[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 112 (Friday, August 12, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]


[Congressional Record: August 12, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]

 
              BETTER NUTRITION AND HEALTH FOR CHILDREN ACT

  The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Daschle). The Senator from Vermont is 
recognized.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I understand the Chair has before it the 
committee amendments. They have been cleared, and I urge their 
adoption.
  I ask unanimous consent that the time be reserved to me, but they are 
to be in order to move now to the consideration of the committee 
amendments.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Under the previous order, the Senator from Kentucky is to be 
recognized for an amendment.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, have the committee amendments been agreed 
to?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the committee 
amendments.
  The committee amendments were agreed to.
  So the committee amendments were agreed to.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
  Mr. LUGAR. I move to lay that motion on the table.
  The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.


                           Amendment No. 2559

      (Purpose: To improve the administration of the WIC Program)

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on 
behalf of myself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Craig, Mr. Dole, Mr. Cochran, Mr. 
Helms, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Chafee.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
  The bill clerk read as follows:

       The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] for himself, Mr. 
     Lugar, Mr. Craig, Mr. Dole, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Helms, Mr. 
     Coverdell, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Chafee proposes an amendment 
     numbered 2559.

  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the 
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment is as follows:

       At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:

     SEC.   . IMPROVED ADMINISTRATION OF WIC PROGRAM.

       Section 17(f) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 
     1786(f)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(23) No State agency or local agency shall be considered 
     an office in a State that provides public assistance for 
     purposes of section 7(a)(2)(A) of Public Law 103-31.''.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask 
unanimous consent the time not be charged to either side.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order 
for the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the amendment I have offered is very 
simple. It will remove the burden WIC clinics will face after January 
1, 1995, of registering WIC recipients to vote. The National Voter 
Registration Act, popularly known as the motor-voter bill, requires 
States to designate public assistance offices as voter registration 
sites. Included in the report language accompanying this bill was a 
sentence asserting that ``public assistance offices'' includes WIC, as 
well as AFDC, food stamp, and Medicaid offices. Mr. President, I 
believe this inclusion of WIC clinics is shortsighted and needs to be 
revisited.
  Mr. President, at the outset it is important to stress that this 
amendment is not about the merits of the motor-voter bill. This Chamber 
knows well my views on that legislation. This amendment is about the 
WIC Program. It is about burdening one of our most successful programs 
with totally unrelated responsibilities. The requirements of motor-
voter will impair the ability of local WIC clinics to meet the needs of 
needy pregnant women, infants, and children, and to fulfill the mission 
of the program.

  The WIC Program was designed specifically for low-income pregnant, 
post-partum, and breastfeeding women; infants; and children under age 5 
who are at nutritional risk. Benefits participants receive include 
vouchers for supplemental foods such as infant formula, iron-fortified 
cereal, and vitamin C-rich juices. Equally important, and arguably more 
so than the foods provided, are the health screenings, nutrition 
education sessions, and one-on-one contacts WIC workers have with moms 
to teach them about the nutritional needs of their fetus and/or child.
  The potential impact this program has on the health and well-being of 
our children is significant. In Kentucky, over half of the babies born 
are on WIC, and that figure is similar nationwide. The link between 
adequate nutrient intake and the development of a child is clear. Tufts 
University researchers have found that undernutrition can have a 
detrimental impact on the intellectual and behavioral development of a 
child. Iron deficiency, for example, has an adverse effect on a child's 
ability to concentrate and retain information. Prolonged 
undernourishment can harm a child's social and cognitive development.
  Mr. President, WIC is successful in improving the nutritional status 
of the participants: studies show that pregnant women on WIC and 
Medicaid are less likely to deliver premature or low birth weight 
babies, which saves Medicaid expenditures and puts the infant on a 
healthy path at the start. Another study found that WIC reduced the 
prevalence of anemia, and reduced height and weight abnormalities among 
children.
  But, the National Voter Registration Act requires public assistance 
offices, including WIC, to distribute voter registration application 
forms to all applying for public assistance, to assist the applicants 
with completing the forms unless the applicant refuses such assistance, 
and to accept the completed registration form and forward it to the 
appropriate State officials.
  Further, the offices can be asked to maintain copies of the forms 
applicants sign when declining to register, as well as register non-
program-applicants who walk in off the street.
  The administrative burden this imposes on WIC is considerable and 
indisputable. In fact, it is specifically recognized in the 
congressional reports accompanying the National Voter Registration Act. 
Both the House and Senate reported that ``Costs for registration 
application assistance for these offices [public assistance offices] 
should be considered matchable under the current Federal match rate for 
these programs.'' Agencies are interpreting this to mean that offices 
can be reimbursed at a Federal match for the additional expenses 
incurred by fulfilling the requirements of motor voter.

  But, Mr. President, WIC is not a program to which the State 
contributes funds to match Federal dollars. WIC is a grant program 
under which Federal money is given to the States for both 
administrative and food expenses. WIC is a discretionary program, not a 
mandatory program.
  Every year for the last 6 years at least, a large, bipartisan group 
of Senators--including myself--has written to our colleagues on the 
Appropriations Committee urging them to continue on the road to fully 
funding WIC. And the committee obliges. This year alone, appropriators 
have recommended an increase of $260 million to $3.47 
billion so that we can continue to increase participation in this 
successful program.
  Requiring WIC workers to register people to vote detracts from the 
primary mission of the WIC program--improving the nutritional health of 
our Nation's underprivileged children. Mandating clinics to administer 
the motor-voter requirements consumes the scarce Federal dollars that 
are appropriated for the important WIC activities such as health 
screening, nutrition education, and breastfeeding promotion.
  If WIC clinics are subject to the motor-voter mandates, then WIC 
workers will have to spend valuable time and money on an activity that 
is totally unrelated to the mission of the WIC program. Further, it 
could take away from efforts to expand participation in WIC. As we, as 
appropriators, continue to increase funds for WIC, I would hope that 
those funds go to adding recipients onto this successful program, and 
continuing the health and nutrition education efforts.
  Mr. President, I want to make one final point before yielding the 
floor for the moment. This is not, as will probably be contended, an 
assault on the motor-voter bill. It does not eviscerate the motor-voter 
bill. It is important to remember that 77 percent of WIC participants 
are children under age 5. Now, clearly, 5-year-olds are not going to be 
registered voters. Seventy-seven percent of WIC recipients are under 5. 
Only 23 percent, or 1.4 million, WIC participants are women--a very 
small fraction of the motor-voter universe.
  In reporting on the motor-voter bill, CBO estimated that 80 to 90 
percent of voters would register through the driver's license system, 
while the remaining 10 to 20 percent would register through the mail-in 
and agency-based systems. And, WIC is but a small component of the 
agency-based system. Is a small fraction-of-a-fraction of the scope of 
the motor-voter bill. But for WIC, voter registration is a very 
significant burden and certainly unrelated to its purpose.
  Mr. President, I think it is important to point out that the National 
Association of WIC Directors supports my amendment--exempting WIC from 
the burdens of motor-voter is an item on their 1994 legislative agenda.
  I ask unanimous consent that a letter, dated June 21, from the 
National Association of WIC Directors, Executive Director Douglas A. 
Greenaway, be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                              National Association


                                              of WIC Directors

                                                    June 21, 1994.
     Hon. Mitch McConnell,
     U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator McConnell: The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WIC 
     DIRECTORS, NAWD, applaud your efforts to ensure that the 
     essential mission of the Special Supplemental Food Program 
     for Women, Infants and Children, WIC--the provision of 
     quality nutrition education and breastfeeding 
     promotion and support services--is maintained and not be 
     diluted by unrelated activities.
       NAWD expressed concern in its broadly distributed 1994 
     legislative agenda about the negative consequences the 
     National Voter Registration Act will have upon WIC Clinics. 
     NAWD urged the Congress to either exempt the WIC Program from 
     the Act or provide additional monies to perform this new 
     unrelated task.
       NAWD's canvass of state and local agency directors and 
     nutrition coordinators confirms that the requirements to 
     implement the Act in WIC clinics will only further reduce the 
     already stretched time, staff, financial and other resources 
     available to ensure that WIC participants receive the quality 
     nutrition services to which they are eligible.
       NAWD is dedicated to maximizing WIC Program resources 
     through effective management practices. Our members--State, 
     U.S. Territory and Native American Agency Directors, Local 
     Agency Directors, Nutritionists and others--have made 
     important contributions toward improving the quality of life 
     of America's low-income women, infants and children.
       NAWD is pleased to learn that you will offer an amendment 
     to the Child Nutrition Act reauthorizing legislation to 
     exempt WIC from implementation requirements of the National 
     Voter Registration Act. NAWD is grateful to you for your 
     generous and continued support of the WIC Program.
       Should you have any questions or if I may provide 
     additional information, please feel free to contact me on 
     202-232-5492.
           Sincerely,
                                             Douglas A. Greenaway,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. McCONNELL. In sum, this amendment would relieve WIC clinics--not 
any other public assistance office--of the burden of complying with the 
motor-voter bill. As the WIC program celebrates it's 20th birthday this 
year, let us not stray from the important mission of this program: to 
improve the nutritional health and well-being of underprivileged women, 
infants, and children. I hope my colleagues to join me in support of 
this amendment.
  Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 35 minutes remaining.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I retain the remainder of my time for 
the moment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. LUGAR addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
  Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask the distinguished Senator from 
Kentucky for as many as 7 minutes.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I yield 7 minutes to the Senator.
  Mr. LUGAR. I thank the Senator.
  Mr. President, I commend the distinguished junior Senator from 
Kentucky, Senator McConnell, who is the ranking member on the Senate 
Nutrition Subcommittee and has done so much to ensure the successful 
legislation that we are considering today.
  I thank him especially for his amendment to exempt WIC from the 
provisions of the National Voter Registration Act. The Senator has made 
the case with eloquence and cogency. But let me simply underline some 
of the important points that he has raised.
  I share his concern that requiring WIC agency staff to offer voter 
registration services will detract from the fundamental goal of the 
Women, Infants, and Children Program, which is to promote the health of 
at-risk, low-income mothers and children through the provision of 
nutrition services and nutritious food.
  In fact, the time element in these services is important, Mr. 
President. I cannot stress enough the diligence with which the staffs 
of WIC programs approach these responsibilities and opportunities. But 
the women and infants that they serve are fully in need of their total 
devotion and concentration. And, in my judgment, the National Voter 
Registration Act is extraneous to nutrition and feeding programs. In 
fact, a 1994 report by the Urban Institute cited voter registration as 
one of the new Federal and State initiatives that, without additional 
funding--and I quote from the Urban Institute--``will inevitably reduce 
sources devoted to core WIC services.'' That is from an objective 
agency, devoted to the urban poor, looking specifically at the 
objectives of the WIC Program.

  The services provided at WIC clinics are qualitatively different from 
those provided by other public assistance agencies. That, certainly, is 
the central point of our case today. The WIC services qualitatively are 
different. WIC agency staff offer nutrition education. They conduct 
nutrition assessments. They make referrals to other health care and 
social service providers. They promote breast feeding and tailor food 
packages to meet individual needs.
  It is these services which have helped WIC to achieve its proven 
effectiveness in reducing infant mortality. It is these services which 
have led WIC to a special effectiveness, in making certain that the 
birth weight of infants was higher and thus the incidence of infant 
mortality declined. WIC has been especially effective in lowering the 
incidence of iron deficiency anemia for infants.
  I just state obvious common sense, that mandating the WIC staff to 
spend time on something totally unrelated to these overriding health 
goals and nutrition goals is simply not sound public policy. Therefore, 
I commend the McConnell amendment to my colleagues. I strongly support 
it and have asked to be a cosponsor, and the distinguished Senator from 
Kentucky has included me among the cosponsors. I am hopeful it will 
have strong support in this body.
  I yield the floor.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, let me start out by saying I am a strong 
supporter of the WIC Program. There is nothing I see out on the horizon 
that does better work as it relates to women, infants and children than 
the WIC Program. It is a little odd to me, however, that we heard about 
the WIC Program here today and how devastating it will be to that 
program if the recipients who bring their children in are asked if they 
would like to register to vote. That is all. They can say yes or no.
  If they say ``no'' it is over. There is no cost. There is no time 
lost.
  This is just an effort by those who vehemently opposed the motor 
voter registration bill. This is not a simple amendment just to prevent 
those who are on the WIC Program from being participants in this 
program. What it says is ``the office.''
  In checking around I find many of our States are combining health 
care offices. So when you combine a health care office and WIC is 
within that office when they walk through the front door--this 
eliminates it. So this is a back-door effort to gut the Motor Voter 
Registration Act that we passed here and the President signed into law. 
It will not take effect until January. So we do not know whether it is 
going to help or hurt.
  But if this goes through, then those who have supported the ability 
of individuals to be reconnected with their Government--and I do not 
believe anybody on the other side will tell me that people are not 
riled up, they want to be registered to vote. What we have done is 
eliminated the patriotic duty, if you want to call it that, or the 
blood-given right, by all of the hurdles that we have placed in front 
of an individual wanting to have the opportunity to vote to prevent 
them from registering.
  You cannot tell me that having the form there and asking the mother, 
on the form, if she is registered--if the answer is yes, that ends it; 
if you are not registered, do you want to register? If the answer is 
no, that ends it.
  But do not take my word for it. The motor voter law requires public 
employees, like those who administer the WIC Program, to assist 
citizens in the voter registration process. Contrary to what the WIC 
directors are saying, the process is not a burden. But you do not have 
to take my word for it. Listen to the Center on Budget and Policy 
Priorities, one of the most respected--and I underscore respected--
advocates for the WIC Program. I think everybody--I think--will agree 
to that. But here is what they have to say.

       The costs of this procedure are marginal, and whatever 
     small costs are entailed are treated like any other WIC 
     administrative costs * * *
       In short, these tasks would not add substantial burden. And 
     they would help achieve a fundamental democratic goal--
     increased citizen participation in the affairs of our 
     democracy.

  That is a quote directly from the letter from the Center on Budget 
and Policy Priorities. I ask unanimous consent to have that letter 
printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  (See exhibit 1.)
  Mr. FORD. You do not have to take my word for it. Here is something 
the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has clearly stated about the 
goal of the motor voter law: We must eliminate the barriers that are 
preventing citizens from getting to the ballot box. Voter registration 
should be simple, convenient and accessible to all citizens. The 
registration of citizens in WIC offices as well as other social service 
agencies--motor vehicle license bureaus and other State and local 
offices--will achieve that goal. And on election day, those who choose 
to vote will be able to do so. And that is democracy in action.
  So what we are saying here is that there is no extra effort. How many 
times can that mother that is there to get some help in the WIC 
Program--how many times can she get to the post office or the 
registrar's office? Can she only go Saturday? Or noon, when the office 
is closed? Can she only get there Saturday, when the office is closed? 
The answer is probably so.
  So, with this amendment we deny her, that woman, the opportunity to 
register and to vote. She probably has more emotion, probably 
understands the problems better than most. What we are saying here in 
this amendment, if it passes, is that we want to deny that woman the 
ability to register and express her opinion.
  So what we are doing is denying the women an easier route to register 
and to vote and to express their opinion. Mr. President, this amendment 
must be defeated. And the work of implementing the motor voter law must 
proceed.
  We did not think this up all by ourselves, this procedure.
  We went to the State of Pennsylvania and we copied from them. We went 
to the State of Minnesota and took it from them. It is something that 
has been tried, something that is good.
  So now they are saying in this amendment that we can eliminate the 
ability of everyone going to a public assistance office, under this 
amendment, from having the opportunity to register to vote, because the 
amendment says ``office.''
  If there is a 10-by-12 space for WIC, is that all this amendment is 
going to cover? Or is it the office in which WIC has a portion of the 
square feet? When you walk in the front door, you are in the office. 
They will say, ``You can't have them over here, but you can have them 
all around.'' So if you have them all around, could the WIC mother then 
go over and get one from the other office in the building or on the 
floor?
  Oh, Mr. President, this is just another way to try to use a motion to 
stop some people, particularly women, from having the opportunity to 
register to vote.
  I am one who says that these women have every right to be registered. 
We should not prevent them the opportunity that others are given. What 
we are seeing here is denying to their infants and children the 
facilities and services that they are entitled to, when we have it 
refuted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, it really is not 
going to take up any time; it really is not going to cost any money; 
whatever problem there is might be marginal.
  So if you want to deny these women who are having trouble with their 
children, trying to lead a good life, and trying to make them healthy, 
and say to them, ``You can't register to vote as others can register to 
vote,'' then I think you are denying a segment of our population the 
opportunity that should not be.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my 
time.

                               Exhibit 1

                 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


       proposals to exempt wic from the national registration act

       It has been suggested that WIC be exempted from the 
     National Voter Registration Act (also known as the Motor 
     Voter Act). Such an action would be unwise. It could be the 
     first step in a process toward unraveling the Motor Voter 
     Act.
       The tasks involved for WIC programs to comply with the 
     Motor Voter Act are modest. During a certification interview 
     at a WIC clinic, participants would be given a 5''  8'' voter 
     registration card and a short form asking them if they want 
     to register at the WIC clinic. If a participant checks the 
     ``NO'' box on the form, the WIC clinic has no additional 
     tasks. If the WIC participant wishes to register at the 
     clinic, the participant fills out the simple card (with the 
     caseworker's assistance, if the participant requests it) and 
     the participant or caseworker drops the card in a box. Once 
     every 10 days, the clinic would send the cards in the box to 
     the elections office. The costs of this procedure are 
     marginal, and whatever small costs are entailed are treated 
     like other WIC administrative costs and charged against a 
     state's WIC grant for administrative and nutrition services. 
     It should be noted that under legislation sought by state WIC 
     agencies and enacted in 1989, grants to states for 
     administrative and nutrition services this year reached 25 
     percent of total WIC funding. This exceeds the percentage for 
     any prior fiscal year.
       In addition, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service has sent a 
     directive to its regional offices, directing them to work 
     with states to insure that these procedures are implemented 
     in the least burdensome ways possible. The FNS directive also 
     clears up a misunderstanding on the part of a number of 
     states who mistakenly thought they would be subject to 
     various additional requirements under the Motor Voter 
     legislation.
       In short, these tasks would not add substantial burden. And 
     they would help achieve a fundamental democratic goal--
     increased citizen participation in the affairs of our 
     democracy. Citizen participation in elections has been 
     declining for some time. The National Voter Registration Act 
     holds promise of helping to stem that trend, and the WIC 
     program--which is now a mature program--has a role to play 
     and a contribution to make. It is understandable that some 
     WIC administrators would not see this task as central to WIC 
     and urge that they be excluded from it. But from the 
     standpoint of the well-being of our nation's democratic 
     values, the National Voter Registration Act--including its 
     application to WIC--should be maintained.

  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I listened very carefully to my 
colleague from Kentucky, and I want to commend him for the good work 
that he did on this legislation. I was not in favor of it, but he 
succeeded through the legislative process and it became law. That is 
not really the issue before us today.
  My colleague talks about whether or not it is going to inconvenience 
the WIC directors. I think they themselves would be the best testimony, 
the best evidence of whether this legislation, if applied to them come 
January, is going to create a problem.
  In the letter that I referred to earlier from the National 
Association of WIC Directors, it is rather clear how they feel about 
it. In a letter to me dated June 21 from the director, it says:

       Dear Senator McConnell: The National Association of WIC 
     Directors applaud your efforts to ensure that the essential 
     mission of the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women, 
     Infants, and Children--the provision of quality nutrition 
     education and breastfeeding promotion and support services--
     is maintained and not diluted by unrelated activities.

  Later in the letter, the Director says their,

       * * * canvass of State and local agency directors and 
     nutrition coordinators confirms--

  Confirms, these are the people actually working there and dealing 
with the WIC clients.

     that the requirements to implement the act in WIC clinics 
     will only further reduce the already stretched time, staff, 
     financial, and other resources available to ensure that WIC 
     participants receive the quality nutrition services to which 
     they are eligible.

  Mr. President, how many folks are we talking about here? First, it is 
important to remember that 77 percent of the people that come into the 
WIC clinic are under age 5--77 percent are under age 5; 23 percent of 
the WIC participants are women. But of that group, 12 percent are under 
18. So 77 percent of the people who are coming into the clinic are 
under age 5, and of the women who are coming in with their children 
into the clinic, 23 percent of those women are under age 18.
  It is important also to note that two-thirds of the WIC clients go to 
other agencies for other services, and those agencies are required to 
participate through the National Voter Registration Act.
  So it is not like these adults who come into the WIC office are not 
going to be dealing with some other agency required to register under 
the National Voter Registration Act. Two-thirds of the WIC recipients 
are on Medicaid, food stamps, and/or AFDC. This amendment does not 
affect those programs. So two-thirds of that six-tenths of 1 percent of 
the population will be provided with voter registration options at the 
other agencies.
  We are talking about a minuscule percentage of the eligible voting-
age population that might--might--miss an opportunity to be registered 
through this agency-based effort.
  Let us go over that one more time: 77 percent of the WIC clients are 
under 5; 23 percent are women, but of that group, 12 percent are under 
18, so they are not eligible; and two-thirds of the overall WIC 
recipients go to some other agency, such as Medicaid, food stamps, and/
or AFDC. So two-thirds of those folks are going to be exposed to other 
agency-based registration efforts.
  It could hardly be persuasively argued, Mr. President, that this is 
blowing a gaping hole in the National Voter Registration Act. I come at 
this as ranking member of the Nutrition Subcommittee. I fully admit I 
was not supportive of the Motor-Voter Act, but that is over. The 
supporters of that prevailed.
  The question is, at this point, on this bill, whether this six-tenths 
of 1 percent of the population is going to be affected in this adverse 
way.
  I am going to retain the remainder of my time, but we are talking 
here largely about an agency that serves children who are not eligible 
to vote and a reasonable percentage of women who have children who are 
under 18, two-thirds of which go to some other agency which is required 
to engage in voter registration under the Motor-Voter Act. Clearly, 
this is not blowing a gaping hole in the national Motor-Voter Act.
  So, Mr. President, I retain the remainder of my time and yield the 
floor at this point.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. HATFIELD. Will the Senator yield to me?
  Mr. FORD. I yield such time as the Senator from Oregon might use.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
  Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I thank my colleague for yielding the 
time.
  I would like to say from the very beginning that on most things that 
involve electoral and political processes, I follow the lead of my 
colleague from Kentucky, Senator McConnell. I know few, if any, on my 
side of the aisle who have greater expertise or have a better 
background in commenting on these matters.
  On this one issue, I do take a different position, in part because my 
own State of Oregon had proven motor-voter registration to be an 
effective instrument by which we expanded participation in government 
and brought more people into the voting process.
  I might also say, as a former secretary of state from Oregon, meaning 
the head of the elections office, I presided over a number of election 
cycles where we had, of course, State supervision, State roles, State 
involvement. In all of these roles, I must say, Mr. President, that I 
feel that the State should be paramount. I think the Federal Government 
has a limited role to play in the matter of these basic procedures. 
With the mobility of our population and for other reasons, however, I 
think that the matter of mail-in registration is a very legitimate kind 
of Federal role to create uniformity across the country. I think making 
voter registration available at the time of your driver's license 
application is another legitimate Federal role. I think also, when you 
are at a Federal agency conducting business, a further appropriate role 
would be for the agency to supply registration forms.

  In the motor-voter bill, which, by the way, has not taken effect 
yet--it was postponed until January 1995 to skip this election cycle in 
order for the States and the local governments to become involved in 
the process--we left it to the States to negotiate as to which Federal 
agencies would make available the voter registration system. We did not 
designate the agencies in the bill.
  This fight today is basically symbolic because this is the first 
Federal agency authorization program potentially affected by motor-
voter that has come up in this Congress. I think it is important to 
defeat this effort to undermine the motor-voter registration law 
because I assume that we could possibly face this same amendment on 
each and every other Federal agency program that may come along 
subsequent to the one that we are dealing with today.
  And so even though there is a small percentage of potential 
registrants involved, as cited by the author of the amendment, Senator 
McConnell, I think it is very important to set the precedent today that 
we are not going to have an erosion of the basic concept of the motor-
voter registration bill which was passed and signed into law to take 
effect in January 1995.
  A recent study by the Department of Transportation found that almost 
50 percent of the people in the low-income families and minorities do 
not have drivers' licenses and have annual incomes of less than 
$10,000. Five States already offer some form of public agency voter 
registration system; Alaska, Iowa, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Ohio. 
Again, this idea has already been proven at the State level. We are not 
venturing into some strange field of experimentation. All we are saying 
in effect is let the Federal agencies that are designated out of State 
negotiations be also the source of such registration forms.
  A number of my colleagues opposed the original bill that includes 
agency registration because of the fear of coercion, fear of coercion 
by Federal agencies when a recipient of a Federal program is handed a 
check in one hand and a voter registration form in the other. Is it 
intimidation? Is it coercion?
  As one of the cosponsors of this bill initially, we paid very careful 
attention to anticoercion safeguards, to protect against manipulation 
or intimidation of public assistance recipients who register.
  These safeguards are threefold. One, clients in public agencies will 
not be registered unless they specifically indicate they want to be 
registered.
  Second, registration forms will explain that no action can be taken 
against those clients who do not want to register in a Federal agency.
  And No. 3, the name and number of the person with whom to file a 
complaint--a complaint--if abuse occurs or if the recipient assumes or 
feels or considers that there has been some kind of intimidation--must 
be given to that recipient.
  We do have safeguards against coercion. Should such coercion still 
happen and a complaint be filed, and it was found that coercion was a 
valid complaint by the recipient, this is now a Federal offense, 
including criminal penalties.
  I believe that adequate protections are in place to prevent the 
manipulation of Americans. Furthermore, I support my colleague, Mr. 
Ford, the chairman of our committee, in his view that we have worked 
hard to ensure that the agency-based registration aspect of this law 
would have a minimal impact on any agency's work. In other words, we 
are not imposing an additional great demand for work, for being 
registrars, with that fulfilling the basic mission of the agency. In 
this specific case, WIC agencies have been asked to make available 
registration forms and to provide the same assistance in completing 
those forms as they would for their own forms in their agency.
  Mr. President, this bill is not rooted in partisanship. This bill is 
rooted in democratic philosophy. It stands for the premise that we are 
all Americans, first, not Democrats or Republicans. It also has a focus 
of providing for the individual and helping the individual to 
understand and to involve himself or herself as an individual voice in 
an expression of interest in the political process. Its purpose is to 
protect the value and integrity of votes, the votes cast through a 
strong registration process, not to keep any element of society from 
exercising their right to vote.
  I urge my colleagues to meet this first attack of what I assume to be 
many others to follow, by defeating this amendment offered by my good 
friend from Kentucky.
  I yield the floor.
  Mr. FORD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. FORD. How much time do I have remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky has 25 minutes, both 
Senators from Kentucky have 25 minutes remaining.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished 
Senator from Vermont.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I do not think any of my colleagues are 
more knowledgeable and diligent than my colleague from Kentucky on 
matters such as that contained in the amendment before us today. He 
knows his stuff and he makes a very persuasive argument.
  I also have been with him on many of the issues, especially when they 
become partisan. However, on this issue, I disagree very strongly with 
him. So, too, does a majority of the Senate. We had a full and 
exhaustive debate on this issue many months ago. We have fought this 
battle, and those of us in favor of encouraging Americans to 
participate in the election process prevailed.
  Having torn down some of the barriers to voting, I think it is 
unfortunate that my friend from Kentucky feels it necessary to try to 
resurrect those barriers. All eligible Americans have the right and 
responsibility to vote. If we can make it easier for them to fulfill 
this responsibility and exercise their rights, we should do so.
  I understand that there may be some questions as to whether the 
language of the amendment comports with the Senator's intention to 
block voter registration in connection with the Women, Infants, and 
Children Feeding Program. If there is a problem, I know it was 
inadvertent, so I will restrict my few comments to the impact on WIC.
  Why should we single out the WIC Program? Of any of the Federal 
programs serving low-income Americans, I think it probably has the 
strongest bipartisan support. President Bush boosted WIC funding 
tremendously with the active help of Republicans in both the Senate and 
the House.
  And why on Earth should we single out pregnant women and those with 
infants? Becoming a parent often has a profound positive impact on an 
individual, who is all of a sudden given a much greater stake in our 
society by a birth.
  But with this amendment, half a million women, who often face many 
barriers to voting, would be denied easier access to our political 
system. I strongly supported the motor-voter bill, and I just as 
strongly oppose the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky to deny its 
benefits to some 500,000 women in this country.
  I appreciate his concern for the WIC Program, however, and know that 
he and those who support the amendment must share my support for the 
provisions relating to WIC in the Health Security Act, which we will be 
facing sometime later this year.
  Mr. President, I hope this amendment is defeated, and urge my 
colleagues to do so.
  Mr. President, I yield the floor. I yield the remainder of my time to 
the Senator from Kentucky.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, how much time does the distinguished Senator 
from Washington desire?
  Mrs. MURRAY. If I could have about 3 minutes.
  Mr. FORD. I yield up to 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from 
Washington.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized for 
5 minutes.
  Mrs. MURRAY. I thank my colleague from Kentucky for his leadership on 
this issue and for his consideration in opposing this amendment today.
  I rise to oppose this amendment. Mr. President, I remember a little 
over a year ago when I was a very proud Member of the U.S. Senate to 
vote with the majority in behalf of the motor voter bill. It was a 
message that fit all Americans who care about its citizens. We care 
about them being involved in our Government, and being part of that 
Government. And we were doing everything we could to make it easier for 
every American, no matter who they were or where they came from, to be 
a part of this democracy by allowing them to vote.
  I am simply amazed that we are on the floor of the U.S. Senate today 
beginning to try to repeal that act by going after group by group, and 
the very first group we are going to make it tougher for is mothers 
with young children.
  I can think of no one that we should be more accommodating to than 
mothers with young children. That is from one of the few people on the 
floor who had the experience of being a young mother with children at 
one time in my life. I can tell you how difficult it is for these women 
to get their kids ready to go out to do anything, grocery shopping or 
whatever, much less getting out to register to vote.
  I think it would be the worst move, the worst message to send to 
these mothers that we are going to exclude them from our democracy by 
passing this amendment.
  I urge all of my colleagues to vote a resounding ``no'' to this 
amendment.
  I thank my colleague. I thank the chairman for yielding time.
  Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the amendment before us brings up an issue 
that was decided by the Senate over a year ago.
  In passing the National Voter Registration Act, we decided that 
access to our electoral system of government should be open to all 
Americans, and that voter registration procedures should not be a 
barrier to participation.
  Motor-voter requires States to provide voter registration services 
when people apply for a driver's license and at public assistance 
agencies, including AFDC, food stamps, Medicaid, and WIC.
  Opponents of motor-voter are making a desperate attempt to chip away 
at the edges of the National Voter Registration Act.
  They claim voter registration will pose too great a burden on WIC 
clinics, but those claims are grossly exaggerated.
  Agencies are only required to provide and accept voter registration 
applications when clients apply or are recertified for WIC. They are 
not required to offer voter registration services in any mailings to 
participations, nor at each appointment.
  Public assistance agencies, such as WIC, were included in the 
National Voter Registration Act to ensure that all citizens have equal 
access to voter registration.
  WIC applicants should have the same opportunity as people who apply 
for driver's licenses to participate in our political process.
  When the motor-voter bill was being debated, WIC was recognized as a 
program likely to have contact with citizens who do not have driver's 
licenses. Estimates are that if WIC were exempt from the mandates of 
the National Voter Registration Act, 500,000 poor women will be 
excluded from voter registration services because they do not receive 
food stamps, Medicaid, or AFDC.
  The Clinton administration and the Department of Agriculture stand 
firmly behind motor-voter. USDA has told WIC directors that the 
Department is committed to the successful implementation of motor-voter 
in WIC clinics.
  In fact, USDA is allowing any costs associated with voter 
registration to be covered by WIC administrative funds.
  Since 1974, I have been an outspoken champion of the WIC Program in 
Congress, and I am sensitive to concern that WIC is weakened with each 
additional demand put on it.
  But motor-voter was signed into law with a goal in mind, and I 
believe in that goal. WIC is just the first target of opponents of 
motor-voter. And if they succeed here, it will be just the first step. 
What will be next? Food stamps? Unemployment? Medicaid?
  We cannot start tearing apart motor-voter piece by piece.
  I see it very simply: The intention of this amendment is to keep poor 
women from voting. But poor women have the same rights as rest of us, 
and they deserve every change to participate in the political process.
  Mr. FORD addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I think the message is getting through loud 
and clear that we are going after young mothers; that we are going 
after young mothers who have problems of not being in the mainstream, 
who are going for help, and we are trying to deny to those women help.
  Let me make two points. Mr. President, I want to make a point again 
that the letter that my colleague has that WIC directors do not want 
this, they want to maintain the status quo, but the status quo for 
voter registration in my opinion is not acceptable.
  I go back to the statement I made earlier where the strong advocate 
of the WIC Program, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, one of 
the most respected advocates for the WIC Program, has said, in short, 
that these tasks would not add any substantial burden, that they would 
help achieve a fundamental democratic goal of increasing citizen 
participation in the affairs of our democracy.
  Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the statement from the 
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

                 Center on Budget and Policy Priorities


       proposals to exempt wic from the National Registration Act

       It has been suggested that WIC be exempted from the 
     National Voter Registration Act (also known as the Motor 
     Voter Act). Such an action would be unwise. It could be the 
     first step in a process toward unraveling the Motor Voter 
     Act.
       The tasks involved for WIC programs to comply with the 
     Motor Voter Act are modest. During a certification interview 
     at a WIC clinic, participants would be given a 5" x 8" voter 
     registration card and a short form asking them if they want 
     to register at the WIC clinic. If a participant checks the 
     ``NO'' box on the form, the WIC clinic has no additional 
     tasks. If the WIC participant wishes to register at the 
     clinic, the participant fills out the simple card (with the 
     caseworker's assistance, if the participant requests it) and 
     the participant or caseworker drops the card in a box. Once 
     every 10 days, the clinic would send the cards in the box to 
     the elections office. The costs of this procedure are 
     marginal, and whatever small costs are entailed are treated 
     like other WIC administrative costs and charged against a 
     state's WIC grant for administrative and nutrition services. 
     It should be noted that under legislation sought by state WIC 
     agencies and enacted in 1989, grants to states for 
     administrative and nutrition services this year reached 25 
     percent of total WIC funding. This exceeds the percentage for 
     any prior fiscal year.
       In addition, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service has sent a 
     directive to its regional offices, directing them to work 
     with states to insure that these procedures are implemented 
     in the least burdensome ways possible. The FNS directive also 
     clears up a misunderstanding on the part of a number of 
     states who mistakenly thought they would be subject to 
     various additional requirements under the Motor Voter 
     legislation.
       In short, these tasks would not add substantial burden. And 
     they would help achieve a fundamental democratic goal--
     increased citizen participation in the affairs of our 
     democracy. Citizen participation in elections has been 
     declining for some time. The National Voter Registration Act 
     holds promise of helping to stem that trend, and the WIC 
     program--which is now a mature program--has a role to play 
     and a contribution to make. It is understandable that some 
     WIC administrators would not see this task as central to WIC 
     and urge that they be excluded from it. But from the 
     standpoint of the well-being of our nation's democratic 
     values, the National Voter Registration Act--including its 
     application to WIC--should be maintained.

  Mr. FORD. Mr. President, it has been indicated that this would be a 
tremendous burden on the WIC directors. Let me read from the 
instructions from the Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition 
Service that says:

       Voter registration services are required to be offered by 
     WIC clinics at every application, reapplication, and change 
     of address. Such services need not again be offered during 
     other participant contacts such as voucher pickups, nutrition 
     education sessions, or other instances where a parent comes 
     into the clinic. There are no requirements to offer voter 
     registration services in any mailing to participants.

  So it is just one time, the first blush, and that is it. That is the 
end of it. They either say ``yes'' or ``no.'' Or they say, ``I am 
registered. I don't need to register again.'' Or they say, ``Yes. I 
want to register.'' Then they are helped. If they say, ``No. I do not 
want to register,'' that ends it.
  I do not understand why you want to take on the motor-voter, and you 
take on the young mothers of this country with children and try to 
prevent them from having an opportunity to register.
  I do not know what six-tenths of 1 percent is. I do not know. By my 
calculation, we have roughly 250 million people in this country. And 
six-tenths of 1 percent of our population does not sound too big. But 
when you get into the millions, it sounds pretty good. We are denying 
over 1 million, if my calculations are right, and those of the smarter 
people in the Chamber when they put the pencil to it, that it is well 
over 1 million young mothers, mothers with infant children. So six-
tenths of 1 percent does not sound very big.
  Seventy-three percent of those that come for help are with children. 
Somebody has to bring them. Their mother brought them. We are saying to 
the mother of those children that they are not going to have equal 
access.
  Where in the world are we going to come out here on the floor and say 
we are going to deny young mothers that have real problems, that do not 
have equal access to register to vote, to express the voice of those 5-
year olds? Oh, they say 3 percent of them are 5-year olds. So we do not 
have to worry about them. But the mother ought to be able to exercise 
her voice. And what those children ought to have, as anybody knows what 
they need the mother does, and we are saying to her, ``You cannot have 
the same access to register to vote that others have.''
  Mr. President, we have gone too far in this amendment. If you look at 
the amendment, it says ``office.'' What does that mean? When all of the 
State governments are trying to combine and have a one-stop health 
center, when you walk in the front door, it is the office, and WIC is 
back here in the corner. So we deny it to the whole floor, to all the 
help. This is a back-door way of trying to gut motor-voter, and I think 
it is a dreadful way to start.
  I yield the floor. I reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky has 15 minutes. The 
junior Senator from Kentucky has 25 minutes.
  Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it is unfortunate that this turned into 
a motor-voter debate when it really is about child nutrition. My 
interest in this was stimulated, not by my opposition last year to 
motor-voter, which I concede and make no apologies for, but my interest 
at this point was generated by the National Association of WIC 
Directors who wrote, and who asked to be relieved of this 
responsibility. It is not just the National Association of WIC 
Directors. I have a letter here from the county health department in 
Shepherdsville, KY. I will read a couple of paragraphs of that letter 
before asking that it be printed in the Record. It says:

       Dear Senator McConnell: . . . WIC staff . . . doing voter 
     registration rather than nutritional education or breast 
     feeding promotion, then there will be some major disruptions 
     that deal with WIC clients (most of whom are far too young to 
     vote yet anyway).

  ``Most of whom are far to young to vote anyway.''

       The lack of reimbursement mechanisms for costs associated 
     with motor voter tells me that without the McConnell 
     amendment I am looking at an unfunded mandate to provide 
     staff and space for voter registration while taking these 
     same staff away from other clinical duties.

  I am quoting, Mr. President, from the people who administer these WIC 
clinics on the scene. I did not make this up. This is their view of the 
onerous requirement that they participate in registering voters.
  Let me repeat here. Seventy-seven percent of the WIC clients are 
under age 5. Surely the proponents of this are not suggesting that they 
be registered. Twenty-three percent of the WIC participants are women. 
Twenty-three percent of the WIC participants are women, but of that 
group 12 percent are under 18. They are not eligible to vote. Two-
thirds of the WIC lines go to other agencies which are entitled and 
required to register people to vote.

  So we are talking about a minuscule percent of the target audience of 
the National Voter Registration Act, but a very important group of 
soldiers out there in the field trying to adequately feed women, 
infants, and children under the WIC Program.
  Mr. President, in order for the WIC clinics to comply with motor 
voter, they are going to have to utilize administrative funds. WIC has 
two pots of money: food and administrative. Unlike food stamps, unlike 
AFDC, unlike Medicaid, WIC is not an entitlement program and does not 
have a Federal mandate for State matching dollars.
  Activities that are funded from the administrative pot of money 
include eligibility determination, enrolling new participants, health 
screening for nutritional risk, and nutritional education sessions. So 
when you have a limited pot of money, Mr. President, it is only logical 
that paying for one activity will take away from the efforts on other 
projects.
  Motor voter would undermine the ability of WIC workers to increase 
participation and to focus on nutrition-related activities--the very 
activities that have made this program so successful in reducing anemia 
and the incidence of premature and low birthweight babies. As local and 
State agencies work hard to maximize the use of funds to increase 
participation, obviously it would be better if we did not divert those 
funds away from it.
  I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the Bullitt County 
Health Department to me be printed in the Record.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                              Bullitt County Health Department

                                               Shepherdsville, KY.
       Dear Senator McConnell: I strongly endorse the McConnell 
     WIC/Motor Voter Amendment to the National Voter Registration 
     Act. It's wrong that WIC clinics are to be considered as 
     public assistance offices for purposes of this Act.
       WIC has been one of the very few strongly successful 
     government programs. Simply, put, WIC works. It works because 
     the WIC Program is very specific about its mission and has 
     kept focus on it: Improving nutritional status of women and 
     children at risk.
       If WIC staff are doing voter registration rather than 
     Nutritional Education or Breastfeeding Promotion, then there 
     were be some major distractions in dealing with WIC clients 
     (most of whom are far too young to vote yet anyway).
       The lack of reimbursement mechanisms for costs associated 
     with Motor Voter tells me that without the McConnell 
     Amendment, I am looking at an unfunded mandate to provide 
     staff and space for voter registration while taking these 
     same staff away from other clinical duties.
       In closing, I would say that without the McConnell 
     Amendment, the Motor Voter Act penalizes the WIC Program (and 
     all its participants) for its success by infringing upon it.
       That's the wrong way to reward an outstanding program like 
     WIC.
       Consequently, I again state how strongly I support the 
     McConnell WIC/Motor Voter Amendment.
           Sincerely,
                                                   Ned Fitzgibbons
                                                         Director.

  Mr. McCONNELL. I want to make one point, and I will be ready to wrap 
up here. I do not know about my senior colleague, but the League of 
Women Voters, obviously, was opposed to this amendment. And there has 
been some correspondence between the National Association of WIC 
Directors and the League of Women Voters. It is interesting that in the 
letter to the President of the League of Women Voters, the executive 
director of the National Association of WIC Directors points out:

       Some nineteen tangentially related programmatic 
     requirements have been placed on the program in the last 
     several years. Experience has shown that the time required to 
     serve the nutrition education and breastfeeding support and 
     promotion needs of WIC participants has been seriously eroded 
     by additional requirements placed upon the program by 
     policymakers.

  That is, other things before they get to this.

       While these requirements benefit participants, they detract 
     from WIC's ability to meet its primary mission. 
     Infrastructure problems (insufficient space, staffing 
     shortages and constrained MIS systems) combined with added 
     requirements, often totally unrelated to nutrition education 
     efforts of the program, e.g. the NVRA, are forcing many 
     participants to experience delays in appointments and others 
     to go unserved.

  I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record as 
well.
  There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the 
Record, as follows:

                                           National Association of


                                                WIC Directors,

                                                    July 25, 1994.
     Ms. Becky Cain,
     President, The League of Women Voters, Washington, DC.
       Dear Ms. Cain: I am in receipt of a copy of your Memorandum 
     to Members of the U.S. Senate dated 11 July regarding the 
     National Voter Registration Act, NVRA.
       Just as the League of Women Voters supports WIC, the 
     National Association of WIC Directors, NAWD, is fully 
     supportive of efforts to register voters.
       The WIC Program prides itself on being the Gateway to 
     Health Care. WIC strives to reach its mission of providing 
     quality nutrition education and services, breastfeeding 
     promotion and education, dietary food supplements and health 
     care referrals to low income women, and their children at 
     nutritional risk. Programmatic requirements totally unrelated 
     to the mission of WIC infringe upon that mission and 
     seriously detract from the need of staff and participants 
     alike to focus on the health and well-being of the nation's 
     women, infants and children.
       In your memorandum, you advised that ``. . . efforts to 
     exempt WIC from the NVRA are precipitous. We believe that the 
     concerns that have been expressed . . . will prove to be 
     unfounded.''
       NAWD takes exception to these comments. Some nineteen 
     tangentially related programmatic requirements have been 
     placed on the Program in the last several years. Experience 
     has shown that the time required to serve the nutrition 
     education and breastfeeding support and promotion 
     needs of WIC participants has been seriously eroded by the 
     additional requirements placed upon the Program by policy 
     makers. While these requirements benefit participants, they 
     detract from WIC's ability to meet its primary mission. 
     Infrastructure problems (insufficient space, staffing 
     shortages and constrained Management Information Systems 
     systems) combined with the added requirements, often 
     totally unrelated to the nutrition education efforts of 
     the Program, e.g. the NVRA, are forcing many participants 
     to experience delays in appointments and others to go 
     unserved.
       Your Memorandum goes on to state that ``limited voter 
     registration services are required. Effective motor voter 
     programs have demonstrated that this is a minimal 
     responsibility that should not detract from the agencies' 
     primary mission. WIC applicants, should have the same 
     opportunity as driver's license applicants to participate in 
     our political process.'' According to a USDA study ``in 1992 
     nearly two-thirds of WIC participants received benefits from 
     at least one other public assistance program.'' NAWD feels 
     confident that the majority of WIC's participants will 
     receive adequate voter registration information without WIC 
     Program involvment in NVRA.
       NAWD has expressed its concerns to Members of Congress 
     about the negative consequences voter registration 
     requirements embodied in the NVRA would have on WIC clincs 
     and efforts to successfully accomplish the WIC mission. NAWD 
     advised that if WIC is not exempted from this Act, additional 
     monies must be appropriated to perform this service.
       NAWD has calculated that approximately $25.6 million in 
     personnel costs alone will be expended for interview and 
     registration efforts by WIC. This figure does not include MIS 
     or other administrative costs involved in processing 
     information, reproducing materials, the cost of materials or 
     space requirements. Conservatively estimating the cost per 
     participant to be served by the WIC Program at $41 per month, 
     expenditures by WIC on NVRA could force over 624,000 
     participants to go unserved.
       NAWD urges you to reconsider your position and calls upon 
     the League of Women Voters to endorse a healthy future for 
     all Americans. Granting everyone a healthy future stake in 
     the successes of the nation makes for better citizens--
     willing and fully empowered to participate in the rights of 
     citizenship--among them the right to vote!
           Sincerely,
                                             Douglas A. Greenaway,
                                               Executive Director.

  Mr. McCONNELL. Finally, let me ask my friend and colleague from 
Kentucky. He was concerned that the way the amendment was crafted, it 
might impact other personnel jointly occupying an office. I understand 
that under the agreement under which we were operating, it would take 
unanimous consent for me to modify my amendment. If he gives me 
unanimous consent, I would modify it in such a way that it was more 
specifically crafted to effect only the personnel who work in an office 
which provide supplemental food and nutrition education under the 
section and shall not be considered to be working in an office in a 
State that provides public assistance for the purposes of this section.
  That modification, I believe would deal--I understand it would not 
gain support if the modification is allowed, but it would deal with the 
issue he raised.
  Mr. FORD. If the Senator will withhold so we can look at that.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Yes.
  Mr. President, while the staff is looking at that modification, let 
me repeat one more time. In the universe of people who come into a WIC 
clinic, 77 percent are under 5 years old. Of the remaining 23 percent--
and they are women who have brought in the children--12 percent of them 
are under the age of 18. Of this whole universe of people who come into 
a WIC office, WIC clients, two-thirds of them go to other agencies that 
are required under motor-voter to provide voter registration 
assistance.
  I offer this amendment today not as an opponent of motor voter, which 
I confess to have been last year; I offer this as the ranking member of 
the nutrition subcommittee of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and I 
do it on behalf of the Nation's WIC directors, the people who are there 
dealing with the clients every day, who feel that this will get in the 
way of their providing this service, mostly to children, and mostly to 
clients who also go to other offices that are required to offer this 
service under the National Voter Registration Act.
  So with all due respect to those who have spoken in opposition to the 
amendment, I do not see how you can argue this is blowing a gaping hole 
in the motor voter bill. It seems to me that this is an amendment 
clearly designed to deal with the nutritional needs of women, infants, 
and children, and not an amendment designed to eviscerate the Motor 
Voter Act.
  How much time is remaining?
  The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Feinstein). The Senator has 16 minutes 47 
seconds.
  Mr. McCONNELL. I reserve the remainder of my time.
  Mr. FORD. I will accept the Senator's modification.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to modify my 
amendment in the way I described.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The amendment will be so modified.
  The amendment (No. 2559), as modified, is as follows:
       At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:

     SEC.   . IMPROVED ADMINISTRATION OF WIC PROGRAM.

       Section 17(f) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 
     1786(f)) is amended by adding at the end the following new 
     paragraph:
       ``(23) The personnel who work in an office which provides 
     supplemental foods and nutrition education under this section 
     shall not be considered to be working in an office in a State 
     that provides public assistance for purposes of section 
     7(a)(2)(A) of Public Law 103-31.''
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I imagine the audience gets confused that 
each of us is referred to as the Senator from Kentucky. I am the one 
who is opposed to the amendment. My friend is the one that is the 
proponent.
  I made a point and I think I caught the amendment that was going to 
eliminate every agency that was combined. I guess you can term it 
either way you wanted to. But at least I made a point here that this 
amendment could have eliminated the ability of any office to register.
  Madam President, they say they cannot imagine why we would object to 
something like this. The only issue here has been emotion. We find in 
the amendment that it could have eliminated the use of registration 
forms in all offices. Now it has been modified in an effort to limit 
it. I have shown and filed for the Record an amendment from the Center 
on Budget and Policy Priorities, one of the most respected advocates 
for the WIC Program, saying it would not take up any time or money. I 
have a statement from the Department of Agriculture, Nutrition 
Services, that says you only offer it one time. When they come back, 
you do not have to offer it again. Here is the Pennsylvania form, right 
here. You give this to the recipient the first time, and that recipient 
has a little bit to fill out here, some to fill out here, and questions 
over here.
  There is one question on there. ``Does anyone in your household want 
to register to vote?'' You can say, ``no,'' and that is the end of it. 
You can say ``yes,'' so the employee is required then to say, ``Here is 
the form, and you fill it out. If you have any questions I will help 
you.'' That is all.
  But what we are doing here is we are denying even the possibility of 
that mother having this much. We hear a lot of figures--we do not get 
numbers--77 per percent of those who come into the WIC office are under 
5. That is expected, is it not? Then you have 23 percent that are left, 
and 12 percent of those would go to some other office.
  Then you say it is only six-tenths of 1 percent of those who are 
really meaningful in this. So it is over a million. I am not sure 
exactly how many, and I do not think six-tenths of 1 percent is a real 
figure.
  But how many mothers are denied under this amendment to have an 
opportunity to register? They say that this is getting into the voter 
registration. That is true. That is what he is trying to eliminate. 
That is what I am trying to keep.
  When you have a respected speaker say it is not going to cost much, 
if anything, it is just the supervisors do not want more work to do--
bureaucrats. They say they are robbing them of time with the mother.
  So here is the form. Go fill it out. Do you want to register to vote? 
Here is another form. Fill it out.
  How much time does that take? That is not denying anybody anything. 
It is giving them an opportunity to participate in democracy for those 
children under 5 that she brought in with her. To pick on women, the 
very first pop out of the box before this law takes effect, then I just 
have a lot to wonder about, Madam President, and that is all there is 
to it. And that is going to deny someone the ability to perform their 
services.
  So, I am going to leave it at that.
  I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I think we ought not to beat this to 
death.
  The important thing to remember is that WIC is a child nutrition 
program. Yes, it serves women. But it does so with the intent of 
producing a healthy, well-nourished baby and teaching the moms about 
nutritional feeding habits to pass on to the children.
  If the Senate believes WIC as a child nutrition program should 
register people to vote, then do you also think that school lunch and 
breakfast programs, child care food programs, and the summer food 
programs should provide the same registration services?
  If that is the rationale, maybe we ought to carry it over to school 
lunch, breakfast, child care food, and summer food programs. Those 
programs deal also with children.
  If WIC is required to be a voter registration agency, should the 
election officers be required to administer WIC? Voter registration is 
totally unrelated to WIC, just as WIC services are totally unrelated to 
registering voters.
  I hope the Senate will not conclude that this amendment, which is the 
result of correspondence to me as the ranking member of the nutrition 
subcommittee, correspondence from the National Association of WIC 
Directors, would be an effort on their part or mine to unravel motor 
voter.
  I hope that people might conclude that the best efforts of those 
offices should be put forward in dealing with nutritional problems of 
these folks who come there for services.
  I am prepared at this point, if the senior Senator from Kentucky is, 
to yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. If I understood the Senator is yielding back 
the remainder of the time.
  Mr. McCONNELL. No. I want to see if we have finished here.
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask 
unanimous consent that the time be equally divided.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  The clerk will call the roll.
  The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I am pleased to join Senator McConnell in 
offering this amendment to exempt WIC clinics from the requirements of 
the National Voter Registration Act. Passage of the amendment will help 
ensure that the integrity of the WIC Program is not jeopardized by 
unrelated administrative requirements.
  Forcing WIC clinics to comply with the requirements of the National 
Voter Registration Act means that limited administrative funds are 
diverted from program purposes and redirected to pay for voter 
registration. WIC is a discretionary program that is attempting to 
stretch its funds to meet the needs of as many recipients as possible. 
Using these funds for voter registration is a mistake.
  We all know how successful the WIC Program is at meeting the food and 
nutrition education needs of its clients. I, for one, don't want to see 
that success imperiled. WIC mothers go to the clinics to receive 
instruction on breastfeeding and proper nutrition for their children 
and themselves. They are not there to be registered to vote.
  In fact, mothers represent only 23 percent of the WIC client 
population. Seventy-seven percent of WIC clients are under age 5. So, 
obviously, WIC clinics are not the best places to seek out and register 
potential voters.
  As my colleagues know, I opposed the passage of the motor-voter bill 
last year. Motor-voter is yet the latest in a string of unfunded 
mandates imposed on the States and localities by the Federal 
Government. With a credit-card mentality, the Federal Government 
mandates and the States and cities pick up the tab.
  Mr. President, in closing I want to thank the distinguished ranking 
member on the Nutrition Subcommittee, Senator McConnell, for his hard 
work on this issue. I am pleased to join him and Senator Lugar, Senator 
Craig, Senator Cochran, Senator Helms, and Senator Coverdell in 
cosponsoring this important amendment, and I urge my colleagues to 
support its passage. What's at stake is nothing less than the integrity 
of the WIC Program.


         The folly of requiring WIC Offices to Register Voters

  Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I am pleased to be a cosponsor of Senator 
McConnell's amendment that would exempt WIC offices from the 
requirements of the National Voter Registration Act, which was approved 
and signed into law last year.
  Some might wonder what voter registration has to do with providing 
nutrition services to low-income women and infants. That's a very good 
question. The National Voter Registration Act contains a provision that 
requires all agencies providing public assistance to offer voter 
registration services. Of course, this provision included WIC offices.
  Although I have never supported the National Voter Registration Act, 
for a number of reasons that I discussed last year during debate on 
that measure, I have no argument with the intent of the act. I agree 
that we should make every reasonable effort to increase voter 
registration in the hope of encouraging greater participation in the 
election process. Rhode Island has a motor-voter program that has 
worked very well since its inception in 1990. The National Voter 
Registration Act, while well motivated, is seriously flawed, and the 
effect its implementation will have on WIC offices is one example of 
the flaws in this act.
  But we aren't here to debate the wisdom of the National Voter 
Registration Act. We are here to reauthorize the Child Nutrition Act 
and the National School Lunch Act. These programs, particularly the 
Child Nutrition Act, have been extremely successful. I always have 
supported expansion of the WIC Program, as has my colleague from 
Kentucky, who offered this amendment.
  In recent weeks, I have received letters and phone calls from the WIC 
office in Rhode Island asking for my assistance in relieving the 
burdens that would be imposed by the National Voter Registration Act. 
John L. Smith, chief of the WIC Program at the Rhode Island Department 
of Health, wrote to me on June 2, 1994. He took the time to express 
support for the goals of the National Voter Registration Act but went 
on to say:

       As enlightened as this seems, however, to carry out the 
     provisions of the NVRA requires significant WIC staff time. 
     Such staff time cannot be procured without either purchasing 
     more time or substituting NVRA for other staff activities.

  Mr. Smith went on to point out:

       At the WIC clinic level, over 80% of the available funds 
     are used for direct nutritional services to WIC clients. 
     Therefore, if the program is required to conduct NVRA 
     activities, it must subtract the time required for these 
     activities from an already expanding set of requirements to 
     provide nutrition assessment and education, drug abuse 
     assessment and referral, breast feeding promotion and 
     support, and information and referral services for health 
     care, financial aid and other nutrition support services, 
     immunization assessment and referral and support services.

  In short, Mr. President, we have required the WIC offices to 
undertake an enormous list of highly beneficial activities. On top of 
these requirements, we have added registering clients to vote.
  There is no doubt in the mind of Kathleen A. Stento, chairwoman of 
the Rhode Island WIC advisory board, that the requirements of the 
National Voter Registration Act would have a detrimental effect on the 
quality of the services provided at Rhode Island's WIC clinics. The 
advisory council represents the 23 local WIC clinics in Rhode Island. 
Ms. Stento wrote:

       On this matter, we are united: we DO NOT want to give up 
     any of our nutrition education time (nutrition education is 
     the key to our program * * * it is what makes the program 
     unique to any other food assistance programs, and it is what 
     makes the program work). The National Voter Registration Act 
     is worthwhile, but it is not fair to burden the WIC program 
     with its implementation.

  I ask unanimous consent that the full test of the letters from Mr. 
Smith and from Ms. Stento be printed in the Record in their entirety.
  I do not believe that this is the appropriate time to debate the 
National Voter Registration Act, but I do believe that we should take 
the appropriate step or relieving WIC clinics of this terribly 
burdensome requirement by supporting the McConnell amendment.
  There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in 
the Records follows:

                            Rhode Island WIC Advisory Council,

                                     Providence, RI, May 26, 1994.
     Hon. John H. Chafee,
     Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Chafee: I am writing on behalf of the Rhode 
     Island WIC Advisory Council. The Council requests your 
     further support of the WIC Program for the 1994 
     Reauthorization legislation.
       In particular, we look to you to support full funding for 
     the program so that all eligible needy mothers and children 
     can be served and to preserve the nutrition and health 
     prevention focus of the program.
       As you are aware, Rhode Island WIC aggressively built the 
     Program over the years and now serves one of the highest 
     proportions of need in the nation. This means, however, that 
     the State does not share in the annual growth funding 
     provided by Congress, under current federal funding formulas. 
     Nevertheless, about 30% of eligible Rhode Islanders are still 
     unserved, and Council members often have to tell eligible 
     parents that their children must be placed on a waiting list, 
     perhaps for a long period of time, until funds are available.
       Only with commitment to a full funding approach will 
     resources nationally be sufficient to allow Rhode Island to 
     participate in growth.
       I also write to you today, asking that you please consider 
     our strong reservations regarding the National Voter 
     Registration Act, and the negative impact we feel it will 
     have on the local WIC agencies here in your home state.
       As chairwoman of the Council, I represent the 23 local 
     agencies in Rhode Island. The WIC Advisory Council meets 
     regularly to discuss matters that affect the WIC program in 
     Rhode Island, at the grass roots level. We feel very strongly 
     that the potential is great for the National Voter 
     Registration Act to have an extremely negative impact on the 
     quality of the nutrition services we provide at our WIC 
     sites.
       The overwhelming consensus among the local agencies is that 
     the time it would take to register voters, would be 
     decreasing the time we have to provide nutrition education 
     services, too greatly. On this matter, we are united: we do 
     not want to give up any of our nutrition education time 
     (nutrition education is the key to our program * * * it is 
     what makes the program unique to any other food assistance 
     programs, and it is what makes the program work).
       The National Voter Registration Act is worthwhile, but it 
     is not fair to burden the WIC program with its 
     implementation. Please consider the validity of our argument 
     and do what you can to exempt the WIC program from providing 
     Voter Registration services.
       In conclusion, let me again urge you to work towards 
     exempting the WIC program from the National Voter 
     Registration Act. Additionally, I extend to you an invitation 
     to join the WIC Advisory Council of Rhode Island at an 
     upcoming meeting, to discuss in person, our concerns 
     regarding this matter. Please contact me to arrange a place 
     and date if your busy schedule allows. Thank you for your 
     time and attention to this letter, we hope to meet with you 
     at your convenience.
           Sincerely,
                                               Kathleen A. Stento,
                                                       Chairwoman.
                                  ____

         State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations, 
           Department of Health,
                                     Providence, RI, June 2, 1994.
     Hon. John H. Chafee,
     Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
       Dear Senator Chafee: This is to express my appreciation for 
     the opportunity to meet with Coates Lear recently to discuss 
     legislative matters impacting on the WIC Program. This 
     meeting was particularly timely in light of the current 
     consideration of WIC Program reauthorization. At the request 
     of your office, this is to provide additional detail about 
     the potential impact of the National Voter Registration Act 
     (NVRA) on the WIC Program.
       This Office believes deeply that the WIC Program's 
     existence, success and support represent an important public 
     policy and that the determination of such important public 
     policies should be made with the fullest possible 
     participation by all members of society eligible to vote. To 
     this end, it is entirely appropriate of government to 
     encourage voter participation and educate citizens to be 
     aware of and knowledgeable about the issues that face the 
     country and which their votes may impact. It is in this 
     spirit that the National Voter Registration Act was passed.
       As enlightened as this seems, however, to carry out the 
     provisions of the NVRA requires significant WIC staff time. 
     Such staff time cannot be procured without either purchasing 
     more time or substituting NVRA for other staff activities.
       The NVRA, and parallel state legislation, provides no 
     additional financial resources to the WIC Program to purchase 
     more staff time to carry out its activities. Therefore it is 
     apparent that the WIC Program can only carry out NVRA 
     activities by reducing its efforts in other areas. At the WIC 
     clinic level, over 80% of the available funds are used for 
     direct nutritional services to WIC clients. Therefore, if the 
     program is required to conduct NVRA activities, it must 
     subtract the time required for those activities from an 
     already expanding set of requirements to provide nutrition 
     assessment and education, drug abuse assessment and referral, 
     breastfeeding promotion and support, and information and 
     referral services for health care, financial aid and other 
     nutrition support services, immunization assessment and 
     referral, and general preventive health care participation 
     referral and support services.
       It is fairly obvious that the preceding activities are all 
     deeply allied with the program's mission of preventive health 
     care. Activities aimed at NVRA support are not so obviously 
     allied. Virtually all Rhode Island WIC clinics are certified 
     voluntary, nonprofit health care sites. They are surprised 
     that the NVRA law defines them as ``public assistance 
     agencies''. The customary and accepted meaning of that term 
     is defined by the various financial assistance Titles of the 
     Social Security Act, and usually applied to government 
     administered offices or other agencies primarily providing 
     assistance under the Social Security Act. I believe that non 
     governmental subgrantee programs primarily engaged in health 
     care services, should not be defined as public assistance 
     providers, for NVRA purposes.
       We respectfully request, therefore, that Congress 
     reconsider the role of the WIC Program with respect to NVRA 
     and determine that either the NVRA activities detract from 
     and do not fit with the preventative health activities, 
     traditional and recently added, of WIC or that NVRA 
     activities should be supported by additional appropriated 
     funds for WIC in order not to detract from the program's 
     nutritional and health assistance role, which has been the 
     basis of its success in reducing low birth rate, infant 
     mortality and poor childhood development.
       I thank you for the opportunity to bring these ideas, 
     concerns and recommendations directly to your office.
       Please feel free to call on this office at any time for 
     information about how the WIC Program can be of assistance to 
     our fellow Rhode Islanders or how policy options might 
     further or deter the Program's mission, locally or 
     nationally.
           Sincerely,
                                                    John L. Smith,
                                               Chief, WIC Program.


                      Unanimous-Consent Agreement

  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I understand we now have an agreement 
between both sides.
  I ask unanimous consent that the vote on the McConnell amendment or 
in relation to his amendment occur at 6:20 p.m.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I understand that Senator McConnell and I 
are both ready to yield back.
  Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I yield back the remainder of my 
time.
  Mr. FORD. I yield back the remainder of my time.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.
  The vote will be at 6:20 p.m.
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the 
McConnell amendment.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
  There is a sufficient second.
  The yeas and nays were ordered.
  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, a few days ago I spoke here about the 
compelling need for comprehensive health care reform in our country. I 
said then, as I have on many other occasions, that we need to put far 
more emphasis on preventive health care so that we can change our 
current sick care system into a true health care system. By emphasizing 
more preventive care we will not only promote better health for 
Americans, but we will also ensure that we spend our money in a smarter 
way.
  Child nutrition programs stand as one of the very best examples of 
how smart spending on prevention pays dividends in money saved and in 
healthier and more fulfilling lives for our people. We know that sound 
nutrition, beginning even before birth, can prevent many problems 
throughout life. Programs like the school lunch and breakfast programs; 
the summer food service program; the special supplemental nutrition 
program for women, infants and children [WIC]; the special milk 
program; and the child and adult care food program are critically 
important tools in the effort to improve--and indeed save--lives while 
spending smarter.
  As the chairman of the Nutrition Subcommittee of the Committee on 
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, I was pleased to hold hearings 
earlier this year on this legislation and more generally on the crucial 
role of sound nutrition in building promising futures for our children. 
Those hearings followed hearings held by Chairman Leahy which dealt 
with related aspects of this legislation and the child nutrition 
programs.
  The necessity of sound childhood nutrition and the important role of 
Federal child nutrition programs could not be clearer. Children who are 
hungry or undernourished suffer impaired health, growth, physical 
development and cognitive and behavioral development. Good nutrition is 
a sound prevention strategy against a host of serious and costly health 
problems including infant mortality, premature births, low birth 
weight, anemia and even lead poisoning. For example, studies have shown 
that each $1 invested in WIC prenatal assistance saves from $11.92 to 
$4.21 in Medicaid costs. in a study I requested, the GAO estimated that 
the initial investment in WIC prenatal benefits of $296 million in 1990 
would save $1.036 billion in health and education expenditures over the 
next 18 years.
  Undernourished children simply do not learn as well as they should. 
The President recently signed the goals 2000 education bill, which 
included the goal that every U.S. child enter school ready to learn. 
But without proper nutrition our children simply will not be ready to 
learn.
  We are also gaining a much clearer picture of the specific ways in 
which nutrition and dietary patterns early in life affect health 
throughout life. Three of four leading causes of death in our Nation 
have been linked to diet. Sound nutrition and dietary habits in 
childhood and adolescence have been linked to the prevention of chronic 
disease and illness later in life. And healthy dietary habits formed in 
childhood provide a solid foundation for a lifetime of healthier 
eating.

  Simply put, without sound nutrition our Nation's children will be 
foreclosed from attaining their full human potential for leading 
healthy and fulfilling lives. When our children's lives are diminished, 
each and every one of us is also diminished in some way, as is our 
Nation. And despite the encouraging progress that has been made, 
millions of children in our Nation remain at risk for the damaging 
consequences of inadequate or unsound nutrition. With all that is at 
stake, we simply cannot afford to be complacent about the nutrition of 
our Nation's children.
  Once again, I want to congratulate Chairman Leahy for his leadership 
on this legislation that we have put together in the Agriculture 
Committee and to commend him for his heartfelt commitment to nutrition 
issues, particularly regarding children. This bill reauthorizes and 
makes improvements in the various Federal child nutrition programs. The 
legislation will improve the ability of the programs to meet the 
nutritional needs of our Nation's children. And, in recognition of the 
link between diet and health, the legislation will help improve the 
nutritional quality of the meals children receive.
  Despite severe budgetary limitations, this legislation will achieve 
significant improvements in child nutrition programs. The bill provides 
for stronger efforts to include more children in the school breakfast 
and summer food service programs. The bill provides for more help to 
local school districts to improve the nutritional quality of the meals 
they serve and to meet new USDA nutrition guidelines. USDA will be 
directed to improve the nutritional quality of commodities provided to 
schools and to label commodities in order to enhance the benefit to 
schools of the commodity distribution program.
  The bill also reauthorizes the WIC program and makes a number of 
improvements designed to help the program better achieve its objectives 
and to facilitate administration of the program. In particular, the 
bill reinforces and strengthens efforts within the WIC program to 
promote increased breastfeeding. I worked to include breastfeeding 
promotion in the 1989 WIC reauthorization, and am very pleased that 
this bill expands these efforts. I am also pleased that this bill 
reauthorizes the WIC Farmers Market Program and provides for the growth 
of program, both in States like my State of Iowa already in the program 
and through the participation of additional States. We also initiated 
this program through the 1989 bill, and it is very gratifying to see 
that it has become a very popular and successful program.
  Finally, I want to mention the important provisions of the bill 
designed to prevent and deter fraud, bid-rigging and other 
anticompetitive activities in procurement for the child nutrition 
programs. The bill will significantly strengthen USDA debarment 
procedures, and will provide training, technical assistance, advice and 
guidance to help State and local agencies prevent and avoid fraud and 
anticompetitive activities. I have a keen interest in these provisions 
of the bill. Any fraud against Government programs is detestable, but 
cheating child nutrition programs surely falls into a distinct category 
of outrageous behavior.
  Mr. President, this legislation represents a crucial part of our 
Nation's prevention strategy. It is not only nutrition legislation. It 
is also health legislation. And it is education legislation. I urge my 
colleagues to support this important bill.
  Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I rise in support of legislation to 
reauthorize the child nutrition programs. This legislation revises and 
extends the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and 
Children [WIC], the Summer Food Service Program, the Commodity 
Distribution Program, State administrative expenses and the Nutrition 
Education and Training Program. The bill also makes a number of changes 
in those child nutrition programs which are permanently authorized.
  One provision addresses an issue which is very important to me. In 
compliance with USDA child nutrition and section 504 regulations many 
schools around the country are working to make the National School 
Lunch and School Breakfast Programs accessible to children who, because 
of disability or chronic illness, are unable to eat what is on the 
regular menu. To accomplish this task, these schools need specific 
technical guidance.
  A popular maxim among those of us here in Congress who actively 
support school meal programs is that a hungry child cannot learn. This 
is doubly true of children with special dietary needs. For a child with 
diabetes or severe allergies, appropriate nutrition can mean the 
difference between sickness and health. For a severely disabled child, 
appropriate nutrition can mean the difference between being alert and 
responsive or passive and withdrawn.
  When the school lunch program was established in 1946, and when I was 
involved in expanding it during the early 1970s, no one envisaged that 
regular schools would be asked to serve children with such a wide array 
of disabilities and chronic illness. Many of these children come from 
low-income families without the financial resources to provide them 
adequate nutrition, making their needs that much more pressing.
  Section 123 of this bill requires USDA to issue guidance to assist 
schools and other institutions in accommodating the special dietary 
needs of these children. The guidance will give meal providers a 
greater understanding of how they can meet these needs. In many cases, 
accommodation may require no more than substituting fruit for a piece 
of cake or making available a special plate or cup. In other cases, the 
preparation of special meals may be necessary.
  This section also contains discretionary funding for grants to States 
to cover nonrecurring costs associated with accommodating special needs 
children. These funds will be awarded on a competitive basis and can be 
used to purchase special feeding and food preparation equipment. Other 
appropriate uses would include providing training or purchasing 
educational videos, manuals or other training materials dealing with 
accommodating children with special dietary needs.
  The grants included in this bill will assist the food service 
community in providing for the special needs of these children. This 
bill contains other worthy provisions which refine operating 
procedures, reduce paperwork and establish targeted discretionary pilot 
programs and assistance grants.
  Mr. President, in closing I want to thank the distinguished chairman 
and the ranking member of the Agriculture Committee, Senator Leahy and 
Senator Lugar, the chairman and ranking member of the Nutrition 
Subcommittee, Senator Harkin and Senator McConnell, and Senator 
Cochran, their staffs, and their members of the Senate Agriculture 
Committee for their hard work on this legislation. This bipartisan 
effort addresses needed changes in the child nutrition programs and 
will ensure their continued effectiveness. I urge my colleagues to give 
it their support.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased that we have come to the 
place of floor action on S. 1614, the Better Nutrition and Health of 
Children Act of 1993. This Act has several provisions that historically 
have been very important to our country. It also has provisions that 
have been particularly important to Iowa.
  The WIC Program has received overwhelming support over the years from 
Republicans and Democrats alike. It has proven successful in providing 
preventative care for women, infants, and children by providing good 
basic nutrition.
  I, like many of my colleagues, have consistently supported greater 
funding for the program as a means of reducing other health costs down 
the road.
  I am pleased to see an increase in funding for the WIC breastfeeding 
program. Medical research shows that children who are breasted are less 
likely to encounter certain physical challenges than children who are 
formula fed. The Iowa WIC program has consistently encouraged WIC 
recipients to breastfeed their children for both physical and emotional 
health reasons.
  The Farmers' Market WIC Program has been one of the projects in which 
I have had special interest for several years. The program provides 
fruits and vegetables for nutritionally at-risk women and children. In 
Iowa alone, it serves countless thousands who would not have received 
fruits and vegetables otherwise. Additionally, it helps farmers who 
need to diversify their market and encourages use of farmers' markets 
generally. Research shows that women continue to use farmers markets 
even after they are no longer officially part of the Farmer Market WIC 
Program.
  I am pleased with several provisions of the committee bill being 
considered today. The committee language has increased funding for the 
Farmers Market Program and provided for a greater administrative match. 
Because farmers markets are not year round in many States, there are 
special considerations, such as start up and shut down costs for these 
programs that other programs do not face. Additionally, the bill allows 
States to use up to 1 percent of its funds for market development in 
areas where there are no farmers markets for nutritionally at risk 
families. This provision will allow States to develop farmers markets 
in underserved areas.
  Of course, the school breakfast and lunch program are an important 
part of any child nutrition reauthorization. The bill before us 
provides appropriate attention to the millions of children served 
through these programs. It addresses the issue of moving toward school 
breakfast and lunches serving nutritious foods, but does so in a way 
that is not overly burdensome to school districts trying to care for 
our children. It also provides flexibility to school districts to 
choose lowfat or skim milk products if they prefer these products to 
whole milk.
  I am pleased that the committee has been able to address my chief 
concern with the proposal, which was its original cost. Many of the 
high cost provisions originally in the bill have been dropped so that 
we have a balanced bill before us today. I join my colleagues in 
supporting this final proposal.
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
  the legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
  Mr. FORD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for 
the quorum call be rescinded.
  The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.

                          ____________________