[Congressional Record Volume 141, Number 54 (Thursday, March 23, 1995)]
[House]
[Pages H3708-H3710]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]


                    MORE ON THE SCHOOL LUNCH PROGRAM

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Calvert). Under a previous order of the 
House, the gentleman from Illinois [Mr. LaHood] is recognized for 5 
minutes.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the distinguished gentleman from 
Ohio, [Mr. Hoke].
  Mr. HOKE. I thank my friend from Illinois. I just have to point out 
that each time we see one of these little 
 [[Page H3709]] pins go up on the map, there is a fundamental deceit 
going on. It is the only way that I can describe it.
  In the State of California, I am sorry, in the State of New York, 
1996 over 1995, under the block grant program, there is a $28,798,000 
increase in funding for school lunch programs. In the State of Ohio, 
$11,500,000 increase in funding.
  All that I can do is, I have to wonder if there is not something else 
going on. Who is being represented? What vested special interest is 
being represented? Could it be government bureaucrats? If we look at 
this, what have we got, $1,900,000 that has been contributed by Federal 
employee PACs to Republicans; $17,682,000 contributed by Federal 
employee PACs to Democrats, about a 10-to-1 ratio.
  What is going on here? Are the children being represented? Or are the 
government bureaucrats, the Federal Washington bureaucrats being 
represented?
  Mr. LaHOOD. Reclaiming my time, I yield to the distinguished 
gentleman from Georgia, [Mr. Kingston].
  Mr. KINGSTON. I still was confused if the State of Ohio is getting, 
is this 11 million, $11.5 million more?
  Mr. HOKE. Eleven and a half million dollars more in 1996 under the 
block grant program than in 1995.
  Mr. KINGSTON. I just want to make sure the record is complete. One of 
the other statements of the previous speaker was that the program has 
been rocking along for 41 years to everyone's satisfaction and there 
have not been any problems.
  Here is the problem, and this is something really, I wish the 
President was watching tonight. We spend the third largest item on our 
national budget is interest on the national debt. We have not had a 
balanced budget since 1969. The third largest item is interest. It is 
just short of $20 billion a month that we pay in interest on the 
national debt. To say that this program is not a problem is to me 
unbelievable.
  Program after program is okay, not this program, not this one, 
everything is running fine, hunky-dory, no problems at all.
  If you want to help children, you keep the country from going broke. 
How many kids are you going to feed when you are broke? You cannot do 
it. I am telling you, you cannot always lead with your heart. You have 
to use your brain and the formula.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Reclaiming my time, I have not said one word yet on my 
own time, but I want to tell the American people what is happening 
here.
  Last night we saw the distinguished gentleman from California stand 
up here with his paper plate display and move them around and try and 
shift things around to try to persuade the American people that if you 
say something often enough, my gosh, they might even believe you.
  So we move this paper plate here and this one here and this one here 
and, all of a sudden, we have moved a bunch of paper plates around. But 
we have not proved anything.
  So tonight we get a little geography lesson. They bring a map of the 
United States of America. And we are trying to teach a little 
geography. And we bring these little cutouts of children to try and 
tell the American people again to continue the drumbeat, as I said, if 
we say it often enough, somebody is going to believe us, we are cutting 
school lunch programs.
  You believe that if you tell the American people something often 
enough they will believe you. That is why you have been on the floor 
every night. And the truth is, and you know it is the truth, there is 
not one Member in this House, not one Republican, not one Democrat that 
want to cut the school lunch program. Nobody wants to do that. Nobody 
wants to do it.
  But what we want to do is what you could not do when you had control 
of the White House, the House of Representatives, and the U.S. Senate. 
We want to reform welfare. You had your chance to do it. Where were 
you? You had two years to do it. You talk a good game. You talk a great 
game. But you never produce.
                             welfare reform

  Tomorrow the House of Representatives will deliver on one of 
President Clinton's own campaign promises. We will ``end welfare as we 
know it.'' But it will be a Republican-controlled House of 
Representatives forging ahead with this revolutionary task--not his own 
Democrat-controlled House.
  This piece of legislation, the Personal Responsibility Act, is quite 
possibly the most important piece of legislation that I will vote on as 
a Member of Congress.
  We have fought the war on poverty and, unfortunately, we have lost 
that war. We must now turn to solutions that will stop this cycle of 
generational poverty. Even though Americans remain compassionate 
people, we have to do something to stop kids from having kids--to make 
fathers and mothers more responsible--and to encourage able-bodied 
members of the work force to provide a proper livelihood for their 
families.
  Welfare has exploded into an industry that no longer cares for--or 
effectively deals with--what Lyndon Johnson envisioned. His temporary 
assistance has turned into permanent poverty. The collapse of work and 
family has spawned crime, drug use, problematic educational 
environments, and other social ills--and the people who have suffered 
the most are the ones we want to help the most--the children.
  Residents of my hometown of Peoria have been horrified last week by 
an occurrence on the north side. A young boy, age 11, was found dead in 
a vacant lot covered with plastic garbage bags. He has been beaten with 
a metal pipe and suffocated to death, a 14-year-old ``friend'' was 
charged with the murder. The mother of the slain boy was alleged to 
have allowed the child to smoke marijuana when he was 5. He was put in 
a foster home at a young age, but, later, was given back to his 
mother--a mother who has been convicted on prostitution charges, and is 
currently facing another charge for the same offense. And neighbors say 
the slain boy would wander the neighborhood late at night--sometimes 
being locked out of his house.
 This is just another in a long succession of American tragedies. This 
takes place, only with different names, in cities all across our 
Nation. This is shameful--and immoral--and we must have the courage to 
face up to the tragedy of circumstances like this and do something 
about it.

  This monumental task of reform will not be accomplished without 
naysayers decrying at every attempt. One example of this has been the 
Women, Infants, and Children [WIC] program. Liberals have been racing 
around breathlessly accusing Republicans of gutting the WIC program. 
When, in fact, the $25 million rescission is coming out of a $3.5 
billion-a-year program. But, this is not a cut, as you and I understand 
the program. Each year, the WIC program runs a $55 million to $125 
million carry-over of funds. In other words, this is what they usually 
have left over, because they have not yet been able to spend all of 
their budget. When the Federal Government is adding $200 billion a year 
to the national debt, one place to start saving money to balance the 
budget is in carry-over funds.
  More lies have been told about the school lunch program. Liberals 
have again accused Republicans of either cutting or abolishing these 
programs. The fact is that our plan would do neither. Our Nation's 
school lunch program for children would not be abolished or cut. School 
lunch spending will, in fact, grow by 4.5 percent every year through to 
the end of this century. Far from cutting its programmatic spending, 
the block grants would increase from $6.7 billion next year to $7.8 
billion over the next 4 years. Our bill seeks to turn over all of the 
program's money to the States and let them run it in the most efficient 
way possible.
  Finally, the $27 billion food stamp program will be reformed by 
capping its growth to 2 percent a year and combining four other food 
programs into one. The bill preserves food stamps as a federal program 
to guarantee that any American who needs food will continue to have 
access to nutrition assistance. The reforms will result in a savings of 
over $26 billion in 5 years.
  The Republican proposal will break this vicious cycle of welfare. All 
able-bodied welfare recipients between the ages of 18 and 50, who do 
not have children, will be required to work. Having more children will 
no longer be rewarded. And we will means test for the nutrition block 
grant programs.
  You will hear much crying this week from old-line liberals. We are 
about to bring changes to some of their favorite programs--programs 
that have been proven failures. These changes are desperately needed to 
change this system into a trampoline--not a hammock--for its 
recipients.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Mr. Speaker, will the gentleman yield?
  Mr. LaHOOD. I yield to the gentleman from Texas.
  Mr. GENE GREEN of Texas. Let me remind, I have heard it tonight that 
we started with Lyndon Johnson's Great Society, 1969 was the last time 
we had a balanced budget. That was the last budget Lyndon Johnson 
submitted. So even though you trace it to 1965, the last budget, after 
18 years of Republican leadership in the White House, we have not had a 
balanced budget since 
 [[Page H3710]] the last one President Johnson submitted.
  Mr. LaHOOD. Reclaiming my time, I am happy to say that we have all 
supported a balanced budget amendment. We could not get some of you to 
help us.


                          ____________________