[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 47 (Tuesday, March 14, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H3133-H3134]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


        BLOCK GRANTING CHILD NUTRI- TION PROGRAMS IS A BAD IDEA

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under a previous order of the House, the 
gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] is recognized for 5 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, block granting child nutrition programs is 
a bad idea, but it is not a new idea. In 1982, members of this body 
felt it necessary to pass a bipartisan resolution opposing nutrition 
block grants and one of the signers of that resolution was House 
Speaker Newt Gingrich.
  And in the resolution it said, ``Whereas the nutrition benefits 
provided to our Nation's schoolchildren contribute significantly to the 
development of their learning potential, the Federal Government should 
retain primary responsibility for the child nutrition programs and such 
programs should not be included in any block grant.'' And that is a 
quote.
  These statements, Mr. Speaker, are as true today as they were in 
1982. Our Federal child nutrition programs work. They help to fight 
hunger. They keep our kids healthy, alert, and ready to learn every 
single day. Block granting child nutrition programs was a bad idea in 
1982 and it is a bad idea in 1995.
  Mr. Speaker, it has been said that sunshine is the best disinfectant, 
so I rise today to join my colleagues in shedding some light on the 
Republicans' plan and its devastating impact on Federal child nutrition 
programs and specifically the school lunch program.
  The Republicans are at it again, insisting that their proposal 
actually preserves and strengthens the school lunch program. The very 
opposite is true.
  As these charts behind me show, each year that the Republican block 
grant is in place, school meal programs will be cut. Over 5 years, 
funding for school meals programs will be cut resulting in a total loss 
of $2.3 billion in the year 2000.
  [[Page H3134]] And when you combine these cuts with cuts in the 
funding for the child nutrition programs under the family-based block 
grant program, which amounts to $4.6 billion, child nutrition programs 
will be cut by $7 billion over the next 5 years.
  What the American School Food Service Association--don't take my 
word--the American School Food Service Association says, and what our 
Republican colleagues do not tell us, is that inflation with regard to 
this program rises 3.5 percent every year and school enrollment rises 3 
percent every year. That is 6.5 percent.
  My Republican colleagues tell you that they are going to increase the 
program 4.5 percent. And it does not take a rocket scientist to figure 
out that 4.5 from 6.5 is a 2-percent cut in this program. What they do 
not do is to include increased school enrollment, the increased cost of 
food prices, and a downturn in our economy.
  Also, according to the American School Food Service Association, the 
bill cuts funding for school meal programs and places our children at 
risk in the following ways: First, the Republican plan means an end to 
free meals for the poorest children in America.
  Currently children from the lowest income families receive their 
meals free. In my State of Connecticut, more than 13 million free meals 
were served last year. I went to the Simon Lake School in Milford, 
Connecticut, yesterday. In that very small community they served 96,000 
free meals last year.
  The Republican bill states that these children in the future may or 
may not receive free or reduced priced meals. And then it requires the 
States to
 spend only 80 percent of the money that they receive under this block 
grant toward providing free and reduced meals. They cut back the cost, 
then they say to the State: If you want you can spend only 80 percent; 
20 percent of that money you can spend on anything else that you would 
like to.

  The bill also eliminates current requirements that low-income 
children pay no more than 40 cents for a reduced price meal. Schools 
would be able to charge these kids any price they choose, 50 cents, 75 
cents or even $1 per meal. This is a hardship that many working 
families simply could not afford.
  Second, in addition to cutting $2.34 billion from the program, the 
school nutrition block grant would allow Governors to transfer up to 20 
percent of the funds they receive to another block grant program. 
Further, Governors would no longer be required to make a State matching 
contribution to the program.
  I will give you my own State. If the Governor of my home State of 
Connecticut had this kind of discretion and he chose to exercise it, 
the School meals program in Connecticut could lose $2 million this 
year.
  Let me conclude. As my colleagues have said, school lunches are an 
essential part of every child's day and benefit every American child in 
the public school. We should not be tampering with a program that 
works. I say, leave the school lunch program alone and protect the 
children of America.

                          ____________________