[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 53 (Wednesday, March 22, 1995)]
[House]
[Page H3532]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                       SCHOOL NUTRITION PROGRAMS

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. LaTourette). Under a previous order of 
the House, the gentleman from Ohio [Mr. Hoke] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. HOKE. Mr. Speaker, tonight we are going to talk a little bit more 
about the school nutrition programs, because this seems to be the 
Democrats' favorite topic of the topics de jour.
  Somehow, somewhere along the line the Democrats have decided or 
believe that somehow they can make, by telling the same lie over and 
over and over, that they can somehow get a wedge with the American 
people. And the fact is that in some ways the opposition does 
understand politics perhaps better than the Republicans do. They 
understand that politics is about power, and when it is about power, 
you stop at nothing to try to regain it.
  Republicans are still under the impression that politics is about 
ideas and ideals. But this is about the politics of deceit and the 
politics of the big lie.
  I yield to my friend, the gentlewoman from Washington [Mrs. Smith].
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. I thank the gentleman for yielding.
  You know, I have been standing here for 2 days listening, in fact, 
nearly 2 weeks, to untruths.
  My mom used to say, you know, it would be awful nice if people would 
just turn purple when they started stretching the truth, shifting words 
around and using wiggle words. There would be an awful lot of purple 
people here tonight if that were the case.
  I think what we need to do is just make sure the American people 
understand that a 4\1/2\-percent-a-year increase is not a cut. Now, if 
you are used to being in Congress where you guys all have been spending 
more than we out there have been earning, you think a 4\1/2\-percent 
increase is a cut. The American people, I do not think, will agree with 
that.
  So let us take a look at the actual members of how much the food 
programs are going to go up.
  Mr. HOKE. Only a liberal could call a $200 million increase a cut. 
Only people that think the way the people think inside of Washington 
could call that a cut.
  I would like to draw attention just for a moment to the CRS study 
that was published just today. We got a copy of it just today [CRS] 
Congressional Research Service, completely independent, nonpartisan.
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. Not a Republican group.
  Mr. HOKE. Not a Republican group, not a Democrat group. It is a 
completely nonpartisan group.
  Here is what they say about what is going to happen in Ohio, a State 
close to my heart. What we are going to find in Ohio with respect to 
the school-based block grants, school-based nutrition programs, is that 
in 1995, fiscal 1995, under current law, $190 million is being spent. 
Under the school-based block grant program, our Republican program, 
that will go up to $202 million, an increase of $11 million.
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. That is in one State.
  Mr. HOKE. That is in one State, just the State of Ohio, an $11 
million increase. Now, for those who like baseline budgeting, which is 
to say we will take into account demographics, that is, changing 
populations, plus an inflation number, not the way that America thinks. 
I mean, this is the way that you get the phony numbers. But the fact is 
even using those numbers, the 1996 fiscal year current baseline would 
be $199 million, a $2 million increase over that.
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. That is a real increase in food.
  Mr. HOKE. A real increase. This is food, and not only that, is there 
not a difference in the way that these programs get administered?
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. You know, what is amazing about it is the 
closer you get it to home, from what I can see, the less waste there 
is. We do not seem to hear much about that. The closer the States have 
control, the less we are going to take the money here. I think the 
thing that surprised me the most when I flew into D.C., and I am from 
the west coast, did not even have a very long campaign, all of a sudden 
I was here as a write-in candidate. I fly in, and I see all of these 
buildings. I get here and find out they are all filled with 
bureaucrats. Those bureaucrats are deciding one layer of how money is 
spent, then the States decide, and then the locals, to where by the 
time the money gets down to food, it has a lot of red tape and rules 
around it.
  What I like about the school lunch program is we unwrap it from a lot 
of that red tape and make sure the food gets to kids.
  Mr. HOKE. And kids who really need it, the kids who need it most. We 
give them the opportunity; we make it possible for that money to get to 
those that need it the most. How? By making sure it goes to parents, 
administrators, and teachers and people right there in the 
neighborhoods locally making those decisions as opposed to Washington 
bureaucrats making those decisions.
  Mrs. SMITH of Washington. You know, those other bureaucrats are going 
to whine, and that is the State superintendents of public instruction. 
They are going to whine, too, because we tell them you cannot spend any 
more than 2 percent on administration.


                          ____________________