[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 47 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H3125-H3126]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                  FAMILY AND SCHOOL NUTRITION PROGRAMS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentleman from Pennsylvania [Mr. Fox] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Mr. FOX of Pennylvania. Mr. Speaker, my Republican colleagues and I 
are here tonight to set the record straight about family and school 
nutrition programs. We care about women, infants and children, and are 
committed to compassionate solutions to assist our children.
  I believe that the whole debate on this issue was best summarized in 
an editorial which appeared recently in the Cincinnati Enquirer. The 
author poses the following question to us: If you had a dollar to spend 
on lunch, would you rather, A, give it to Uncle 
[[Page H3126]] Sam, who will order your lunch for a cut of the money, 
or, B, choose your own lunch, or, C, skip lunch and stay hungry?
  We have a program that chooses A, give your money to Uncle Sam, who 
will order your lunch for a cut of the money. President Clinton and his 
Congressional allies would have you believe that any change in the 
current system would mean choice C, that kids would go hungry.
  Nothing could be further from the truth. My colleagues and I believe 
we should choose B, to give block grants to the States and allow 
decisions to be made closer to our children, which empowers families 
and our local communities.
  We are growing kids, not the Government. Our plan will increase 
funding for Women, Infants and Children programs and school nutrition 
programs by 4.5% each year. As you see from this chart in each year 
from 1995 to the year 2000, the red chart shows a yearly increase of 
the food programs for school nutrition of 4.5 percent and an even 
larger increase for WIC programs.
  The GOP growth in school meals is very clear, the huge increase. You 
see the increases, 3.6 percent, 4.5 percent, and 4.5 percent. The same 
is true with WIC programs. I wish to point that out. The GOP also grows 
the WIC programs. In this case we see that a line goes up, the CBO 
baseline WIC funding and the GOP WIC funding, which is even higher.
  By eliminating the Federal middleman and the 15-percent 
administrative costs that were used to run the current program, our 
plan will make more resources available to feed more children.
  Our proposal creates two separate block grants--one to address family 
nutrition needs and one to address school nutrition needs, which 
preserves the family and rewards work.
  The family nutrition block grant will allow States to promote the 
good nutrition, health and development of women, infants and children 
and to provide healthy meals in child care, head start, summer camp, 
and homeless shelters.
  Under the block grant, funding for family programs, including vital 
programs to help women, infants, and children, will be $588 million 
greater over the next 5 years than in the current programs. With 
increased funding and less bureaucracy and paperwork, States can assist 
more of our children.
  The school nutrition block grant allows our schools to provide 
breakfast, lunch, before and after school meals and low-cost milk to 
our children. We know that hungry children cannot learn--that is why we 
propose to increase funding for school meals 4.5 percent each year for 
5 years. We are sensitive to the needs of our children. We are 
committed to providing healthy meals and thus creating a proper 
learning environment.
  Furthermore, the school nutrition block grant will enable more meals 
to be served to more children.
  We are proud to be part of a caring solution that helps our children 
grown, not our Government bureaucracy.


                          ____________________