[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 39 (Thursday, March 2, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H2567-H2568]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
FEDERAL FOOD ASSISTANCE
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the
gentlewoman from North Carolina [Mrs. Clayton] is recognized for 60
minutes.
Mrs. CLAYTON. Mr. Speaker, a compelling case can be made against the
proposal to convert Federal nutrition programs into block grants.
That case will be made tonight.
Over the next 2 hours, the American public will hear from many of our
colleagues about the dangers of certain provisions of H.R. 4, the
Personal Responsibility Act.
That is the bill that contains provisions to slash school lunches and
breakfasts.
That bill will remove thousands of women, infants and children from
the WIC Program. National nutrition standards will be eliminated by the
bill. And States will be able to transfer as much as 24 percent of
nutrition funds for non-nutrition uses.
But, the impact of this proposed bill goes even deeper.
Retail food sales will decline by $10 billion, farm income will be
reduced by as much as $4 billion and unemployment will increase by as
many as 138,000.
The security of America's economy is at stake.
From grocery stores, large and small, to the farmer and food service
worker--everyone will suffer. Most States will lose money.
But, the case becomes even more compelling when viewed in a broader
context.
The House Appropriations Committee is pushing a recession package
that, when combined with the proposed cuts in the nutrition programs,
will squeeze those most in need in ways we have not seen in America,
since the Great Depression of the 1930's.
Nearly $2 billion will be cut from education programs, including
money for drug free schools and educational support for the
disadvantaged.
Also $3 billion will be cut from programs that move teenagers from
school to work, including complete elimination of the Summer Jobs
Program.
Our seniors and veterans do not escape this blind axe
Billions will be cut in federally assisted senior citizen housing.
The 2 million needy senior citizens who benefit from the Fuel
Assistance Program may go cold. That program will be completely
eliminated.
That committee's bill cuts $50 million in funds for veterans' medical
equipment and facilities.
Billions of the money saved by these cuts will go to the top 3
percent wage earners in the United States in the form of a 50 percent
cut in the capital gains tax.
They want capital gains cuts. We want an increase in the minimum
wage. They want block grants. We want healthy Americans.
They want a full plate for those with money. We want to restore
Federal food assistance programs. And, we will. The nutrition of our
citizens should not be left to chance.
Mr. Speaker, all of the nutrition programs are important.
I would like to highlight one of them to demonstrate the poor
judgment of those pushing passage of H.R. 4.
That is the WIC Program. WIC works.
It is a program that services low income and at risk women, infants,
and children.
Pregnant women, infants 12 months and younger, and children from 1 to
5 years old, are the beneficiaries of the WIC Program.
For every dollar this Nation spends on WIC prenatal care, we save up
to $4.21.
The budget cutting efforts we are experiencing are aimed at reducing
the deficit.
The deficit is being driven by rising health care costs.
When we put money into WIC, we save money in Medicaid. The equation
is simple.
Those who have a genuine interest in deficit reduction can help
achieve that goal by investing in WIC.
The WIC Program embraces the unborn; provides nurturing and care; is
devoted to maternal health; helps insure life at birth; and promotes
the growth and development of millions of our children.
And, it saves us money.
WIC works. Let's keep it working.
The Committee on Economic and Educational Opportunities has proposed
radical changes in the school lunch and WIC programs.
If these changes stand, 275,000 women, infants, and children will be
removed from the WIC Program. Nutritious meals served in 185,000 family
day care centers will be eliminated. School food programs will be
reduced by $309 million.
In contrast, the Agriculture Committee has proposed keeping the Food
Stamp Program as an entitlement. The committee is to be commended.
It seems inconsistent, however, to retain food stamps as an
entitlement, a program that has had some problems with fraud and abuse,
while block granting the WIC and school lunch programs.
[[Page H2568]] Mr. Speaker, last year, we spent just $26 per American
taxpayer for the AFDC Program.
Child nutrition programs represented just one-half of 1 percent of
total Federal outlays in 1994. The average food stamp benefits is 75
cents per person, per meal. Seventy-five cents. Children aren't driving
our deficit.
Senior citizens are not the cause of our economic woes. Programs for
the poor do not represent pork.
That is why I maintain that H.R. 4, the Personal Responsibility Act
of 1995, is irresponsible.
Mr. Speaker, this Nation is strong, not just because of its military
might or its technology.
This Nation is strong because of its compassion.
We care about those among us who are weak--the young, the old, the
poor, the frail, the disabled. If our citizens are weak, we are weak.
I hope the American people will pay close attention to the statements
by our colleagues this evening.
Change for the sake of improvement is good. Change for the sake of
change is not. Something different does not necessarily create
something better. Most of us support welfare reform because the current
system does not serve us well.
However, the nutrition programs do not need the kind of sweeping
change as proposed by the proponents of H.R. 4.
A compelling case against that proposal can and will be made tonight.
And, at the end of the presentations, I ask all to judge for
themselves who will be helped and who will be hurt by the proposal to
block grant our nutrition programs?
____________________