[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 53 (Wednesday, March 22, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H3530]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                              {time}  2030
                       WELFARE REFORM: SHELL GAME
  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Under a previous order of 
the House, the gentlewoman from Connecticut [Ms. DeLauro] is recognized 
for 5 minutes.
  Ms. DeLAURO. Mr. Speaker, I rise to join my colleagues once again in 
exposing the myths that the Republicans keep repeating about their 
welfare reform proposal and its impact on child nutrition programs. 
Later this evening, two of my colleagues will demonstrate how the 
Republicans are misleading the American people and how this block grant 
plan clearly cuts funding for essential child nutrition programs. But 
before they begin, here are the facts.
  The Republicans claim their block grant does not cut funding for 
child nutrition programs, only the growth rate of these programs. They 
would like everyone to believe that their proposal increases funding 
for programs, such as school lunch, by 4.5 percent each year.
  The truth is their 4.5 percent increase in funding for School Lunch 
is a fabrication. In fact, the bill doesn't even
 designate funding specifically for the school lunch, breakfast, or any 
other school-based meal program. The Republicans' numbers are nothing 
more than assumptions--I repeat, assumptions--of how much States may 
choose to use for lunch programs.

  Even if States spent all of the money they receive under this block 
grant, this mythical funding increase would fall $300 million short of 
the amount necessary to meet real needs. That is because the 
Republicans' plan won't keep pace with expected increases in program 
enrollment, inflation, or a possible recession. These needs require a 
6.5 percent increase, so even the mythical 4.5 percent increase falls 
woefully short.
  The Republicans' mythical funding also includes only cash assistance 
and not the value of direct purchases of food goods such as cheese and 
fruit. These direct purchases of food are a critical part of the school 
lunch program. In the first year, Republicans cut $51 million from 
direct food assistance. Over 5 years, they cut $600 million. That is a 
total shortfall of $1 billion even if they live up to their hollow 
promise of a 4.5 percent increase in cash assistance.
  That 4.5 percent promise comes with all kinds of trap doors that will 
drop even more kids from the school lunch program.
  The first trap door is that States would be required to use only 80 
percent of the school block grant for school meals. Governors may 
transfer 20 percent to other programs. That means a potential 
additional loss of $5 billion dollars from the program--$1 billion a 
year. In my home State of Connecticut, if the Governor had this kind of 
discretion today and exercised it, the School Lunch Program would lose 
$2 million in 1995 alone.
  The second trap door is that these funding increases are not 
guaranteed--they will be subjected to the political whims of the annual 
budget process. So the Congress each year will be able to vote to 
reduce funding even more and drop even more kids from the program.
  The Republicans also claim that their bill will cut bureaucrats, not 
kids. They couldn't be further from the truth. If Republicans were only 
interested in cutting administrative costs they would have done their 
homework: The entire administrative budget for all USDA feeding 
programs is $106 million per year. The Republican plan would cut $860 
million in 1996 child nutrition programs alone. The bottom line is 
their cuts far exceed what is needed to control administrative costs.
  The truth is, if the Republican proposal is enacted, 3,600 kids will 
be dropped from the School Lunch Program in Connecticut in the first 
year alone, and over half a million kids will be dropped nationwide.
  The Congressional Budget Office has concluded the Republican proposal 
will cut $2.3 billion over 5 years from school based nutrition programs 
and $7 billion from all child nutrition programs over 5 years.
  Republicans though don't want to admit this. They actually believe 
that these are not cuts. They boast that their plan provides savings. I 
ask you, how can you have savings, if you don't have cuts? This is the 
biggest Republican myth of them all.
  The tragedy in this debate, Mr. Speaker, is that these Republican 
myths are being perpetuated so that drastic cuts can be made in a 
program that everybody agrees is working--and working well. And the 
savings--the money that will no longer be used to pay for a child's 
school lunch--will be used to pay for a tax break for the wealthiest 
Americans. It's shameful. It's mean spirited. It's just plain wrong.


                          ____________________