to address
    these problems.
        As I said in my testimony, only 16 kids get summer food,
    summer lunch on an average day in July for every 100 who get
    school meals during the regular school year. And we know from
    the studies that both food insecurity among kids and obesity
    spike in the summer. In a way, the summer is, in a bad way, a
    control group for what happens if you don't have a school meal
    program.
        So the provisions of the bill to increase summer
    participation are important. And the rural provision in
    particular, as I indicated, we would like to see extended to
    urban and suburban areas.
        Did you also ask about after school or----
        Mr. Tierney. Would have been my next question, so go ahead.
        Mr. Weill. So many kids now are in after-school programs
    until 6:00, 7:00, or later in the evening because of their
    parents' work and commuting situation that they really need
    more than the snack that the federal government supports now.
    They need supper when programs run that late.
        And the pilot program that does that in 13 states and the
    District of Columbia we support extending to all states in this
    legislation, as well as some other provisions that are in here
    that reduce paperwork and make it easier to do that.
        Mr. Tierney. On the summer program, you have mentioned the
    rural aspect of it, but isn't the suburban area also important,
    because they have a lower concentration of poverty?
        Mr. Weill. Absolutely. I should have brought with me, we
    have on our Web site maps of every state which show where
    changing the test from--the area eligibility tests from 50
    percent to 40 percent, what areas that would add to coverage in
    the program, and that is predominantly rural and suburban
    areas, but also some urban areas, as well.
        Mr. Tierney. Thank you.
        I had a question for the gentleman from the Heritage
    Foundation. I am sorry. Your name has escaped me at the moment.
        Mr. Rector, if I could, you indicate in your written
    remarks, at least, that the poor people are increasingly
    becoming overweight because they eat too much and they exercise
    too little and they appear to eat too many high-fat foods and
    foods with added sugars. And then you go on to say that, you
    know, a promising alternative to the situation is to simply
    limit the amount of low-nutrient, energy-dense foods, such as
    soft drinks, candy, chips, and French fries that schools
    provide or make available to students.
        So that sounds like you are in favor of having some sort of
    regulation or law that applies to schools and limits that kind
    of intake. Would that be accurate?
        Mr. Rector. No. I think that that is a fairly promising
    area, although----
        Chairman Miller. Hit your microphone, please.
        Mr. Rector [continuing]. It can be greatly oversold. But
    wait. I think that this is an issue that clearly can be decided
    at the local school. I don't think that there is any necessity
    for this committee to jump in and become the soft drink czar
    for the nation, so I would strongly suggest that that is not an
    appropriate response, because we can make mistakes, you know?
        Mr. Tierney. Well, share with me what you think might be an
    appropriate response. Should there be any federal dollars at
    all applied in this direction? If so, how?
        Mr. Rector. In the--I am sorry, I didn't understand.
        Mr. Tierney. Toward the issue of nutrition in
    schoolchildren?
        Mr. Rector. Yes, I think that you need to provide some
    school assistance. However, it is very important to put this in
    an overall budget context.
        For the most part, all of these programs are discussed in
    what I call the great charade, which is a pretense that these
    programs are the only thing that stand between children and
    starvation.
        Mr. Tierney. Well, I have--I don't want to----
        Mr. Rector. There are 70 different programs that we have to
    have.
        Mr. Tierney. Excuse me. I have to interrupt you, so what I
    am asking you is, what is your plan? I know what you think the
    criticism of the existing plans are, but what is your plan
    going forward? I want to give you that opportunity.
        Mr. Rector. For school nutrition, I would think that
    schools should have a continuing discussion about the offering
    of things such as soft drinks in the schools. I don't think you
    need a federal mandate on that. And I also think that you
    really ought to evaluate these programs.
        I think it is astonishing that you spend this money without
    any scientific evaluation whatsoever.
        Mr. Tierney. Well, I think it is astonishing--I just gave
    you an opportunity to tell me how you would spend the money,
    and the only thing you can----
        Mr. Rector. I would spend the money on evaluation. I just
    said that.
        Mr. Tierney [continuing]. Just evaluation. Thank you.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Ms. Clarke?
        Ms. Clarke. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.
        My question is for Dr. Sanchez and Major General Paul
    Monroe. While our discussion is focused on food and nutrition,
    I would just like to pivot for a moment to focus on fitness and
    ask a question of you.
        Recently, my office participated in a rally in New York
    City, urging Mayor Bloomberg to keep open our Douglas and
    DeGraw pool, which is affectionately known in our community as
    the Double-D pool. Double-D serves a dual purpose of teaching
    children to swim and is also a safe place for children to
    exercise.
        Having access to safe places to exercise is especially
    important in minority communities, since 25 percent of African-
    American and Hispanic children are obese.
        Fortunately, because of the community's efforts, the
    Double-D pool will remain open. However, many communities
    across America, especially inner-city neighborhoods, lack safe
    exercise spaces for children, and combating the obesity
    epidemic in our country requires both proper nutrition and
    exercise.
        So here is my question. I would like you to comment on how
    a lack of safe exercise spaces for our children impacts the
    obesity crisis facing our nation.
        Dr. Sanchez. I had the honor and privilege of serving as
    chair of the Institute of Medicine committee that looked at
    what actions local governments could take to address childhood
    obesity. And there is a compelling evidence base for thinking
    about policies that create safe places for children and their
    families to be able to move their bodies.
        There is evidence there about the value of access to
    affordable foods within a neighborhood. So I believe that the
    evidence is fairly compelling.
        I would say that, in the context of the conversation that
    we are having today, insofar as childhood obesity goes, it will
    take a comprehensive, concerted effort to move the needle in
    the direction that we would like to move it.
        Food and movement are two elements. They need to be
    happening in the schools. They need to be happening in the
    homes. And they need to be happening in communities. And that
    combination is a combination that will begin to make a
    difference. And, in fact, in some communities in the nation, we
    are seeing the needle move. As I mentioned earlier, it is
    concerted efforts. This bill is an important part of the
    foundation that will help move us in the direction that we need
    to move.
        If I can make two other points, Congressman Platts, we are
    paying now because Medicaid costs are increasing because of
    childhood obesity. In Arkansas, we are seeing that. I have no
    doubt that that is the case in other states.
        When it comes to healthy foods being more expensive perhaps
    than not-so-healthy foods, I would say this bill incorporates
    in it some nutrition education that then leads to smarter
    shopping, because there are times of year where some foods that
    are fresh are very inexpensive to purchase, but you have got to
    know what you are buying and when.
        And then, lastly, poverty links obesity and hunger. What we
    do in our communities and our schools can lead to better
    performance in schools, higher graduation rates, and in the
    long run, decreased poverty.
        MG Monroe. Congresswoman, physical fitness is extremely
    important. The Army specifically has begun to conduct a pre-
    basic training course because so many of our young people come
    unprepared, and they experience injuries while they are going
    through basic training.
        Most of us here are concerned about the fiscal
    responsibility, but consider this: 1,200 people a year are
    discharged because they are obese and out of shape. They fail
    to meet the minimum requirements, and they are discharged in
    their first term.
        It requires $50,000 to train someone in basic training, so
    everyone we lose, we have to recruit and spend that much money
    again, so we are talking about $60 million a year in costs
    there. And that pales in comparison to those that Dr. Sanchez
    just mentioned, the obesity that is related to heart disease,
    diabetes, cancer, and other health problems.
        I don't know what the answer is, as far as physical
    fitness, but that is one of the programs that seems to be
    dropped, along with art, music, when school districts try to
    make their budget. But they are doing not only the military,
    but the country a disservice by not emphasizing physical
    fitness.
        Chairman Miller. The gentlewoman's time has expired.
        Mr. Kildee?
        Mr. Kildee. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Mr. Rector, you talked about the temporary or paucity of
    results of certain nutrition programs, the BMI program. Have
    there been any studies of the possible differences of results
    between different socioeconomic groups?
        I say that, because I taught generally 10th grade, and the
    junior highs were 7th, 8th and 9th. And the first day of
    school, I could tell those who came from one feeder school,
    junior high school, and those who came from another. And I was
    generally always right on that, their socioeconomic condition,
    and that one part of where I was raised was much less than the
    other.
        Is there any study that has been made on nutrition that
    takes place up to that, say, through the 9th grade?
        Mr. Rector. You see variations in what children eat at home
    based on the parents' education, okay, that you I think see
    wiser food choices as education goes up. It doesn't correlate
    very well with income.
        But what I would say--I appreciate your question, but most
    of the problems that we see with regard to either adult or
    child obesity are pretty widespread in our society. I mean, we
    have people who are overweight in every income class and
    increasing, largely as a result of the fact that people take in
    more calories than they expend in exercise.
        And so that exercise to caloric balance is at the core of
    this. And I really don't think it is very socioeconomic in
    nature.
        One particular thing I would say is that there is a lot of
    misinformation about this, which is one thing that is very
    commonly said is, well, poor people are overweight because they
    don't have enough money to buy good foods, and so they are
    forced to buy junk foods.
        As I said in my testimony, I have researched this. Junk
    food is a very expensive form of calorie. It is not something
    that you would buy if, in fact, you are running out of money.
        I mean, we as--when you are running out of money and food
    in your household, you say, ``Oh, boy, we had better get down
    to the store and get a bunch of Triscuits and Pepsi and some
    chips so we can tide through the end of the month.''
        It is, in fact, a very expensive form of calorie. In fact,
    Pepsi and Coke per calorie cost as much as milk. So I think
    what we have there is people overeat those things, and that
    contributes to obesity, but they do it all up and down the
    socioeconomic spectrum, and it is because those foods are very
    palatable.
        And I do think that it would be good to have an education
    system that began to show to people, ``These are probably--
    these are not very good food choices.'' But I don't really
    think it is due to the fact that people, for example, don't
    have enough resources to buy more nutritious food.
        In particular, if you really are running out of food, you
    are running--you don't have enough to bring bulk food into the
    home, junk food is probably the last thing you would buy. You
    would buy basic staples which used to be more common in all
    households in the United States.
        Mr. Kildee. Thank you very much.
        Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you.
        Chef Colicchio, this discussion has sort of gone back and
    forth here. Some of this is--what encourages me about this
    legislation that the committee is--we have been able to put
    together is that it really incorporates a lot of other people
    into this issue. I mean, we didn't do this without soft drink
    manufacturers, without food processors, without other people
    looking at this, because they have been receiving a message
    from local school boards and states about competitive food
    sales, about sweets on campus, about vending machines. These
    decisions are being made locally all the time, and they have
    now come in and said, ``Let's think about a beverage policy, as
    opposed to just fighting every day that we can keep a sweetened
    drink on campus.''
        But a lot of this is about presentation. You are in the
    business of presentation. And we see some, you know, small
    studies done, just one on the presentation of the food, where
    it might be placed in the cafeteria in proximity to the
    students, to the checkout, changes in the uptake rates of
    carrot sticks or celeries or fresh tomatoes or whatever it is
    that is being offered as opposed to other things on that line.
        And I assume in your business, as you try to present food
    to your customers, that is a big part of the decision.
        Mr. Colicchio. Sure. I think what is happening is that
    advertising to kids for fast food and for junk food is--we
    heard earlier testimony, just a tremendous amount of money that
    goes into it, and I think what is happening is that school
    lunch programs are starting to mimic fast food lines.
        And so things that are offered in the school lunch room are
    based on things like chicken nuggets and high-calorie, you
    know, carbonated drinks. And I think what is going--I mean,
    there is a sort of school of thought saying, well, to get the
    kids to eat more, you know, give them sort of what they want or
    what they are being told is something that they want.
        But, again, I think, as I mentioned in my testimony, we are
    adults, and we need to actually start telling our kids that
    there is a healthier alternative. You know, going to Mister
    Softee----
        Chairman Miller. That is sort of like the automobile
    industry said, ``The reason we are selling all these SUVs is
    because that is what America wants.'' No, they were selling
    them because they had four or five times the profit per
    vehicle, and it turned out they got trapped in that market, and
    we----
        Mr. Colicchio. Right, right. They are telling Americans
    what they want----
        Chairman Miller. But for the federal government, we lost
    that industry.
        Mr. Colicchio. Sure. You know, again, kids will make a good
    choice if they are given the opportunity. You know, we know it
    from--my wife and I mentor a young girl who lives in Brooklyn,
    New York. And halfway through the month, when dollars run out
    from food stamps and from SNAP programs, they are forced to get
    the least expensive food available to them, which is usually
    sugar drinks. There is a sugar drink they sell that will give
    you calories, and they are empty calories, providing no
    nutrition at all.
        We found that when we took her into our home and fed her
    things like asparagus, she couldn't believe how good it was.
    When we took her to a farm and had her pick strawberries, she
    had no idea they actually came out of the ground and that they
    were so delicious.
        And these things you don't find in school lunchrooms. You
    are finding cheap, inexpensive, high-calorie fat and sugar
    foods.
        Mr. Scott, the question that you asked about how does
    obesity correlate to poverty--I think that was the question--
    again, when you are forced to choose between a Happy Meal that
    costs a dollar, it is cheap, but there is very little nutrition
    involved, there are a lot of calories, empty calories from
    sugar and starch and fat.
        And so it is affordable, but we are providing our kids no
    nutrition at all and just a tremendous amount of calories. And
    so kids are getting more than a 2,000-calorie, you know, meal.
    That is what is making them fat.
        Chairman Miller. You know, one of the things we are trying
    to do in this legislation is to really modernize this program.
    We have a program that was really designed to force
    agricultural products through the largest consumer, I guess,
    outside of the U.S. Army on food.
        So you get corn or you get wheat and then you send it out
    and you get back a pizza, you get back a corn dog. You send out
    a whole chicken, you get back a Chicken McNugget. That works
    really well for the farming community. It doesn't work terribly
    well for the nutrition of our children.
        But as the Secretary was pointing out, with some equipment
    changes, with some alternatives, those schools now have some
    alternatives available to them at relatively low cost to
    provide fresh fruits and vegetables or more wholesome products
    from the programs than what was happening.
        And I think they were--it was easy. You know, you talked
    about your mother working in a school line. That is the program
    I went to. People were behind there making the meals from
    scratch. That is not going to happen today. Many schools don't
    have kitchens. But that doesn't mean we then have to surrender
    to high-calorie, high-fat foods in the name of our children. It
    is just not going to work.
        Mr. Colicchio. No. And, you know, it is interesting that
    early on Secretary Vilsack talked about the farm bill, because
    I think that that is something--another way to address this.
    Whole foods are more expensive for various reasons, and I think
    that the key to this is trying to get the cost of whole foods
    down.
        Why is it that processed foods are so cheap and yet whole
    foods, a head of cauliflower is expensive? It shouldn't be that
    way, and maybe that is a place for discussion in the farm bill.
        But, again, my mother was always frustrated because she
    couldn't get a hold of fresh vegetables and that she was forced
    to use a lot of processed foods. So, yes, it is--this is a
    major issue.
        Chairman Miller. Dr. Sanchez, I just want to thank you for
    your statement. And I think this is what we have been trying to
    do in this legislation. You say that addressing the challenges
    of poor nutrition and obesity will take action from all levels
    of government, business, health care organizations, public
    health advocates, schools, families, and individuals.
        I know in my area, well, Blue Cross is a big provider, but
    as is Kaiser. And both of these organizations are working with
    schools, working with their covered patients to try to develop
    this.
        You know, I think it is unfair to stand that we haven't
    solved obesity on the head of the school lunch program, the
    child nutrition programs. We have got a long ways to go in our
    community, but what we do see is a huge change in attitudes and
    education and receptivity to this message about what this is
    costing us.
        Again, as we went through this health care debate and as we
    continue to see these figures, the drivers of health care costs
    that you have pointed out, and this is an attempt to take this
    opportunity, kids are in the class, they are here, they are
    after school, and to see whether or not we can bring that
    information, we can bring some of those foods to this part of
    the day, but there are other parts of the day that families are
    going to have to take responsibility for, health providers are
    going to have to take responsibility for.
        But to put this into that conversation that is now so
    valuable in this country, along with, as many of my colleagues
    have mentioned, exercise and the needs to combine healthy
    eating and exercising and getting kids up out of the thumb
    exercises on computers or games or however they are doing that,
    as important as much of that is.
        Mr. Kline?
        Mr. Kline. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, thanks to our
    witnesses.
        I want to pick up on what the chairman just said about
    there being a huge change in attitude. Clearly, we have seen
    that. Now we know that 90 percent of schools have eliminated
    soft drinks, caloric soft drinks. You get diet soda, you get
    water, you get sports drinks, and that has been a voluntary
    effort. The beverage association took that on without any
    federal legislation here.
        I just want to touch on a couple of things, because I don't
    have a lot of time. Dr. Sanchez mentioned that this bill cost
    $8 billion. We need to keep in mind that this is some $8
    billion over and above the current about $20 billion baseline.
    There is a lot of money here.
        Mr. Weill, I think your organization is suggesting that we
    broaden these programs. This bill has numerous so-called pilot
    programs in it where there are 13 states or some number of
    states and you would like to see all states included, as I
    understand your testimony, and I am sure you realize that that
    is billions and billions of dollars more on top of the $8
    billion that is already there, so that is something we will be
    looking at as this bill comes up for markup, presumably in a
    week or 2, whenever it comes up.
        We will, of course, be looking at that, because that is an
    awful lot of money. And one of the problems when you start a
    pilot program with some number of states--of course, let's
    arbitrarily pick 13 here--that means you have got some 37
    states that don't have it, they want it, and that just leads to
    a whole lot more spending, as you go down the line.
        Chef, I mean, I am sure that when you prepare the asparagus
    that your kids, my kids, every kid would love to have the
    asparagus, and, of course, we are all envious of your skills
    and we are very grateful that you are here today.
        I hear the buzzer buzzing, so I am going to go to Mr.
    Rector, as I run out of my time, because we have had--I have
    heard a number of the witnesses and others say for some time
    that things like, ``We know from the studies,'' or, ``Studies
    show us,'' or, ``The evidence says,'' and yet in your
    testimony, you are saying we don't have a study that would
    really address this issue and show us the effectiveness with a
    control group.
        I would like to give you some time, because I know you were
    trying to respond to an earlier question by saying that your
    plan would be to know the facts before we start. So can you
    just take this opportunity, the closing minute or 2, and talk
    about the sort of discrepancy, where clearly there are
    studies--and you are suggesting there aren't studies with
    control groups--can you take some time to address that?
        Mr. Rector. Yes. In most government programs, you have
    evaluations in which you have a treatment group that receives
    the program, and then you have a randomly selected control
    group that does not receive the program. There are different
    ways of doing that.
        And then you evaluate the difference between those two
    groups in terms of the outcome. That is the way you would test
    a drug, for example.
        In these programs, that is never done. There is no control
    group. And therefore, there are very sophisticated studies that
    try to sort of synthetically assume what would have happened in
    the absence of the program, and they produce very contradictory
    results, and they are not very reliable.
        What you find is when you do a real evaluation on any kind
    of program, including programs I like, like abstinence
    education, is that a lot of programs don't have any effect. You
    do get some effect, but the effect is always far less than you
    thought, okay? So it is very easy to say, well, we have got a
    problem with childhood obesity, and if we just throw this kind
    of money in here and do this here, all these wonderful things
    are going to happen.
        But, in fact, when you find when you do the evaluation that
    you get either no effect or an effect that is a lot smaller
    than you had hoped it was going to be. And it is very
    important, before you start throwing out billions and billions
    and billions of dollars, that you actually step back and try to
    figure out what, in fact, doing this particular thing is going
    to do.
        Now, I will go back again to school breakfast. There are
    always claims about, oh, well, this is going to improve
    academic achievement. I think there is a great theory of why
    that would be. It seems plausible to me. But, in fact, there is
    not a single evaluation with a control group to substantiate
    that claim.
        And the couple that exist as alleged scientific studies
    have massive methodological problems with what are called
    selection bias that really make them laughable. And there are
    only a handful of those.
        So before you--you know, we are going bankrupt. We are on
    the path to Greece, okay? And we are spending an astonishing
    amount of money assisting low-income and poor people with
    children, again, over $30,000 per household, cash, food,
    housing, medical care, social services, not general education,
    amazing amount of money.
        And yet somehow we are told that, despite we are spending
    $30,000 for every household with children in the bottom third
    of the population, that we have kids teetering around here
    that, you know, can't study because they don't have enough food
    in their stomachs.
        I think that most of those claims are exaggerated. And if
    you--and it is very important before you start piling on more
    spending and going further down the road to Greece that you
    actually evaluate these things so that you are getting more
    effect for each dollar that you spend.
        Mr. Kline. All right, thank you.
        I yield back, Mr. Chairman.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Thank you again, Chairman Miller.
        You know, again, going through all the hearings that we
    have gone through over the last several years, and basically a
    large part of my subcommittee has been working on obesity. So a
    lot of the things that I am hearing today, we have taken those
    ideas and put them into the bill. I had five standalone bills
    that we have been able to put four of them into the main bill.
        The whole idea about the legislation that we are going
    through is a large part on education, because there has come a
    point in this country where people are not being educated about
    the food, the processed food that they are eating, which goes
    to the child.
        So this legislation also looks at, how are we going to cut
    down costs? Because there are a lot of duplicative programs and
    make it more streamlined.
        So I think that we are covering almost everything on what
    the debate is, but I will go back and say that the food that
    these children are eating is certainly raising the health care
    costs. Again--and Chairman Miller had said, that was the whole
    idea about the health care bill, to take the whole thing and
    look at it holistically.
        We have facts that children in this country, higher rates
    than ever, are Type 2 diabetes. We are seeing as a fact that
    young children are raising their cholesterol levels way above
    where they should be. So those facts alone, this bill is trying
    to look at.
        Now, I guess, you know--and we are also looking at very
    strongly not just for the federal government to be involved in
    this, but to have the partnerships. As you have done, Chef--I
    am going to say this wrong--Colicchio, and also Dr. Sanchez,
    you know, by the partnerships that you have been able to do to
    bring everybody together, again, more education than an awful
    lot of other issues.
        So I guess my question to the panel would be--especially to
    you, Tom--how do you describe your establishments, public-
    private partnerships, to make real changes in schools and to
    improve nutrition? I mean, obviously, that is what you have
    been doing. It has been very responsive.
        I will be honest with you. I am a very bad eater. But I
    started working or looking at the programs that have been
    challenging for schools, and I find it fascinating. And data--
    we will have data, because many of my schools that are already
    doing this kind of a model are working with hospitals so they
    have the data.
        And so far, the data is showing kids do better, they are
    not as restless, and they are more attentive, and overall their
    quality of life has improved tremendously. So that data is
    coming through. And, by the way, we are collecting data.
        Chef?
        Mr. Colicchio. Yes, thank you. Our First Lady sort of
    brought a group of chefs--1,000, around--to the south lawn and
    asked us to go into schools and to start educating and also
    working with local--creating local community farms.
        We are actually creating a farm in New York right now that
    will bring in probably three local public schools to use it as
    a classroom, primarily to educate. And some of the fruits and
    vegetables produced on that farm will go into the school lunch
    system, but it is really primarily to educate children on how
    food is grown and why eating--you know, making healthier
    choices translates into healthier children.
        Also, in New York City, there has been some pilot programs
    where they are providing lunches in the classroom in first
    period, not in the lunchroom. A lot of the children--there is a
    stigmatism associated with coming in early. You are a poor kid.
    And so they don't actually participate in some of the morning
    programs.
        But we are finding that, when kids come into first period
    and they are getting a lunch, that they are more attentive,
    there are less incidents where they are going to the
    principal's office for behavior issues and things like that.
        And so maybe this isn't an absolute controlled study, but
    if you go into the schoolrooms, you go into the schools and you
    talk to the teachers and talk to the principals, they will tell
    you it is working.
        Mrs. McCarthy. Dr. Sanchez, quickly, because we are running
    out of time--we have a vote--even though we don't have, quote,
    right now all the information that we need, but would you not
    agree that where we are going and going forward hopefully we
    can deal with--certainly starting from Head Start--that is
    where I believe we should start so we can prevent some of these
    kids on going to be, by the time they are in the early teens,
    not to have diabetes and not to have high blood pressure and
    cholesterol problems?
        Dr. Sanchez. I wholeheartedly concur. I think that the
    evidence base is growing. I would agree with Mr. Rector that
    the randomized control trial, which is the gold standard for
    pharmaceutical products, is not necessarily the gold standard
    for what goes on in communities.
        The evidence is building. The methodologies are becoming
    more and more sound. And the evidence is fairly compelling.
        And, again, there are success stories. There are stories of
    what you can do in Head Start that makes a difference. There
    are stories of what you can do in school systems that are
    moving the needle in the direction that we want to move the
    needle.
        Public-private partnerships, I believe, are essential. In
    North Texas, we are trying to make the case that child obesity
    is a corporate North Texas issue. And getting corporate North
    Texas----
        Chairman Miller. I am going to intervene here. I am sorry.
    I just--I wanted to get to Mr. Thompson. Thank you. The
    gentlewoman's time is expired. Thank you----
        Mrs. McCarthy. Thank you.
        Chairman Miller [continuing]. Before we leave for a vote.
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you, Chairman.
        Major General, thanks for your service to the country and
    your continued service with Mission: Readiness. Very much
    appreciated.
        Very simply, in your testimony, you explained that there is
    not one single action that we can take to remedy the problem of
    obesity in the nation, and you focused on the role the schools
    play in child nutrition. Just briefly, what is one action, one
    action, starting with the parents can take?
        MG Monroe. Well, going back a little farther than that,
    parents need to be educated, also, and just more nutritious
    diet and exercise. In the military now, what we have done,
    there is no--we haven't studied empirically. It is just the
    reaction of what is happening. We have a lot of broken bones in
    basic training because a lack of exercise and a lack of
    nutritious meals.
        The military tries to correct that. Unfortunately, we have
    also allowed fast food restaurants on military bases. And even
    the dining facilities, they have opened up that type of food
    service, if you will.
        So they have the regular balanced food. Every military
    organization has a food service officer that pays attention to
    the balance of nutrition in the food. But at the same time, we
    still have corn dogs over at the side, and it is just defeating
    that purpose.
        But if there was some way we could educate parents, maybe
    through--once a school's--through PTAs and things like that,
    that this is what is beneficial for your child, and these are
    some of the things that you can expect if they are not eating
    nutritious foods and if they are not exercising.
        Mr. Thompson. And what would be one thing, based on your
    work with Mission: Readiness, one thing? If you had a priority
    of what schools should do, what would that one thing be?
        MG Monroe. Well, some of it has begun, is to remove those
    sugared sodas that they have in the restaurant, and provide
    more healthy lunches, because a lot of kids do eat in the
    cafeteria. My wife is a retired school principal, and she was
    there when they used to cook in the kitchen. They still have a
    kitchen. And all of a sudden, in order to save money, the
    district contracted and they get corn dogs and Cheetos and
    things of that nature. And it just doesn't help the children.
        Again, as I mentioned earlier, we get rid of physical
    education programs, which we really need in order to keep our
    people healthy and to make sure that we have those folks that
    are qualified to enlist in the military, because they have had
    nutritious meals and they have had the exercise that they need.
        The first thing I would say that parents can do is get
    their kids moving.
        Mr. Thompson. Thank you.
        Mr. Chairman, I yield back.
        Chairman Miller. Ms. Chu--one question----
        Ms. Chu. Okay, I will just ask one question, which is
    research has shown that there is a strong connection between
    well-fed healthy students and achievement. And we certainly
    need to improve our lowest performing schools. And to ensure
    that our lowest performing schools that are at the lowest 5
    percent make a turnaround, it seems that it is critical for us
    to incorporate wraparound services, such as free and reduced
    price meals.
        To that end, do you--what do you think about schools
    designating the lowest performing schools under ESEA as
    automatically certified for school meal programs?
        Mr. Weill. I think it would be great to focus, given the
    limited resources, to focus more the expansions in the lowest
    income schools, so I think that is an excellent idea.
        I would just add, related to that, that in the debate, as
    Dr. Sanchez says, there is more and more compelling evidence of
    the effect of these programs. But also, the other evidentiary
    base that we have that the committee could look to is talking
    to teachers, because when these programs get into the schools,
    get into the classrooms, the teachers are the biggest advocates
    for school breakfast and school lunch and better nutrition in
    these programs.
        Ms. Chu. Thank you. I yield back.
        Chairman Miller. Thank you very much.
        Thank you for your time and your expertise and bearing with
    us during the set of votes. We are not going to make you do it
    a second time.
        It is the intent of the committee to mark up this
    legislation on the week that we return after the July 4th
    break, so just put people on notice of that. And if there are
    no further comments or questions, the committee will stand
    adjourned.
        And, again, thank you so much for your time.
        [Additional submission of Mr. Miller follows:]

           Prepared Statement of the Food Research and Action Center

        Chairman Miller, thank you for your work on the Improving Nutrition
    for America's Children Act (HR 5504) and for holding today's hearing.
        According to the Food Research and Action Center, over 15% of
    households in Washington's 2nd Congressional District experience food
    insecurity. We need to do more to make sure that every child gets the
    nutritious food he or she needs to be healthy.
        The Improving Nutrition for America's Children Act is a great step
    forward towards the important goals of reducing childhood hunger and
    obesity. It provides over $8 billion to help school districts, non-
    profits, and community organizations improve access to food for low-
    income children while giving the Secretary of Agriculture much-needed
    authority to strengthen nutritional requirements for food served in
    schools.
        I am particularly pleased that HR 5504 includes provision that will
    help non-profits and community organizations serve food to low-income
    children after school and during the summer. Specifically, Section 113
    of the legislation will allow non-profits in 10 states to serve
    nutritious meals and snacks after school, on weekends, and during the
    summer, ensuring that they can help low-income children access healthy
    food 365 days a year. This expansion of the enormously successful
    ``Miller Pilot'' in California is a great approach to helping low-
    income children get nutritious meals at times when they are most
    vulnerable to hunger.
        We have a moral obligation to ensure that all children get enough
    to eat, and your efforts will help us get closer to President Obama's
    goal of ending childhood hunger in America by 2015. I look forward to
    working with you to pass the Improving Nutrition for America's Children
    Act in the coming weeks.
                                     ______

        [Additional submissions of Mr. Kucinich follow:]

                                    ------

        [The article, ``Television viewing, fast-food consumption,
    and children's obesity,'' by Hung-Hao Chang, Rodolofo M. Nayga,
    Jr., Contemporary Economic Policy, July 2009, may be accessed
    at the following Internet address:]

            http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/
                           20100701hearingarticle.pdf

                                     ______

        [The article, ``Fast-Food Restaurant Advertising on
    Television and Its Influence on Childhood Obesity,'' by Shin-
    Yi-Chou, Inas Rashad and Michael Gross, Journal of Law and
    Economics, November 2008, may be accessed at the following
    Internet address:]

            http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/
                          20100701hearingarticle3.pdf

                                     ______

        [Additional submissions of Mr. Weill follow:]

                       Food Research and Action Center's
                   Child Nutrition Reauthorization Materials

        School Nutrition Programs:
         Providing Grants for Universal and In-Classroom School
    Breakfast Programs. A one pager that outlines the importance of
    supporting universal and in-classroom breakfast. http://www.frac.org/
    pdf/cnr--priority--breakfast.pdf
         How to Expand Participation in School Breakfast. An in-
    depth policy brief on the School Breakfast Program. http://
    www.frac.org/pdf/CNR06--breakfast.pdf
         Eliminating paper applications for free school meals. A
    one pager that recommends strategies to improve the process for
    qualifying low-income children for free school meals and ways to allow
    high poverty schools to provide free meals to all students. http://
    www.frac.org/pdf/cnr--priority--paperless.pdf
        Afterschool and Summer Nutrition Programs:
         Reaching More Children in Need of Afterschool and Summer
    Nutrition: Improving the Area Eligibility Test. A one pager that
    outlines the need to lower the area eligibility requirement from 50
    percent to 40 percent. Area eligibility is how afterschool and summer
    programs qualify to participate in the child nutrition programs.
        http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr--priority--area--eligibility.pdf
         Expand the Afterschool Meal Program Nationwide. A one
    pager that outlines the need to expand the Afterschool Meal Program so
    that every state can participate. Currently, the program is only
    available in 13 states and the District of Columbia. http://
    www.frac.org/pdf/cnr--priority--afterschool.pdf
         Increasing Access to Summer Meals. A one pager that
    outlines ways to improve Summer Food so that more children can
    participate. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr--priority--summer.pdf
         How to Increase Low-Income Children's Access to Nutritious
    Meals and Snacks After School. An in-depth policy brief on the
    Afterschool Nutrition Programs. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR02--
    afterschool.pdf
         How to Increase Low-Income Children's Access to Nutritious
    Meals in the Summer. An in-depth policy brief on the Summer Nutrition
    Programs. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR04--summer.pdf
        Child and Adult Care Food Program:
         Allow child care centers and homes the option of serving a
    third meal. A one pager that outlines the importance of allowing
    children to receive three meals if they are in child care for more than
    eight hours. Currently, they can only receive two meals and a snack.
    http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr--priority--cacfp--thirdmeal.pdf
         Improving the Area Eligibility Test for the Child and
    Adult Care Food Program. A one pager on that outlines the need to lower
    the area eligibility requirement from 50 percent to 40 percent. Area
    eligibility is how child care homes qualify to participate in the Child
    and Adult Care Food Program. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr--priority--
    area--eligibility--cacfp.pdf
         How to Promote Access to Good Nutrition in Child Care
    Settings. An in-depth policy brief on ways to increase low-income
    children's access to nutritious meals and snacks while they are in
    child care. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR03--CACFP.pdf
        Nutrition Quality:
         How Improving Federal Nutrition Program Access and Quality
    Work Together to Reduce Hunger and Promote Healthy Eating. An in-depth
    analysis of how the child nutrition programs combat both hunger and
    obesity. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR01--qualityandaccess.pdf
         How Competitive Foods in Schools Impact Student Health,
    School Meal Programs, and Students from Low-Income Families. An in-
    depth policy brief that outlines the impact of competitive foods.
    http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR05--competitivefoods.pdf
                                     ______

                                                         June 16, 2010.
    Hon. Harry Reid, Majority Leader; Hon. Mitch McConnell, Minority
        Leader; Hon. Richard Durbin, Assistant Majority Leader; Hon. Jon
        Kyl, Assistant Minority Leader;
    United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510.
        Dear Senators Reid, McConnell, Durbin and Kyl: We the undersigned
    organizations are writing to ask for your help in achieving passage of
    a robustly funded and comprehensive child nutrition reauthorization
    bill before the end of the 111th Congress that will ensure more low-
    income children have access to these valuable programs and take a
    strong step forward to meet the challenge of ending childhood hunger by
    2015.
        According to the USDA nearly one in four children in the United
    States is food insecure: that is, some 17 million children who face
    hunger. Child nutrition programs offer the healthiest and most
    nourishing meals that many children receive each week. For many poor
    children, they may be their only fully-balanced meals. Moreover, there
    are many poor children who do not have access to nutrition programs at
    all. This is particularly true for children living in low-income and
    rural areas where breakfast, child care and after school, or summer and
    weekend food programs are not available to them.
        Data on child nutrition program participation illustrate the point
    that there are millions of low-income children who do not have child
    nutrition programs available to them. In FY2009, 19.5 million low
    income children received free and reduced price school lunches. This
    compared to only 9.1 million receiving free and reduced price
    breakfasts, and only 2.2 million children in summer food programs.
    Moreover, only 3.1 million children are in child care centers and homes
    with federally supported child nutrition programs. Clearly these are
    large gaps in service that must be filled quickly if we are to
    accomplish an end to childhood hunger, and time is running out to reach
    this goal by 2015.
        Our organizations are united in the call for completion of a strong
    and fully funded child nutrition reauthorization bill before the end of
    this year. Two hundred twenty one members of the House of
    Representatives have written to Speaker Nancy Pelosi, urging her
    assistance in identifying resources to achieve President Barack Obama's
    commitment of $10 billion in additional funding for child nutrition
    over 10 years. We therefore respectfully request that you bring S.3307
    to the Senate floor with the full funding increase proposed by the
    President, with the right mix of funding, and on a schedule that
    assures that this year this important legislation can fill the gaps in
    access that remain for millions of our nation's poorest children.
                Respectfully,

                           [Signatures as of 6/14/10]

    National Organizations
    9to5, National Association of Working Women
    Action for Children
    Afterschool Alliance
    Alliance to End Hunger
    American Academy of Pediatrics
    American Baptist Home Mission Societies
    American Commodity Distribution Association
    American Community Gardening Association
    American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees
    American Federation of Teachers
    American School Health Association
    Americans for Democratic Action, Inc.
    Association of Nutrition Services Agencies
    Bread for the World
    Catholic Charities USA
    Center for Law and Social Policy
    Child Care Network
    Child Welfare League of America
    Children's Defense Fund
    Children's Health Watch
    Church Women United
    Christian Reformed Church in North America
    Coalition on Human Needs
    Community Action Partnership
    Community Food Security Coalition
    Conference of Major Superiors of Men
    Congressional Hunger Center
    Disabled Veterans Committee on Housing
    Early Care and Education Consortium
    Easter Seals
    eGovernment Payments Council of the EFTA
    End Hunger Network
    Evangelical Lutheran Church in America
    Feeding America
    First Focus Campaign for Children
    Food Research & Action Center (FRAC)
    Friends Committee on National Legislation
    Half in Ten Campaign
    Human Relief Organization
    Islamic Circle of North America
    Jewish Council for Public Affairs
    Jewish Reconstructionist Federation
    Knowledge Learning Corp.
    Land O' Lakes, Inc.
    Leadership Conference of Women Religious
    Learning Care Group
    Lutheran Services in America
    MAZON-A Jewish Response to Hunger
    Meals on Wheels Association of America
    Mennonite Central Committee
    Muslim Public Affairs Council
    National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd
    National Association of County Human Services Administrators
    National Association for Family Child Care
    National Association for the Education of Young Children
    National Black Child Development Institute
    National CACFP Forum
    National Collaboration for Youth
    National Council of Churches of Christ, USA
    National Council of Jewish Women
    National Council of La Raza
    National Education Association/
    National Farmers Union
    National Immigration Law Center
    National Recreation and Park Association
    National Rural Health Association
    National Summer Learning Association
    National WIC Association
    National Women's Law Center
    NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby
    Presbyterian Church U.S.A. Washington Office
    Progressive National Baptist Convention RESULTS
    Salvation Army
    Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law
    Save the Children
    School Food FOCUS
    School Gardens Across America
    School Nutrition Association
    Service Employees International Union
    Share Our Strength
    Single Stop USA
    Sodexo
    Sodexo Foundation
    Sojourners
    The Episcopal Church
    The Jewish Federations of North America
    The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights
    The National Center for Children and Families
    The National Policy and Advocacy Council on Homelessness
    The Society of St. Andrew
    The Sponsors Association
    The United Methodist Church-General Board of Church and Society
    Union for Reform Judaism
    United Church of Christ
    United Fresh Produce Association
    Universities Fighting World Hunger
    USAction
    Voices for America's Children
    WhyHunger
    Women of Reform Judaism
    YMCA of the USA
    YWCA
    Zero to Three
    State/Local Organizations
                Alabama
    Auburn University
    Bay Area Food Bank
    Food Bank of North Alabama
    Jefferson County Child Development Council Inc.
    Legion of Mary
                Alaska
    Alaska Center for Public Policy
    Food Bank of Alaska
                Arizona
    Arizona Association of Family Day Care Providers
    Arizona Child Care Association
    Arizona Community Action Association
    Arizona Council of Human Services Providers
    Association of Arizona Food Banks
    Boys and Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Phoenix
    Community Food Bank, Inc.
    Desert Mission Food Bank
    Grand Canyon Synod--ELCA
    St. Mary's Food Bank Alliance
    United Food Bank
    Yuma Community Food Bank
    WHEAT
                Arkansas
    Arkansas Action for Peace
    Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families
    Arkansas Affiliate American Association of Family and Consumer Services
    Arkansas Health Care Access Foundation
    Arkansas Homeless Coalition
    Arkansas Hunger Alliance
    Arkansas Public Policy Panel
    Arkansas United Methodist Church Hunger Action Task Force
    Black River Area Development Corporation
    Carroll County Community Foundation
    Catholic Adoption Services
    Catholic Charities of Arkansas
    Christ Episcopal Church
    City Connections, Inc.
    Community Crisis Intervention Services, Inc.
    Family Resource Service of Lonoke
    Feed the Children
    First United Methodist Church-Russellville
    First United Methodist Church-Springdale
    Flint Street Fellowship Food Pantry
    Food Bank of Northeast Arkansas
    FPC Food Pantry
    Great Beginnings
    Hill's Community Learning Center
    Kids 1st Inc.
    Manna from Heaven Food Pantry
    Melbourne-Bethesda-Cushman UMS
    Methodist Federation for Social Action
    Neighbor to Neighbor
    North Little Rock Mayor's Youth Council
    Project HOPE Food Bank
    Southeast District Arkansas Conference United Methodist Women
    Saint Paul's Episcopal Church
    South West Arkansas Food Bank
    The Vine and The Branches, Inc.
    Total Deliverance Cathedral Church
                California
    9to5 Bay Area
    9to5 Los Angeles
    A World Fit For Kids
    ACT for Women and Girls
    Alameda County Community Food Bank
    Auburn Adventist Community Services
    Auburn Interfaith Food Closet
    Breastfeeding Task Force of Greater Los Angeles
    California Association for the Education of Young Children
    California Association of Food Banks
    California Breastfeeding Coalition
    California Emergency Foodlink
    California/Nevada Community Action Partnership State Association
    California Roundtable
    California School-Age Consortium
    California School Nutrition Association
    Central Valley Association for the Education of Young Children
    Child Care Food Program Roundtable
    Child Development Centers
    Child Nutrition Program of Southern California
    CHILDS-PACE
    Christian Church (Disciples of Christ)
    Community Child Care Council (4Cs)
    Community Food Bank of San Benito County
    Continuing Development Inc.
    Contra Costa Child Care Council
    Family Resource & Referral Center
    FCEOC Head Start
    FIND Food Bank, Inc.
    Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano
    Food Bank of the Rockies
    FOOD Share
    Fresno County EOC Head Start and Early Head Start
    Full Circle
    Genesis House, Inc.
    Good Samaritan Baptist Church
    Greater Richmond Interfaith Program
    Imperial Valley Food bank
    Interfaith Food Bank
    International Institute of Los Angeles
    Islamic Information Service
    Libreria del Pueblo
    Los Angeles Coalition to End Hunger & Homelessness
    Los Angeles Regional Foodbank
    Lord's Pantry
    Napa ValleyFood Bank/CANV
    National Association of Social Workers-California Chapter
    National Council of Jewish Women, California State Public Affair
    Newport-Mesa Federation of Teachers
    North Coast Opportunities Rural Communities Child Care
    Orange Children & Parents Together, Inc
    Parent Voices El Dorado County
    Partnership for Children and Youth
    Placer Food Bank
    Revolution Foods
    Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment
    San Francisco Food Bank
    Saint Joseph Center
    Second Harvest Food Bank of Orange County
    Second Harvest Food Bank of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties
    Second Harvest Food Bank Santa Cruz County
    Sister Evelyn Mourey Center, Inc
    Sisters of Mercy
    Sparrow Project
    St Vincent de Paul, Dixon
    St. Vincent de Paul, Concord
    The Resource Connection Food Bank
    United Ways of California
    Valley Oak Children's Services
    Ventura County Health Care Agency
    Western Center on Law and Poverty
    Wu Yee Children's Services
    Youth Leadership Institute
                Colorado
    9to5 Colorado
    ACS Community LIFT
    Arvada Community Food Bank
    Care and Share Food Bank
    Cherry Creek Schools Food and Nutrition Services
    Colorado Children's Campaign
    Colorado Coalition to End Hunger
    Colorado Community Action Association
    Colorado Legacy Foundation
    Colorado Office of Professional Development
    Colorado Progressive Coalition
    Colorado Social Legislation Committee
    Colorado Statewide Parent Coalition
    Congregation B'nai Chaim
    Daniels Fund
    Denver Urban Ministries
    Early Childhood Education Association of Colorado
    Family to Family
    Feeding Colorado
    Food Bank for Larimer County
    Food Bank of the Rockies
    GreenLeaf
    Hope Morrison, Inc.
    Hunger Free Colorado
    Inter-Faith Community Services
    Lutheran Advocacy Ministry--Colorado
    Luv In Action
    Metro CareRing
    Metro Denver Health and Wellness Commission
    Mountain Family Center
    OUR Center
    Overstreet & Associates
    Share Our Strength-Colorado
    Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth
    Weld Food Bank
                Connecticut
    Community Health Network
    Connecticut Association for Human Services
    Connecticut Food Policy Council
    Connecticut Public Health Association
    Connecticut Voices for Children
    Collaborative Center for Justice
    End Hunger Connecticut!
    Foodshare
    Jewish Federation of Eastern Fairfield County
    MACC Charities
    Poor People's Alliance
                Delaware
    Food Bank of Delaware
    District of Columbia
    Ample Harvest
    Capital Area Food Bank
    D.C. Hunger Solutions
    Mary's Center for Maternal and Child Care
    Summit Health Institute for Research and Education, Inc.
                Florida
    Academy 2000, Inc.
    AME Missionary Society
    Association of Early Learning Coalitions
    Boca Helping Hands
    CCB/CSC Million Meals Committee
    Caring For Others Ministries
    Central Florida Teen Challenge
    CharityExpressInc.
    Children's Services Council of Broward County
    Circle of Life
    Community Crusaders
    Community Foundation for Palm Beach and Martin Counties
    Community Partnership Group
    CROS Ministries-United Methodist Church
    Easter Seals of S. Florida
    EBPrest
    ECHO (Emergency Care Help Organization)
    Episcopal Charities of Southeast Florida
    Evangelical Christian Bible Ministries International
    Family Assistance Coalition, Inc.
    Family Central.org
    Farmworker Association of Florida, Inc.
    Florida Conference AMEC Women's Missionary Society
    Florida Impact
    Florida Organic Growers
    Gainesville Commission on the Status of Women
    Gulfstream Goodwill
    Harry Chapin Food Bank of SW Florida
    Holy Name of Jesus Food Pantry
    Hope International Church
    Housing Partnership
    IBEW #728 AFL-CIO
    ISF Group, Inc.
    Jesus Loves You Outreach Ministries, Inc.
    Lutheran Social Services of Northeast Florida Inc
    Million Meals Committee
    Mt. Sinai M.B. Church
    New Hope Charities
    Okeechobee County School District
    Palm Beach County Community Food Alliance
    Rescue Outreach Mission
    Safe Earth Alliance
    Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida
    Second Harvest North Florida
    South Brevard Sharing Center
    St. George's Center, Inc.
    St. Luke's United Methodist Church
    St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Tallahassee
    Strong WoMen Network
    Tampa Jewish Federation
    The Blue Foundation for a Healthy Florida
    The Children's Forum, Inc.
    The Children's Trust
    The Christian Sharing Center
    The First Community Christian Pentecostal Church of God
    The Jewish Community Relations Council of the Greater Miami Jewish
            Federation
    The Sharing Center-Sanford
    Treasure Coast Food Bank
    True Tabernacle of Jesus Christ Ministries, Inc
    Tuskawilla United Methodist Church
    United Methodist Women
    Zoe Ministries
                Georgia
    9to5 Atlanta Working Women
    Atlanta Community Food Bank
    Chatham County Nutrition Program
    Feeding the Valley, Inc.
    Georgia School Nutrition
    Macon Bibb County Economic Opportunity Council
    The West End Center, Inc.
                Hawaii
    Aunty Jill's Playgroup
    Child Care Business Coalition of Hawaii
    Family Support Hawaii
    Hawaii Breastfeeding Coalition
    It's A Small World Daycare
    Kimberley Limasa's Day Care
    Knight's Day Care
    Little Learners Preschool, LLC
    Maui Economic Opportunity, Inc.
    PATCH
    Saint Joseph Preschool
    Seagull Schools
    Shen's Daycare
    Waiokeola Congregational Church
    Wesley Children's Programs
                Idaho
    Idaho Interfaith Roundtable Against Hunger
    Monastery of St. Gertrude
    Sandpoint Food Group
    Tables of Hope
                Illinois
    Arcola Food Pantry
    Chicago Lights Elam Davies Social Service Center
    Chosen Tabernacle Ministries
    Clifton Community Food Pantry
    Coalition on Human Needs
    Community Service Center
    Corner Stone Food Pantry
    Dominican Sisters of Sinsinawa
    Eastern Illinois Foodbank
    Feeding Illinois
    Generations of Hope
    Grassroots Collaborative
    Greater Chicago Food Depository
    Illinois Action for Children
    Illinois Hunger Coalition
    Illinois Maternal and Child Health Coalition
    Lutheran Advocacy--Illinois
    Lutheran Church of St. John
    Marillac Food Pantry
    National Council of Jewish Women, Illinois State Public Affairs
    Northern Illinois Food Bank
    Northside Anti-Hunger Network
    Oak Park River Forest Food Pantry
    Palestine Food Pantry
    Respond Now
    River Bend Foodbank
    Rural Grace Pantry
    SAM Food Pantry
    Salt and Light
    Sixth Grace Presbyterian Church
    St. Cletus Food Pantry
    Vital Bridges NFP, Inc.
    Voices for Illinois Children
    YWCA-Illinois
                Indiana
    Catholic Charities Archdiocese of Indianapolis
    Catholic Charities Terre Haute
    Children's Bureau, Inc.
    Church Women United in Indiana
    Coalition on Human Needs
    Community Harvest Food Bank of Northeast Indiana, Inc.
    Disciples Home Mission
    Feeding Indiana's Hungry, Inc.
    Food Bank of Northwest Indiana
    Food Finders Food Bank
    Freestore Food Bank-Cincinnati
    Hoosier Hills Food Bank
    Indiana Coalition for Human Services
    Jewish Community Relations Council-Indiana
    KALP NETWORK, INC.
    Lafayette Urban Ministry
    Second Harvest Food Bank of East Central Indiana
    Terre Haute Deanery Pastoral Center
    The Madison Literacy Coalition
    UAW Local 287
                Iowa
    Child and Family Policy Center
    Environmental Nutrition Solutions
    Food Bank of Iowa
    Food Bank of Siouxland
    Iowa Food Bank Association
    Northeast Iowa Food Bank
    River Bend Foodbank
    Sisters of St. Francis
                Kansas
    Children's Mercy Family Health Partners
    Church
    Church World Service-Great Plains Office
    Communities In Schools of Kansas
    Douglas County Child Development Association
    El Centro, Inc.
    Family Resource Center, Inc.
    First Lutheran Early Education Center
    First Street Church of God
    GraceMed Health Clinic, Inc.
    Harvesters--The Community Food Network
    Heart of Kansas Family Health Care
    Heritage Preschool
    Hillview Christian Children's Center
    Jewish Community Center
    Jewish Community Relations Bureau of Kansas City
    Kansas Action for Children
    Kansas Association for the Medically Underserved
    Kansas Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics
    Kansas Children's Service League
    Kansas City Kansas Community College Campus Child Care Center
    Kansas Food Security Task Force
    Kansas Health Consumer Coalition
    Kansas National Education Association
    Open Arms Lutheran Child Development Center
    Partnership for Children
    Rawlins County Dental Clinic
    Salina Health Education Foundation
    Salina RESULTS Group
    Society of Saint Andrew
    Tender Hearts
    The Family Resource Center
    Tri-County Smart Start
    United Way of Wyandotte County
    Winter Center for Restorative Justice, Inc.
    Women's Community Y, Leavenworth
                Kentucky
    Calvary Baptist Food Pantry
    Community Farm Alliance
    Jewish Community Relations Council of Louisville
    Family and Children First
    God's Pantry Food Bank
    Kentucky Council of Churches
    Kentucky Equal Justice Center
    Kentucky Out-of-School Alliance
    Kentucky Task Force on Hunger
    Kentucky Youth Advocates
    Louisville District United Methodist Women
    Northern Kentucky Community Action Head Start
    Saint Paul's Food Pantry
    Sisters of Charity of Nazareth
                Louisiana
    Agenda for Children
    Avoyelles Coalition
    Children's Coalition of Greater Baton Rouge
    Food Bank of Central Louisiana
    Food Bank of Northeast Louisiana
    Food Bank of Northwest Louisiana
    Louisiana Food Bank Association
    LUNCH Program
    National Council of Jewish Women, Louisiana State Public Affairs
    Second Harvest Food Bank of Greater New Orleans and Acadiana
    The Edible Schoolyard New Orleans
                Maine
    Campaign to Promote Food Security
    Catholic Charities Maine
    Cultivating Community
    Every Child Matters in Maine
    Maine Alliance for Children's Care
    Maine Children's Alliance
    Maine Equal Justice
    Preble Street
                Maryland
    Advocates for Children and Youth
    Disciples Justice Action Network
    Hillcrest School-Based Health Center
    Interfaith Works, Inc.
    Maryland Hunger Solutions
    Mary's Center for Maternal and Child Care, Inc.
    PeterCares House
    Public Justice Center
    RKM Direct
    The Family League of Baltimore City, Inc.
    The National Center for Children and Families
                Massachusetts
    ABCD, Inc.
    Associated Early Care and Education of Boston
    Boston Collaborative for Food and Fitness
    Cape Cod Child Development Program
    Catholic Charities, Archdiocese of Boston
    CitySprouts Inc.
    Community Action
    Community Day Care of Lawrence
    Daily Bread Food Pantry Inc.
    Ellis Memorial of Boston
    Guild of St. Agnes Child Care Program of Worcester
    Harvard Prevention Research Center on Nutrition and Physical Activity
    Massachusetts Association of Early Education and Care
    Massachusetts Citizens for Children
    Massachusetts Law Reform Institute
    Massachusetts Nutrition Board
    New England Farmers Union
    Newton Community Service Centers
    North Star Learning Programs of New Bedford
    Pathways for Children of Gloucester
    Project Bread-The Walk for Hunger
    Promise the Children
    The Food Bank of Western Massachusetts
    The Greater Boston Food Bank
    United South End Settlement of Boston
    Valley Opportunity Council of Holyoke
    Worcester Advisory Food Policy Council
    Worcester Comprehensive Child Care Services
    Worcester County Food Bank
                Michigan
    Center for Civil Justice
    Center for Food Safety
    Christian Reformed World Relief Committee
    Congregation of St. Joseph
    Feeding America West Michigan Food Bank
    Focus: HOPE
    Food Bank of Eastern Michigan
    Good Samaritan Family Services
    Joy Community Association
    Legal Services of Eastern Michigan
    Mid Michigan Child Care
    National Council of Jewish Women, Michigan State Public Affairs
    Saint Christine Christian Service
    Sisters of Mercy
    Sprout Wellness
    United Way for Southeastern Michigan
                Minnesota
    Boys and Girls Club of Northland
    Child Care WORKS
    Copeland Valley Youth Center
    Jewish Community Center of the Greater St. Paul Area
    Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas
    Jewish Family and Children's Service of Minneapolis
    Jewish Family Service of St. Paul
    Kiddy Karousel Child Care Center
    Kids Against Hunger
    Lowell COMPASS Afterschool, YMCA Program
    Metro Meals on Wheels
    Minnesota Child Care Association
    Minnesota Council of Churches
    Minnesota FoodShare
    Moose Lake Area Food Shelf
    New Horizon Academy
    North Central Food Bank
    Ready 4 K
    Safe Haven Shelter for Battered Women
    Second Harvest Heartland
    Second Harvest North Central Food Bank
    St. Anthony Park Lutheran Church
    Tri-Community Food Shelf
    Mississippi
    Mississippi Food Bank Network
    MS Chapter NASW
    Public Policy Center of Mississippi
                Missouri
    American Jewish Congress-St. Louis Region
    Bread for Life Food Pantry
    Gateway to Hope
    Harvesters--The Community Food Network
    Hawk Point Food Pantry
    Jewish Community Relations Council of St. Louis
    National Council of Jewish Women-Missouri
    State Public Affairs
    Saint Louis Area Foodbank
    Second Harvest Community Food Bank
    Southeast Missouri Food Bank
                Montana
    Big Timber Community Food Bank
    Child Care Partnerships
    Community Food and Agriculture Coalition of Missoula County
    Community Health Partners
    Community Services Fellowship
    Council on Aging
    Family Promise of Gallatin Valley, Inc.
    Family Service, Inc.
    Fergus County Nurses Office
    Libby Food Pantry Inc.
    Livingston Food Pantry
    Missoula Food Bank
    Montana Dietetic Association
    Montana Food Bank Network
    Montana Rescue Mission
    North Missoula Community Development Corp.
    Pantry Partners Food Bank
    Poverello Center, Inc.
    Rocky Mountain Development Council
    Sustainable Living Systems
    The Salvation Army Missoula
    Tobacco Valley Food Pantry
    United Way of Yellowstone County
    Wibaux Food Bank
                Nebraska
    Blue Valley Community Action Partnership
    Food Bank for the Heartland
    Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc.
    Sisters of Mercy West Midwest Justice Team
                Nevada
    Bethel Food Pantry
    Boys and Girls Club Mason Valley
    Boys and Girls Club of Truckee Meadows
    Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas
    Community Foundation of Western Nevada
    Desert Springs Baptist Church Food Pantry
    Elko Friends in Service Helping
    Eureka County Senior Center and Food Distribution
    Faith Lutheran Church
    Fallon Seventh Day Adventist Food Outreach
    Food Bank of Northern Nevada
    High Sierra Area Health Education Center, Reno
    Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada
    Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Nevada
    Nevada Hispanic Services, Inc., Reno
    Northern Nevada RAVE Family Foundation
    Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada
    The Children's Cabinet, Reno
    Three Square
                New Hampshire
    Children's Alliance of New Hampshire
    Every Child Matters in New Hampshire
    Food Solutions New England
    New Hampshire Farm to School
    New Hampshire WIC Directors Association
    Seacoast Family Food Pantry, Portsmouth
    Southern New Hampshire Services, Inc.
                New Jersey
    Abundant Life Community Development Corp
    Abundant Life Fellowship Church
    ALPS Daycare & Preschool
    Andres Gautier Ministries
    Association for Children of New Jersey
    Capital Health
    Cathedral Kitchen
    Catholic Charities
    Catholic Charities BECS
    Catholic Charities, Diocese of Trenton
    Catholic Charities, Emergency and Community Services
    Center for Food Action in NJ
    CWA Local 1037
    Collier Youth Services, Wickatunk
    Community FoodBank of NJ/Southern Branch
    Curbing Hunger Inc.
    El Centro Day Care
    Elijah's Promise
    First Baptist Church Harrisonville
    Food Bank of South Jersey
    Greater Woodbury Cooperative Ministries Food Pantry
    Highland Park Community Food Pantry
    HOPES CAP, Inc.
    ICNA-NJ
    Interfaith Food Pantry
    Jewish Federation of Greater Middlesex County
    Koinonia Family Life, Inc.
    Living Hope Christian Center
    Meeting Emergency Needs with Dignity
    Mercer Street Friends Food Bank
    Mobile Meals of Trenton
    Mt. Calvary Baptist Church
    My Brother's Keeper
    National Council of Jewish Women, State Public Affairs Network
    New Jersey Anti-Hunger Coalition
    New Jersey Farm To School Network
    Outreach Ministry of Cecil Deliverance Tabernacle
    Park Avenue Community Church
    Puerto Rican Action Committee of Southern New Jersey, Inc.
    Regional Office, Church World Service / CROP Hunger Walks
    Society of St. Vincent de Paul
    Spoken Word Evangelistic Church Food Pantry
    St. Mary Street United Methodist Church
    St. Paul's Food Basket
    St. Vincent De Paul OLMC Conference
    St. Vincent De Paul Society
    The Apostles' House
    Touch New Jersey Inc.
    Wiley Church food pantry
                New Mexico
    Bread for the World-New Mexico
    Lutheran Office of Governmental Ministry-New Mexico
    New Mexico Appleseed
    New Mexico Collaboration to End Hunger
    New Mexico Community Foundation
    New Mexico Voices for Children
    NM Center on Law and Poverty
    Pegasus Legal Services for Children
                New York
    Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace
    Brooklyn Food Coalition
    Brooklyn-Queens NOW
    Broome-Tioga BOCES
    Caroline Food Pantry
    Catholic Charities-Brooklyn and Queens
    Catholic Charities Diocese of Albany
    Catholic Charities-New York
    Center for Children's Initiatives
    Child Care Council of Nassau
    Child Development Council
    Church Women United-New York
    Citizens' Committee for Children of New York, Inc.
    City Harvest
    Colesville Community Pantry
    Colonie Senior Center Services
    Community Action Agency of Franklin County
    E S Foods
    Early Care and Learning Council
    Eveline's Food and Health Connection
    Family Enrichment Network
    Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies
    Food Bank of Central New York
    Food Bank of the Southern Tier
    Food Bank of Western New York
    Food for All
    Foodlink
    Got Breakfast? Foundation
    Gray Panthers of Suffolk County
    Harpursville United Methodist Church
    Health and Welfare Council of Long Island
    Healthy Kids Initiative
    Infant Jesus Church
    Island Harvest
    Just Food
    JustFaith
    Long Island Cares, Inc.
    MNYS Russian Mission
    Muslim Women's Institute for Research and Development
    New York City Alliance for Child Nutrition Reauthorization
    New York City Coalition Against Hunger
    New York School Nutrition Association, Inc.
    New York State Community Action Association
    North Fork Housing Alliance, Inc
    Nutrition Consortium of New York State
    Opportunities for Otsego, Inc.
    Pro Action of Steuben and Yates, Inc.
    Regional Food Bank of Northeastern New York
    Rural Health Network of South Central New York
    Saint Peter Damian Fraternity SFO
    Schenectady Inner City Ministry
    School Food FOCUS
    Schuyler Center for Analysis and Advocacy
    SER of Westchester Inc.
    Single Stop USA
    Springs Union Free School District
    The POINT Community Development Corporation
    Tioga Central School District
    West Side Campaign Against Hunger
                North Carolina
    Action for Children NC
    Children First
    MANNA Food Bank
    St. Brendan Social Action
                North Dakota
    SENDCAA
    United Way of Grand Forks, East Grand Forks and Area
                Ohio
    Akron Canton Regional Food Bank
    Attica Community Food Pantry
    Banquet Table Food Pantry Trinity Friends Church
    Bellevue Fish and Loaves Food Pantry
    Butler County Educational Service Center
    CALL Food Pantry
    Camp Aldersgate
    CareSource
    Catholic Charities
    Children's Advocacy Center of Portage County
    Children's Hunger Alliance
    Christ's Community in College Hill
    Christian Corner Community Center
    Church Women United
    Churches United Pantry
    Cleveland Foodbank
    Community Resource Services
    Episcopal Diocese of Southern Ohio
    Faith Food Pantry
    Faith House Academy
    Faith Ministries Christian Center Emergency Assistance Pantry
    Felicity Community Missions
    Freestore Foodbank
    Greater Victory Christian Ministries
    Heartbest of Sandusky: Pregnancy Center and Maternity Home
    Help Open Peoples Eyes Ministries
    Hope Center
    H.O.P.E. Ministries, Akron
    Humility of Mary Health Partners
    Hunger Network in Ohio
    Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of
            Cincinnati
    KinderNest Child Development Center
    KinShip
    Lighthouse Food Pantry
    Local Matters
    Lorain County Alcohol and Drug Abuse Services
    Mahoning Country Bridges Out of Poverty
    Malvern Christian Care Center, Inc.
    Mid-Ohio FoodBank
    Miller Avenue United Church of Christ
    Miriam House-Catholic Charities
    Mother Cabrini's Cupboard Food Pantry
    Mount Healthy Alliance, Inc.
    Mount Olivet Alliance Church
    Neighborhood Ministries
    Nevels Temple Mission
    Oberlin Community Services
    Ohio Association of Child Care Providers
    Ohio Association of School Nurses
    Ohio Association of Second Harvest Foodbanks
    Ohio Catholic Social Services
    Ohio Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics
    Ohio Council of Churches
    Ohio School Based Health Care Association
    Open Door Community Church
    Orrville Area Boys and Girls Club
    Pentecostal Tabernacle Food Pantry
    Philippians 4:19 Food Ministry
    Pike County Outreach Council of Churches, Inc.
    Positive Education Program
    Prince of Peace Lutheran Church
    Second Harvest Food Bank Clark, Champaign, Logan Counties
    Second Harvest Food Bank of the Mahoning Valley
    Second Harvest Food Bank of North Central Ohio
    Shared Harvest Foodbank
    Sisters of Charity
    Sisters Helping Sisters Food Pantry
    St. John Lutheran Church
    St. Patrick Catholic Church Food Pantry
    Upper Room Cultural Development Corp.
    Talbert House
    TAPP House/TC, Inc.
    The Center for Community Solutions
    The Counseling Center
    The Elyria Hospitality Center Pantry
    The Helping Hands Network
    The Lord's Pantry
    The Love Center Food Cupboard
    The Potter's House Ministries, Inc.
    The Salvation Army-Hamilton Corps.
    The Village Network-Canton
    Union Baptist Church Food Pantry
    United Way of Ashtabula County
    Upper Room Cultural Development Corporation, Ravenna
    Washington Food Pantry
    West Alexandria Day Care Center, Inc.
    West Ohio Food Bank
    Word of Life Church, New Philadelphia
    Young Adult Community Development, Inc.
                Oklahoma
    Bethel Baptist Church Food Program
    Bristow Social Services
    Christ Cupboard
    Christ's Food Center, Inc.
    Circle of Care
    Community Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma
    Community Outreach Centers, Inc.
    Deep Fork Community Action Foundation Inc.
    Family and Children's Services
    First United Methodist Church, Depew
    Food4Kids Backpack Program
    Food4Kids Owasso
    Gatesway Foundation
    Grand Lake Community Ministry
    Integrated Concepts, Inc.
    Inter-Tribal Council, Inc of Northeast Oklahoma
    Locust Grove Ministerial Alliance
    MCM Food Pantry-Muskogee
    Moon Church of God Pantry
    MoveOn Tulsa
    Oaks Indian Mission
    Open Table UCC
    Osage Nation Prevention Program
    Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma
    State of Change
    Sugarloaf Christian Fellowship Food Pantry
    The Salvation Army
    Trinity Full Gospel Church Food Bank
    Victory Park Baptist Church Soup Kitchen
    Wagoner Area Neighbors, Inc.
    Youth Services of Osage County, Inc.
                Oregon
    Adelante Mujeres
    CARE Connections
    Change Takes Action
    Child Care Development Services Inc
    Children First for Oregon
    Children's Institute
    Church Women United
    Eat Think Grow
    Florence Food Share
    Half-Pint Daycare and Preschool
    Human Services Coalition of Oregon
    Jackson-Josephine 4-C Council
    Lane Workforce Partnership
    Lutheran Advocacy Ministry of Oregon
    Mid-Willamette Valley Community Action Agency
    Montavilla Farmers Market
    Neighbors For Kids
    North by Northeast Community Health Center
    Nutrition First CACFP--Community Action
    Oregon Food Bank
    Oregon Hunger Task Force
    Oregon Pediatric Society
    Organic Fresh Fingers, Inc.
    Our Savior's Lutheran Church Summer Lunch Program
    Portland Chapter of Hadassah
    Portland Dietetic Association
    Rogue Valley Farm to School
    Society of St. Vincent de Paul
    Soroptimist International of Florence
    Southern Oregon Child and Family Council
    St. Pius X Catholic Church/Faith Cafe
    St. Vincent de Paul Portland Council
    Take Action Now
    West Linn Lutheran Church
    Willamette Farm and Food Coalition
                Pennsylvania
    Adagio Health
    Ashley Food Bank
    Bernardine Center
    Boys and Girls Club, Plymouth Extension
    Brashear Association
    Bread for the World-Pennsylvania
    Bread of Life Food Pantry
    Brightside Academy
    Care Net Pregnancy Center
    Central Pennsylvania Food Bank
    Child Development Council of NEPA, Inc.
    Church of God In Christ
    Church of the Loving Shepherd
    Columbia/Montour Tapestry of Health
    Commission on Economic Opportunity
    Community Food Warehouse of Mercer County
    East Liberty Presbyterian Church
    Faith Assembly of God
    Family and Community Service of Delaware County
    Family Health Council of Central PA
    Family Links
    First Baptist Church, New Castle Food Pantry
    Greater Philadelphia Coalition Against Hunger
    Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank
    Greater Washington County Food Bank
    H&J Weinberg Food Bank of NEPA
    Israel Ben Zion Academy
    Jewish Family Services of York
    Jubilee Kitchen
    Just Harvest
    Lincoln Park Community Center, Inc.
    Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Pennsylvania
    McGlynn Center
    Meadow Lands United Methodist Church
    Mid-Valley Hospital
    National Association of Social Workers-PA Chapter
    National Council of Jewish Women, Pennsylvania State Public Affairs
    PA Association of Regional Food Banks
    Pennsylvania Association for the Education of Young Children
    Pennsylvania Child Care Association
    Pennsylvania Council of Churches
    Pennsylvania Hunger Action Center
    Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children
    Pennsylvania School Nutrition Association
    Pittsburgh Community Services, Inc.
    Pneuma Center Dignity Food Bank
    Presbytery of Philadelphia
    Public Citizens for Children and Youth
    Rainbow Kitchen Community Services
    Salvation Army-Chartiers Valley
    Sarah Heinz House
    Second Harvest Food Bank of NW PA
    Second Harvest of Lehigh Valley & Northeast PA
    Sisters Place, Inc.
    Smithfield United Church of Christ
    St. James Church Social Justice and Peace
    St. Nicholas Food Pantry
    Step by Step, Inc.
    Committee, Wilkinsburg
    Step By Step, Inc.
    TREHAB Food Bank
    Unitarian Society of Germantown Green Sanctuary
    United Way of Beaver County
    Urban League Hunger Services
    Volunteers of America-Pennsylvania
    Westmoreland Community Action
    Westmoreland County Food Bank
    YMCA Hazelwood
                Rhode Island
    CANE Child Development Center
    Connecting for Children and Families
    George Wiley Center
    Ocean State Action
    Parent Support Network of RI
    Rhode Island Children's Policy Coalition
    Rhode Island Dietetic Association
    Jewish Federation of Rhode Island
    Kids First
    Northern RI AHEC
    Parent Support Network of RI
    Rhode Island Afterschool Plus Alliance
    Rhode Island KIDS COUNT
    Rhode Island Foster Parents Association
    Sister's of St. Joseph
    The Learning Community
    Tides Family Services
    Washington County Coalition for Children
                South Carolina
    Billie Hardee Home for Boys
    Charleston Area Children's Garden Project
    Children's Trust of South Carolina
    Christ Central Columbia
    Christ Central, Inc.
    Focus on Kids
    Harvest Hope Food Bank
    Mental Health America of SC
    SC Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy
    Security Federal Bank
    South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center
    Sumter Citizens Coalition, Inc.
    United Way Association of South Carolina
    Unity Missionary Baptist Church
                South Dakota
    Bread for the World-South Dakota
    Feeding South Dakota-FKA Community Food Banks of South Dakota
    South Dakota Voices for Children
                Tennessee
    Black Children's Institute of Tennessee
    Catholic Charities of Tennessee
    Community Shares
    Just Faith
    Knoxville County Community Action Committee
    Manna-Food Security Partners
    Second Harvest Food Bank of East Tennessee
    Second Harvest Food Bank of Middle Tennessee
    St. Ann Catholic Social Ministry
    Tennessee Health Care Campaign
    Tennessee Justice Center
    The Who We Are Counts Institute
                Texas
    3T Outreach
    Abiding Love Food Pantry
    AIDS Services of Austin
    Alameda Heights Community Center
    Albeight United Methodist Church
    Amarillo Family YMCA
    Amazing Grace Fellowship Baptist Church Food Pantry
    Angelheart Children's Shelter
    Austin Faith and Family Magazine
    Austin Food Bank
    Austin RESULTS Domestic Group
    Austin YMBL Sunshine Camps
    Baptist Benevolence of Irving
    Baptist General Convention of Texas
    Bastrop County Emergency Food Pantry
    Bethany Faith Food Pantry
    Blanco Good Samaritan Center
    Blood 'N Fire Foundation
    Boys and Girls Clubs of Central Texas, Inc.
    Boys and Girls Clubs of the Austin Area
    Calvary Baptist Food Pantry
    Capital Area Food Bank of Texas
    Care Center Ministries
    Caritas
    Catholic Charities of Dallas
    Center for Children and Families
    Center for Public Policy Priorities
    Central Dallas Ministries
    Central Texas Area Food Bank
    Central Texas Children's Home
    Christian Assistance Ministry
    Christian Farms Treehouse, Inc.
    Christian Life Commission
    Community Lifeline Center
    Concord--Food Pantry
    Cove House Emergency Homeless Shelter
    DeSoto Food Pantry
    Driscoll Children's Hospital
    East Texas Food Bank
    Elgin Community Cupboard
    Family Abuse Center
    Fannin County Community Ministries
    Food Bank of the Golden Crescent
    Food Bank RGV
    Foundation for the Homeless, Inc.
    George Gervin Youth Center
    Girls Inc. of Metropolitan Dallas
    Good Street Baptist Church Child Care, Inc.
    Grace Baptist Church
    Greater Love Ministries
    Greater Zion Food Pantry
    Hands of Mercy
    Hays County Food Bank
    Helping Hands Ministry of Belton, Inc.
    Highland Lakes Family Crisis Center
    Hispanic Religious Partnership for Community Health
    Holy Redeemer Catholic Church
    Hope Center
    Houston Food Bank
    Islamic Center Of Irving
    Joseph's Storehouse Pantry
    La Fe Policy Research and Education Center
    LACare Food Bank
    Lake Cities Community Food Pantry
    Lamar County Human Resources Council, Inc.
    Loaves and Fishes of Waco
    MASDFW
    Merced Housing Texas
    Methodist Healthcare Ministries
    MetroHaven of Love Inc.
    Midlothian Senior Citizens Center, Inc.
    Montgomery County Food Bank
    Mountain View Church of Christ
    Mt. Sinai Baptist Church Food Ministry
    National Council of Jewish Women, Texas State Public Affairs
    New Hope Compassion Outreach Ministries
    Northeast Texas Opportunities, Inc.
    North Texas Food Bank
    Phi Theta Kappa Food Pantry
    Primera Baptist Church Food Pantry
    Project Transitions, Inc.
    Rosanky Baptist Church Food Pantry
    Rosewood Baptist Church Food Pantry
    Round Rock Area Serving Center
    San Antonio Christian Hope Resource Center, Inc.
    San Antonio Food Bank
    Senior Community Outreach Services, Inc.
    Services of Hope, Inc
    Share Center
    Shared Housing Center
    Shiloh Baptist Church
    Society of St. Martin Parish Food Pantry
    Society of St. Vincent de Paul
    South Plains Food Bank
    St. Louis Catholic Church Food Pantry
    St. Austin Society of St. Vincent DePaul
    Su Casa De Esperanza, Inc.
    Sustainable Food Center
    Taylor's Valley Baptist Church
    Texas Association of Family and Consumer Sciences
    Texas Baptists (BGCT)
    Texas Baptists Christian Life Commission
    Texas Early Care and Education Coalition
    Texas Food Bank Network
    Texas Hunger Initiative
    The Annunciation Maternity Home
    The Burke Foundation
    The Shepherd's Storehouse
    The Substance Abuse Council
    Trinity Outreach Center and Storehouse, Lubbock
    Turtle Creek Recovery
    Voices for Children of San Antonio
    Walker Community Church
    Wolfe City Food Pantry
                Utah
    Salt Lake Community Action Program
    Utahans Against Hunger
                Vermont
    AIDS Project of Southern Vermont
    Bennington Coalition for the Homeless
    Brattleboro Sunrise Rotary
    Central Vermont Community Action Council
    Champlain Islands Parent Child Center
    Child Care Resource
    Community Connections
    Community Food Cupboard
    COTS
    Fanny Allen Foundation
    Filkorn Public Relations
    Fitz Vogt and Associates
    Food Works at Two Rivers Center
    Green Mountain Farm-to-School
    Greenpeace USA-Vermont
    Grounds for Health
    Interfaith Council of Northshire
    King Street Center
    Lamoille Family Center
    Mary Johnson Children's Center
    Neighbor to Neighbor
    Neighborhood Connections Inc. Londonberry
    Northfield Senior Center
    Northfield Summer Lunch Program
    Roxbury Church and Food Shelf
    Rutland County Parent Child Center
    School Nutrition Association-Vermont
    United Way of Lamoille County
    Vermont Campaign to End Childhood Hunger
    Vermont Dietetics Association
    Vermont Foodbank
    Vermont Food Education Every Day
    Voices for Vermont's Children
    Westminister Afterschool Program
    Windham Child Care Association
                Virginia
    Blue Ridge Area Food Bank
    Dunamis Christian Center
    Elizabeth B. Sherman Childcare and Preschool
    Fauquier Community Food Bank
    Federation of Virginia Food Banks
    Foodbank of Southeastern Virginia
    Foodbank of the Virginia Peninsula
    ICNA Council for Social Justice
    Hampton Baptist Soup Kitchen
    H.E.L.P. Inc.
    Islamic Circle of North America VA
    Little Zion Baptist Church
    Loudoun Interfaith Relief, Inc.
    Office of Family and Children's Ministries Christian Church
    Open Door Full Gospel Baptist Church
    Skyline Community Action Partnership
    Society of St. Andrew
    Spirit of Truth Christian Ministries
    St. Charles Lwanga House, Williamsburg
    St. Paul Lutheran Child Care Center
    Street Missions and Restoration Team
    Voices for Virginia's Children
                Washington
    Anti-Hunger and Nutrition Coalition
    Ballard Food Bank
    Camp Fire USA Central Puget Sound Council
    Carol Rowe Food Bank
    Children's Alliance
    Emerald City Church
    Federal Way Community Caregiving Network
    Food Lifeline
    Forks Abuse Program
    Friends of Youth
    Genesis House
    Lawyers Helping Hungry Children
    Lutheran Public Policy Office of Washington State
    Lynnwood Food Bank
    Marysville Community Food Bank
    North Helpline Foodbank
    Northwest Harvest
    Nutrition First
    Olympic Community Action Program
    Point Roberts Food Bank
    Port Townsend Food Bank
    Quilcene Food Bank
    South King County Food Coalition
    Sultan Food Bank
    The Auburn Food Bank
    United Way of King County
    University District Food Bank
    Washington State Food and Nutrition Council
    White Center Food Bank
    WithinReach
                West Virginia
    Scott's Run Settlement House
                Wisconsin
    9to5 Milwaukee
    Hunger Task Force
    School Sisters of St. Francis
    Wisconsin Child and Adult Care Food Program Sponsors Forum
    Wisconsin Early Childhood Association
                                     ______

        [Questions submitted for the record and their responses
    follow:]

                                 [Via Electronic Mail],
                                                 U.S. Congress,
                                         Washington, DC, July 12, 2010.
    Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary,
    U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave, S.W.,
            Washington, DC 20250-0002.
        Dear Secretary Vilsack: Thank you for testifying at the Education &
    Full Committee Hearing on, ``H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for
    America's Children Act,'' on July 1, 2010.
        Committee Members have additional questions for which they would
    like a written response from you for the hearing record.
        Representative Marcia Fudge (D-OH) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following questions:
        1. As you know, the Summer Food Service Program offered through
    USDA provides low-income children with free, nutritious meals during
    the summer months when school is not in session. However, nationally,
    in fiscal year 2009, only 1 in 10 of the more than 19 million low-
    income children who participated in the free or reduced priced school
    meal program also received meals during the summer months. And, in my
    home state of Ohio, the situation is no different. Although in fiscal
    year 2009, more than 585,000 Ohio children participated in the free or
    reduced priced school meal program, only about 62,000 of those children
    received summer meals. Simply put, as the number of American families
    struggling to put food on the table continues to grow, too many of
    America's kids are going hungry in the summer.
        In an effort to address the ongoing concerns about low-income
    children not having sufficient access to food during the summer months,
    Congress appropriated $85 million in the fiscal year 2010
    appropriations for USDA to develop and test alternative methods of
    providing summer food access.
        Can you update the Committee on the status of projects currently
    being conducted using that funding, as well as any additional plans
    USDA may have to test alternatives during subsequent summers?
        Mr. Secretary, one method I would like to suggest is using the
    National Youth Sports Program. NYSP is a 41 year old sports and
    nutrition program, created by Congress, that was funded by the federal
    government until 2003. At its height, it was serving meals through the
    Summer Food Service Program to 75,000 children from low-income
    communities on more than 200 college campuses across the country. Due
    to lack of funding, it now only serves 7,000 children on 24 college
    campuses and most of the programs will cease to exist next summer
    without federal support.
        Do you have any recommendations for this committee as to how we
    could improve access to summer feeding through legislative improvements
    to the child nutrition laws currently up for reauthorization?
        2. Research shows that starting the day with a nutritious breakfast
    gives kids the energy they need in order to learn. Both H.R.5504 and
    the Senate bill provide a 6-cent addition to lunches that meet
    performance standards.
        Would the Administration support the same reimbursement increase
    for school breakfasts that meet the same performance standards?
        Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following questions:
        1. In 2004, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Centers for Disease
    Control and Prevention (CDC) released a study of competitive foods in
    17 schools and school districts. The study found that 12 of the schools
    and districts increased revenue after improving the nutritional quality
    of their competitive foods and 4 reported no change. In your experience
    as Secretary, do you find this to be the case?
        2. Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture have set
    detailed standards for foods sold in the school lunch and breakfast
    programs--from the size of a vegetable serving to what type of milk is
    served. Every year, the federal government invests $12 billion annually
    in those programs, and selling low-nutrition foods in schools undermine
    the taxpayer investment.
        How will passage and implementation of this legislation positively
    impact the local school food authority's effort to produce nutritious
    meals plans?
        3. We know that providing quality, nutritious meals to students is
    essential for their development, and can affect both their physical
    health as well as their preparedness for learning. However, that is
    only half the battle. Even as schools offer students the opportunity to
    select a balanced meal, students don't always make the healthful
    choice.
        How have competitive foods sold in schools had an impact on the
    choices students make in the lunch line and across the school campus?
        Representative Jared Polis (D-CO) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following questions:
        1. Today, more than 70% of schools exceed USDA's maximum saturated
    fat level for school lunches. The newly-released Draft Dietary
    Guidelines recommend that individuals should ``shift food intake
    patterns to a more plant-based diet that emphasizes vegetables, cooked
    dry beans and peas, fruits, whole grains, nuts, and seeds'' and
    encourages increasing intake of high-quality vegetable protein.
        What will USDA do to implement these new recommendations and ensure
    that all children have a range of healthy choices at school?
        2. How can we ensure healthier options are available and affordable
    to all schools, so that they can reduce fat, saturated fat, and
    cholesterol by offering these options on the lunch line?
        Please send an electronic version of your written response to the
    questions to the Committee staff by close of business on the deadline
    of July 16, 2010. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
    contact the Committee.
                Sincerely,
                                                 George Miller,
                                                              Chairman.
                                     ______

                                 [Via Electronic Mail],
                                                 U.S. Congress,
                                         Washington, DC, July 15, 2010.
    Hon. Thomas J. Vilsack, Secretary,
    U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave, S.W.,
            Washington, DC 20250-0002.
        Dear Secretary Vilsack: Thank you for testifying at the Education &
    Full Committee Hearing on, ``H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for
    America's Children Act,'' on July 1, 2010.
        In addition to questions already sent, Committee Members have
    questions for which they would like a written response from you for the
    hearing record.
        Representative Tom Petri (R-WI) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following question:
        1. One issue that I am very concerned about is how the focus on
    added sugar (as opposed to total sugar) in the debate over nutrition
    standards impacts cranberry products. As you know, Wisconsin is the
    leading producer of cranberries in the U.S.
        Cranberries have a low level of natural sugar and therefore are
    sweetened to make them more appealing. However, my understanding is
    that even with added sugar, many cranberry products, including
    sweetened dried cranberries and cranberry juice, contain less total
    sugar than other products such as 100 percent apple juice or dried
    fruits like raisins. It is also my understanding that numerous studies
    have shown that cranberry products provide additional health benefits,
    primarily related to maintaining urinary tract health. Unfortunately,
    however, the focus on added sugar means that cranberry products are
    considered unhealthy as a result of their added sugar while other
    products, which may have higher levels of total sugar, are considered
    healthy if consumed in moderation.
        What is your opinion regarding the focus on added sugars (as
    opposed to total sugars) in the discussion over nutrition standards?
    Additionally, for similar reasons, should other standards beyond the
    100% juice standard be considered for juice products?
        Representative Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-WA) has asked that you
    respond in writing to the following questions:
        1. This past spring, the United States Department of Agriculture
    promulgated an interim final ruling for the Special Supplemental
    Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children's (WIC) program
    excluding white potatoes from the recently revised list of eligible
    foods under the WIC program.
        As a representative from the second largest potato producing state,
    I am concerned that the decision to exclude white potatoes was not
    based on sound nutritional science and will result in a costly and
    confusing policy that is not in the best interest of WIC participants.
        As you know, one of the primary reasons for revising the food list
    was to make it more consistent with the Institute of Medicine's
    recommended dietary intakes (RDA) for individuals. In particular, the
    IOM was concerned about the need to increase RDAs for vitamin C and
    potassium.
        Potatoes are more nutrient dense than many of the vegetables
    already included in the WIC program. In fact, one medium-sized potato
    provides 45 percent of the Recommended Daily Value of vitamin C and 620
    mg of potassium.
        Why were potatoes excluded from this interim rule and will USDA
    reconsider and include white potatoes in the list of WIC eligible
    foods?
        2. In a similar vein, I would like to ask you about the Fruit and
    Vegetable Snack program also implemented by USDA. To date, USDA has
    treated fruits and vegetables in all forms, fresh, frozen, dried,
    canned, the same. Moreover, frozen vegetables and fruits are often
    considered to be as nutritionally dense as fresh fruits and vegetables.
    Would you recommend that Congress include frozen fruits and vegetables
    in the snack program?
        Please send an electronic version of your written response to the
    questions to the Committee staff by close of business on the revised
    deadline of July 23, 2010. If you have any questions, please do not
    hesitate to contact the Committee.
                Sincerely,
                                                 George Miller,
                                                              Chairman.
                                     ______

              Secretary Vilsack's Responses to Questions Submitted

                       representative marcia fudge (d-oh)
        1. Q: As you know, the Summer Food Service Program offered through
    USDA provides low-income children with free, nutritious meals during
    the summer months when school is not in session. However, nationally,
    in fiscal year 2009, only 1 in 10 of the more than 19 million low-
    income children who participated in the free or reduced priced school
    meal program also received meals during the summer months. And, in my
    home state of Ohio, the situation is no different. Although in fiscal
    year 2009, more than 585,000 Ohio children participated in the free or
    reduced priced school meal program, only about 62,000 of those children
    received summer meals. Simply put, as the number of American families
    struggling to put food on the table continues to grow, too many of
    America's kids are going hungry in the summer.
        In an effort to address the ongoing concerns about low-income
    children not having sufficient access to food during the summer months,
    Congress appropriated $85 million in the fiscal year 2010
    appropriations for USDA to develop and test alternative methods of
    providing summer food access.
        Can you update the Committee on the status of projects currently
    being conducted using that funding, as well as any additional plans
    USDA may have to test alternatives during subsequent summers?

        A: I appreciate and share your concerns about food insecurity and
    hunger in the summer months, especially among children. We are moving
    forward on the Summer Food for Children projects, funded with the
    appropriation you mentioned, to demonstrate improved approaches to
    summer feeding for low-income children, and to assess their impact on
    food insecurity. Two projects are already underway to test ways to
    strengthen the existing Summer Food Service Program, one in Arkansas
    and one in Mississippi, and we expect to test additional strategies
    next year.
        The Department will also test new ways of delivering summer
    benefits, including the electronic benefit transfer (EBT) delivery
    systems used in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,
    Infants and Children (WIC) and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance
    Program (SNAP) to give low-income families with children more resources
    to use at food stores during the summer. We intend to release a
    solicitation in the next few weeks for applications from States to
    operate these projects during the summer of 2011 and beyond. Because
    these new delivery systems will depend on the cooperation of several
    agencies of State government, we will be urging governors to coordinate
    across these agencies to help their respective States submit strong
    applications. We will also seek proposals and award a contract for an
    independent, rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of this approach
    in preventing or reducing child hunger during the summer.
        In the near-term, the project will provide thousands of low-income
    children in the demonstration communities with enhanced Summer Food
    Service Program (SFSP) services, or with substantial new household food
    benefits during the summer. More importantly, in the longer term it
    will provide critical knowledge about the impact of a cutting-edge
    nutrition intervention on achieving real improvement in food security
    among our children during the summer months.

        Q: Mr. Secretary, one method I would like to suggest is using the
    National Youth Sports Program. NYSP is a 41 year old sports and
    nutrition program, created by Congress, that was funded by the federal
    government until 2003. At its height, it was serving meals through the
    Summer Food Service Program to 75,000 children from low-income
    communities on more than 200 college campuses across the country. Due
    to lack of funding, it now only serves 7,000 children on 24 college
    campuses and most of the programs will cease to exist next summer
    without federal support.
        Do you have any recommendations for this committee as to how we
    could improve access to summer feeding through legislative improvements
    to the child nutrition laws currently up for reauthorization?

        A: As noted above, USDA is in the process of implementing several
    projects to test innovative approaches for improving access of low-
    income children to food in the summer. This summer, USDA began two
    statewide, multi-year demonstration projects in Arkansas and
    Mississippi. We plan to conduct rigorous evaluations of the impacts of
    these projects, to provide Congress and the Administration with clear,
    sound, and timely findings to make decisions about potential
    legislative changes. Until the evaluation results are available, we
    cannot say which enhancements to the SFSP structure would be most
    beneficial at expanding the reach of the program.

        2. Q: Research shows that starting the day with a nutritious
    breakfast gives kids the energy they need in order to learn. Both
    HR.5504 and the Senate bill provide a 6-cent addition to lunches that
    meet performance standards.
        Would the Administration support the same reimbursement increase
    for school breakfasts that meet the same performance standards?

        A: Yes, we would support the same increase for the School Breakfast
    Program (SBP), provided that such an increase is tied to compliance
    with new meal pattern requirements for the breakfast program, and that
    funding offsets are available for this purpose.
                       representative lynn woolsey (d-ca)
        1. Q: In 2004, US. Department of Agriculture and Centers for
    Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) released a study of competitive
    foods in 17 schools and school districts. The study found that 12 of
    the schools and districts increased revenue after improving the
    nutritional quality of their competitive foods and 4 reported no
    change. In your experience as Secretary, do you find this to be the
    case?

        A: As noted in your question, USDA partnered with the CDC in 2004
    to collect success stories that showcase how schools and school
    districts could improve the nutritional quality of foods sold on the
    school campus. These stories, which are published in ``Making It
    Happen: School Nutrition Success Stories'' at http://www.fns.usda.gov/
    tn/Resources/makingithappen.html, did show that, of the 17 schools and
    school districts reporting revenue information, only one experienced a
    decrease in revenue.
        While USDA has not collected any national data on this question,
    these stories suggest that it is possible for schools to change the
    types of foods they sell to children without negatively impacting their
    bottom line and potentially improving it.

        2. Q: Congress and the US. Department of Agriculture have set
    detailed standards for foods sold in the school lunch and breakfast
    programs-from the size of a vegetable serving to what type of milk is
    served. Every year, the federal government invests $12 billion annually
    in those programs, and selling low-nutrition foods in schools undermine
    the taxpayer investment.
        How will passage and implementation of this legislation positively
    impact the local school food authority's effort to produce nutritious
    meals plans?

        A: The National School Lunch Program regulations prohibit the sale
    of foods of minimal nutritional value, such as carbonated beverages,
    hard candy and water ices, in the foodservice area during meal periods.
    Beyond this, USDA currently does not have the authority to regulate the
    sale of other foods available to students outside of the school meal
    programs during the regular meal service (competitive foods). State
    agencies or local school districts may choose to set their own
    requirements for competitive foods.
        Providing USDA with authority to set specific standards for the
    types of foods offered in both school meals and competitive foods will
    support local school food authorities in their efforts to assure that
    all foods available to students are nutritious and healthful. In
    addition, increasing the levels of reimbursement for meals and linking
    that increase to performance standards will also assist in meeting the
    goals of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and other nutritional
    standards.
        If given authority to regulate all competitive foods, USDA would
    consult with key stakeholders (including schools and industry
    representatives) to seek their input. Subsequently, based on statutory
    direction, stakeholders' input and science-based nutrition standards,
    we would issue a proposed regulation that would establish baseline
    nutrition standards to define the foods that could be sold outside of
    the school meal programs. Stakeholders and the public would have ample
    opportunity to comment on any proposed regulation.

        3. Q: We know that providing quality, nutritious meals to students
    is essential for their development, and can affect both their physical
    health as well as their preparedness for learning. However, that is
    only half the battle. Even as schools offer students the opportunity to
    select a balanced meal, students don't always make the healthful
    choice.
        How have competitive foods sold in schools had an impact on the
    choices students make in the lunch line and across the school campus?

        A: The evidence is clear that competitive foods have a substantial
    impact on the choices that students make at school. USDA's third School
    Nutrition Dietary Assessment from school year 2004-2005 shows that
    about two in five school children consumed one or more competitive
    foods in the course of the day. The most commonly consumed foods
    include desserts and snacks (e.g., ice cream, cookies, cakes, brownies,
    candy, and potato chips), beverages other than milk, and bread products
    such as crackers and pretzels, corn/tortilla chips, breads and rolls,
    muffins, doughnuts, sweet rolls, and toaster pastries.
        Children in elementary schools consume fewer calories from
    competitive foods than do middle and high school children. Elementary
    school children tend to consume competitive foods outside of a meal;
    whereas 75 percent of middle school children's competitive food calorie
    intake is from the lunch meal.
        On average, children who consumed one or more competitive foods
    obtained over 150 calories per day from low-nutrient, energy-dense
    foods. National School Lunch Program (NSLP) participants were less
    likely to consume competitive foods than those not participating in the
    NSLP, and participants who did tended to consume less than
    nonparticipants.
                       representative jared polis (d-co)
        1. Q: Today, more than 70% of schools exceed USDA's maximum
    saturated fat level for school lunches. The newly released Draft
    Dietary Guidelines recommend that individuals should ``shift food
    intake patterns to a more plant-based diet that emphasizes vegetables,
    cooked dry beans and peas, fruits, whole grains, nuts, and seeds'' and
    encourages increasing intake of high-quality vegetable protein.
        What will USDA do to implement these new recommendations and ensure
    that all children have a range of healthy choices at school?

        A: On October 20, 2009, IOM released ``School Meals: Building
    Blocks for Healthy Children,'' a comprehensive final report with eight
    recommendations addressing new nutrient targets and meal requirements
    for the NSLP and SBP, implementation and monitoring of the new
    requirements, and evaluation and research activities to guide future
    program improvement. FNS is developing a proposed regulation to update
    the school meal patterns and nutrition requirements based on the IOM
    report.
        In collaboration with the Department of Health and Human Services,
    USDA's Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP) is carefully
    reviewing the new recommendations from the Dietary Guidelines Advisory
    Committee and will consider these recommendations as it works towards
    issuing the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans at the end of this
    year. FNS will also consider recommendations to incorporate into the
    proposed regulation for school meals as appropriate.
        Stakeholders and the public will have the opportunity to submit
    comments on the proposed regulation for school meals. In the interim,
    FNS has issued practical guidance and technical assistance to help
    schools move in the direction of the Dietary Guidelines.

        2. Q: How can we ensure healthier options are available and
    affordable to all schools, so that they can reduce fat, saturated fat,
    and cholesterol by offering these options on the lunch line?

        A: Reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Programs provides us with
    many opportunities to improve the nutrition requirements and quality of
    the food provided by the National School Lunch Program (NSLP).
    Increased funding for school meals, as well as our continued
    development of enhanced technical assistance resources available to
    states and school food service professionals, can result in great
    improvements in the nutritional quality of the meals provided by these
    programs.
        In February 2008, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service (FNS)
    contracted with the National Academy of Sciences' Institute of Medicine
    (IOM) to independently review and provide recommendations to update the
    meal patterns and nutrition standards for the National School Lunch
    Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program (SBP) consistent with the
    2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
        On October 20, 2009, IOM released ``School Meals: Building Blocks
    for Healthy Children,'' a comprehensive final report with eight
    recommendations addressing new nutrient targets and meal requirements
    for the NSLP and SBP, implementation and monitoring of the new
    requirements, and evaluation and research activities to guide future
    program improvement. FNS is developing a proposed regulation to update
    the school meal patterns and nutrition requirements based on the IOM
    report.
        With the development of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans
    later this year, FNS will consider how such recommendations apply to
    meal pattern requirements for school meals and incorporate
    recommendations into the proposed rule, as appropriate. Stakeholders
    and the public will have the opportunity to submit comments on the
    proposed regulation for school meals.
        The HealthierUS School Challenge (HUSSC) is a voluntary
    certification for schools participating in the NSLP and is implemented
    under USDA's Team Nutrition initiative. USDA has established the HUSSC
    to recognize schools that create healthier school environments by
    providing nutrition education, nutritious food and beverage choices,
    physical education and opportunities for physical activity. The awards
    recognize schools that have gone above and beyond minimum school meal
    program requirements and have met specific criteria established for
    Bronze, Silver, Gold or Gold of Distinction awards--depending on levels
    of criteria met. Schools that become certified maintain the
    certification for four years from the date they receive the Award.
        The HUSSC is a means by which schools involve children in nutrition
    education activities, taste testing opportunities, and more. As of June
    30, 2010, we had 732 schools in 35 States certified as HUSSC schools.
    With the support of the First Lady, we are committed to seeing the
    number of HUSSC schools double over the next school year to 1250 by
    June 2011, with an additional 1,000 schools per year for two years
    after that, with over 3,000 awards by June 2013.
        FNS continues to offer a wide variety of technical assistance to
    make school meals more healthy, appealing and enjoyable. Several
    resources that address menu planning and ways to encourage children to
    consume fruits, vegetables and whole grains are available on our Team
    Nutrition Web site (www.teamnutrition.usda.gov/library.html). The
    National Food Service Management Institute also offers a wide range of
    training opportunities for child nutrition program professionals
    working in school nutrition and child care settings. These training
    sessions may be customized for State agencies and school food service
    professionals.
        USDA is also exploring ways that insights from the discipline of
    behavioral economics can help to improve food selection and consumption
    by students. USDA has already conducted some research that suggests
    that school cafeteria managers may be able to control many of the
    elements shown to influence food choice, such as how foods are
    presented. Identifying how these elements could be used to cue
    healthier choices may help improve students' diets without sacrificing
    freedom of choice. (See ``When Nudging in the Lunch Line Might Be a
    Good Thing,'' from Amber Waves, Economic Research Service, March 2009,
    http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/March09/Features/LunchLine.htm.)
    USDA is also developing an ongoing research program to develop
    practical approaches to put behavioral economics to work in school
    cafeterias.
        USDA is focused on ways to better connect children to their food
    and create opportunities for local farmers to provide their harvest to
    schools in their communities. USDA is supporting Farm to School efforts
    through a number of initiatives, and continues to look for ways to help
    facilitate this important connection. We recognize the growing interest
    among school districts and communities to incorporate regionally and
    locally produced farm foods into the school nutrition programs.
        I am also happy to report that all USDA Foods provided to schools
    consist of commodity products that represent healthy choices. Those
    products have undergone a significant transformation. USDA Foods, which
    represent 15 to 20 percent of the food in school nutrition programs,
    include fruits, vegetables, whole grains and healthy sources of
    protein. States and school districts can choose from over 180 available
    foods. A few specific improvements to USDA Foods include decreasing the
    sodium levels in all USDA canned vegetables, and requiring that all
    USDA canned fruits are packed in light syrup, water, or natural juices.
    Additionally, we offer fresh fruits and vegetables, a variety of lean
    meat choices, and a wide range of whole grain products to schools. We
    will continue to work to make sure schools and states are aware that
    USDA Foods represent a variety of the healthy options that are
    available.
                       representative bobby scott (d-va)
        1. Q: What steps will the Department take to ensure the
    participation of minority and women-owned farms in the Farm to School
    program?

        A: As part of its general mission to increase and support Farm to
    School efforts under the National School Lunch Program, USDA includes
    outreach efforts to reach minority and women-owned farmers through
    various networking opportunities, such as the Know Your Farmer, Know
    Your Food initiative, Farm to School related webinars, and various
    conference attendance.
        As part of USDA's Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative, the
    Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) and Agricultural Marketing Service
    (AMS) formed a Farm to School Team. The purpose of the Farm to School
    Team is to support local and regional food systems by facilitating
    linkages between schools and their local food producers. While still in
    the exploratory phase, a key mission of the Farm to School Team is to
    provide technical assistance and guidance concerning procurement in the
    area of farm to school.
        The Team has been inquiring and gathering information about how the
    procurement requirements are being followed by school food authorities
    in their farm to school efforts, including steps made by school
    districts to utilize small businesses, minority-owned firms, and
    women's business enterprises, whenever possible, as described in
    Program regulations.
        Upon conclusion of the Farm to School Team's site visits in the
    fall of 2010, FNS will develop technical assistance and/or guidance
    materials. Such materials will pay careful consideration to encouraging
    the participation of minority and women-owned firms. As a result of
    this guidance, FNS anticipates that both State Departments of Education
    and Agriculture will be able to assist school systems on what
    exemptions to the bidding processes schools can apply, particularly
    those pertaining to minority-owned, women-owned, small, and socially
    disadvantaged businesses.
        And, finally, as mandated by the 2008 Farm Bill, USDA has created
    an Office of Advocacy and Outreach (OAO). OAO's mission is to increase
    access to programs of the Department, and increase the viability and
    profitability of small farms and ranches, beginning farmers or
    ranchers, and socially disadvantaged farmers or ranchers. The office's
    focus on improving access to USDA programs for historically underserved
    groups'--including minority and women-owned farms and businesses--is
    demonstrative of the Department's commitment to ensuring that all of
    our constituents have the opportunity to participate in and benefit
    from our programs.
                        representative tom petri (r-wi)
        1. Q: One issue that I am very concerned about is how the focus on
    added sugar (as opposed to total sugar) in the debate over nutrition
    standards impacts cranberry products. As you know, Wisconsin is the
    leading producer of cranberries in the US.
        Cranberries have a low level of natural sugar and therefore are
    sweetened to make them more appealing. However, my understanding is
    that even with added sugar, many cranberry products, including
    sweetened dried cranberries and cranberry juice, contain less total
    sugar than other products such as 100 percent apple juice or dried
    fruits like raisins. It is also my understanding that numerous studies
    have shown that cranberry products provide additional health benefits,
    primarily related to maintaining urinary tract health. Unfortunately,
    however, the focus on added sugar means that cranberry products are
    considered unhealthy as a result of their added sugar while other
    products, which may have higher levels of total sugar, are considered
    healthy if consumed in moderation.
        What is your opinion regarding the focus on added sugars (as
    opposed to total sugars) in the discussion over nutrition standards?
    Additionally, for similar reasons, should other standards beyond the
    100% juice standard be considered for juice products?

        A: The consumption of added sugars in the typical American diet
    comes largely from food products that are low in nutrients, meaning
    products such as soft drinks, cakes, cookies, and candies. While we
    recognize that cranberries, lemons and other tart fruits may require
    added sugars to be mixed in with other naturally sweet fruits to
    increase their palatability, we continue to believe that the focus on
    added sugars rather than total sugars is appropriate as we work toward
    developing dietary guidance that will have a positive impact on the
    health of all Americans and reverse the epidemic of obesity which grips
    the country.
        In addition, many cranberry products are allowed in the school meal
    programs. Any 100% fruit juice containing cranberries may be served as
    part of a reimbursable meal and any juice product with a minimum of 50
    percent juice may receive a Child Nutrition Label that indicates the
    contribution that product makes toward the fruit/vegetable requirement
    for a meal. There are no added sugar limitations in the school meal
    programs. Any changes to our existing policies and standards would
    require extensive outreach to stakeholders to obtain their collective
    wisdom on the advisability of any such changes.
                  representative cathy mcmorris-rodgers (r-wa)
        1. Q: This past spring, the United States Department of Agriculture
    promulgated an interim final ruling for the Special Supplemental
    Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children's (WIC) program
    excluding white potatoes from the recently revised list of eligible
    foods under the WIC program.
        As a representative from the second largest potato producing state,
    I am concerned that the decision to exclude white potatoes was not
    based on sound nutritional science and will result in a costly and
    confusing policy that is not in the best interest of WIC participants.
        As you know, one of the primary reasons for revising the food list
    was to make it more consistent with the Institute of Medicine's
    recommended dietary intakes (RDA) for individuals. In particular, the
    IOM was concerned about the need to increase RDAs for vitamin C and
    potassium.
        Potatoes are more nutrient dense than many of the vegetables
    already included in the WIC program. In fact, one medium-sized potato
    provides 45 percent of the Recommended Daily Value of vitamin C and 620
    mg of potassium.
        Why were potatoes excluded from this interim rule and will USDA
    reconsider and include white potatoes in the list of WIC eligible
    foods?

        A: The changes made to the WIC food packages were based on
    scientific recommendations from the National Academies' Institute of
    Medicine (IOM). The IOM was charged with reviewing the nutritional
    needs of the WIC population--low-income infants, children, and
    pregnant, breastfeeding and postpartum women who are at nutritional
    risk--and recommending changes to the WIC food packages. The
    restriction of white potatoes, as recommended by the IOM, is based on
    food intake data showing that white potatoes are the most widely used
    vegetable. As such, the IOM stated that encouraging the intake of
    potatoes provides no additional nutritional benefit to WIC
    participants. Additionally, the inclusion of white potatoes does not
    support the goal of expanding the types and varieties of fruits and
    vegetables available to program participants.
        The interim rule revising the WIC food packages was published on
    December 6, 2007, with a comment period that closed February 1, 2010.
    The Food and Nutrition Service received over 8,000 comments on the
    interim rule and is currently reviewing and analyzing comments
    received. Please be assured that after due consideration of the
    submissions, we will carefully review all interim rule provisions
    during the rulemaking process, and expect to issue a final rule
    revising the WIC food packages in June 2011.

        2. Q: In a similar vein, I would like to ask you about the Fruit
    and Vegetable Snack program also implemented by USDA. To date, USDA has
    treated fruits and vegetables in all forms, fresh, frozen, dried,
    canned, the same. Moreover, frozen vegetables and fruits are often
    considered to be as nutritionally dense as fresh fruits and vegetables.
    Would you recommend that Congress include frozen fruits and vegetables
    in the snack program?

        A: As you mention, the National School Lunch and School Breakfast
    Programs, the Child and Adult Care Food Program and the Summer Food
    Service Program allow use of all forms of fruits and vegetables in
    reimbursable meals. Flexibility in the types of products that are
    offered is important for these programs, given variations in the volume
    of meals provided as well as logistical constraints.
        However, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) is designed
    not only to provide children with needed nutrients, but to encourage
    children to learn about and appreciate fruits and vegetables as fresh
    produce. While frozen produce may be nutritionally equivalent to fresh,
    the FFVP's emphasis on fresh produce affords children opportunities to
    learn how different fruits and vegetables are grown and that there are
    any number of ways they can be offered to support a healthful diet.
    Therefore, we recommend that the FFVP continue to focus on fresh
    produce.
                                     ______

                                 [Via Electronic Mail],
                                                 U.S. Congress,
                                         Washington, DC, July 12, 2010.
    Mr. Tom Colicchio, Chef and Restaurateur,
    Craft, 47 E. 19th St., 5th Floor, New York, NY 10003.
        Dear Mr. Colicchio: Thank you for testifying at the Education &
    Full Committee Hearing on, ``H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for
    America's Children Act,'' on July 1, 2010.
        A Committee Member has an additional question for which they would
    like a written response from you for the hearing record.
        Representative Marcia Fudge (D-OH) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following question:
        1. Can you tell us how you believe Congress can support public-
    private partnerships, like the ones you have established, in order to
    make real changes in schools and to improve nutrition?
        Please send an electronic version of your written response to the
    questions to the Committee staff by close of business on the deadline
    of July 16, 2010. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
    contact the Committee.
                Sincerely,
                                                 George Miller,
                                                              Chairman.
                                     ______

        [Editor's Note: A response was not received from Mr.
    Colicchio prior to the closing deadline of the hearing record.]

                                 [Via Electronic Mail],
                                                 U.S. Congress,
                                         Washington, DC, July 12, 2010.
    Mr. Eduardo J. Sanchez, M.D., M.PH, FAAFP, Vice President and Chief
        Medical Officer,
    Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, 1001 E. Lookout Drive, Richardson,
            TX 75082.
        Dear Dr. Sanchez: Thank you for testifying at the Education & Full
    Committee Hearing on, ``H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for America's
    Children Act,'' on July 1, 2010.
        Committee Members have additional questions for which they would
    like a written response from you for the hearing record.
        Representative Marcia Fudge (D-OH) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following questions:
        1. The Administration and Congress understand that improved
    nutrition is an indispensable element of health care. This connection
    between good nutrition and good health is most explicit in H.R. 5504's
    provision that expands direct certification for free school meals by
    including Medicaid as a source of automatic eligibility. (Currently,
    only SNAP and TANF enrollment are sources of direct certification.)
        Do you support this expansion of automatic free school meal
    eligibility?
        2. Do you see other connections between health care and nutrition
    that the House and Senate child nutrition bills currently include--or
    ought to include?
        Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) has asked that you respond in
    writing to the following questions:
        1. In your testimony, you discussed some of the issues surrounding
    competitive foods. For those of us who haven't been in a school
    cafeteria for awhile, can you describe some of the foods and
    differences in nutritional value of those foods in the a la carte and
    store versus the traditional meal lines? Why is it so critical that the
    Secretary be provided the authority to set nutritional standards for
    these foods being sold in our schools?
        2. One of the key reasons why national school nutrition standards
    for competitive foods is so important to me is that they can lead to
    stigma within the program, where low income children must take the
    school meal and middle and upper income children may purchase the
    competitive foods. Do you think having national standards will help or
    hurt low income schools?
        Please send an electronic version of your written response to the
    questions to the Committee staff by close of business on the deadline
    of July 16, 2010. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to
    contact the Committee.
                Sincerely,
                                                 George Miller,
                                                              Chairman.
                                     ______

                                    ------

        [Whereupon, at 12:41 p.m., the committee was adjourned.]