[Congressional Record Volume 144, Number 97 (Monday, July 20, 1998)]
[House]
[Pages H5865-H5874]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CHILD NUTRITION AND WIC REAUTHORIZATION AMENDMENTS OF 1998
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3874) to amend the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to make
improvements to the special supplemental nutrition program for women,
infants, and children and to extend the authority of that program
through fiscal year 2003, as amended.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3874
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE; TABLE OF CONTENTS.
(a) Short Title.--This Act may be cited as the ``Child
Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Amendments of 1998''.
(b) Table of Contents.--The table of contents is as
follows:
Sec. 1. Short title; table of contents.
Sec. 2. Effective date.
TITLE I--AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT
Sec. 101. Provision of commodities.
Sec. 102. Nutritional and other program requirements.
Sec. 103. Special assistance.
Sec. 104. Miscellaneous provisions and definitions.
Sec. 105. Summer food service program for children.
Sec. 106. Commodity distribution program.
Sec. 107. Child and adult care food program.
Sec. 108. Meal supplements for children in afterschool care.
Sec. 109. Universal free breakfast pilot projects.
Sec. 110. Training and technical assistance.
Sec. 111. Compliance and accountability.
Sec. 112. Information clearinghouse.
Sec. 113. Accommodation of the special dietary needs of individuals
with disabilities.
TITLE II--AMENDMENTS TO THE CHILD NUTRITION ACT OF 1966
Sec. 201. State administrative expenses.
Sec. 202. Special supplemental nutrition program for women, infants,
and children.
Sec. 203. Nutrition education and training program.
SEC. 2. EFFECTIVE DATE.
This Act, and the amendments made by this Act, shall take
effect on October 1, 1998, or the date of the enactment of
this Act, whichever occurs later.
TITLE I--AMENDMENTS TO THE NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT
SEC. 101. PROVISION OF COMMODITIES.
Section 6 of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1755)
is amended--
(1) in subsection (b), by striking ``authorized under
subsection (c)'' and inserting ``required under subsections
(c) and (e)'';
(2) by striking subsections (c) and (d); and
(3) by redesignating subsections (e), (f), and (g) as
subsections (c), (d), and (e), respectively.
SEC. 102. NUTRITIONAL AND OTHER PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS.
(a) State or Local Health and Safety Inspections.--Section
9 of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(h) If the food service operations of a school
participating in the school lunch program under this Act or
the school breakfast program under section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) are not required by
State or local law to undergo health and safety inspections,
then the school shall twice during each school year obtain
State or local health and safety inspections to ensure that
meals provided under such programs are prepared and served in
a healthful and safe environment.''.
(b) Single Permanent Agreements Between State Agencies and
School Food Authorities; Common Claiming Procedures.--
[[Page H5866]]
Section 9 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1758), as amended by this
Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(i)(1) If a single State agency administers the school
lunch program under this Act, the school breakfast program
under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1773), the summer food service program for children under
section 13 of this Act, or the child and adult care food
program under section 17 of this Act, then such agency--
``(A) shall require each school food authority to submit a
single agreement with respect to the operation of such
programs by such authority; and
``(B) shall require a common claiming procedure with
respect to meals and supplements served under such programs.
``(2) The agreement described in paragraph (1)(A) shall be
a permanent agreement that may be amended as necessary.''.
SEC. 103. SPECIAL ASSISTANCE.
(a) School Eligibility Requirements for Payments.--Section
11(a)(1) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1759a(a)(1)) is amended--
(1) in subparagraph (C)--
(A) in clause (i)(I), by striking ``3 successive school
years'' each place it appears and inserting ``4 successive
school years''; and
(B) in clauses (ii) and (iii), by striking ``3-school-year
period'' each place it appears and inserting ``4-school-year
period''; and
(2) in subparagraph (D)--
(A) in clause (i)--
(i) by striking ``3-school-year period'' each place it
appears and inserting ``4-school-year period''; and
(ii) by striking ``2 school years'' and inserting ``4
school years'';
(B) in clause (ii)--
(i) by striking the first sentence; and
(ii) by striking ``5-school-year period'' each place it
appears and inserting ``4-school-year period''; and
(C) in clause (iii), by striking ``5-school-year period''
and inserting ``4-school-year period''.
(b) Adjustments to Payment Rates.--
(1) In general.--Section 11(a)(3)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1759a(a)(3)(B)) is amended--
(A) in the first sentence, by striking ``The annual'' and
inserting ``(i) The annual'';
(B) in the third sentence--
(i) by striking ``The adjustments'' and inserting the
following:
``(ii) The adjustments''; and
(ii) by inserting ``through April 30, 1999,'' after ``under
this paragraph''; and
(iii) by adding at the end the following:
``(iii) For the period beginning on May 1, 1999, and ending
on June 30, 1999, the national average payment rates for
meals and supplements shall be adjusted to the nearest lower
cent increment and shall be based on the unrounded amounts
used to calculate the rates in effect on July 1, 1998.
``(iv) For July 1, 1999, and each subsequent July 1, the
national average payment rates for meals and supplements
shall be adjusted to the nearest lower cent increment and
shall be based on the unrounded amount for the preceding 12-
month period.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Section 4(b) of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773(b)) is amended--
(1) in the second sentence of paragraph (1)(B), by striking
``adjusted to the nearest one-fourth cent,''; and
(2) in paragraph (2)(B)(ii), by striking ``to the nearest
one-fourth cent''.
SEC. 104. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS AND DEFINITIONS.
(a) Adjustments to Reimbursement Rates for Certain States
and Territories.--Section 12(f) of the National School Lunch
Act (42 U.S.C. 1760(f)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``school breakfasts and lunches'' and
inserting ``breakfasts, lunches, suppers, and supplements'';
(2) by striking ``sections 4 and 11'' and inserting
``sections 4, 11, 13, and 17''; and
(3) by striking ``lunches and breakfasts'' each place it
appears and inserting ``meals''.
(b) Buy American Requirement.--Section 12 of the National
School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1760) is amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(n) Buy American Requirement.--
``(1) In general.--For purposes of providing meals under
the school lunch program under this Act or the school
breakfast program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773), the Secretary shall require schools
located in the contiguous United States to purchase, to the
extent practicable, only food products that are produced in
the United States.
``(2) Additional requirement.--The requirement of paragraph
(1) shall also apply to recipient agencies in Hawaii only
with respect to food products that are grown in Hawaii in
sufficient quantities to meet the needs of meals provided
under the school lunch program under this Act or the school
breakfast program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
``(3) Definition.--As used in this subsection, the term
`food products that are produced in the United States'
means--
``(A) unmanufactured food products that are grown or
produced in the United States; and
``(B) manufactured food products that are manufactured in
the United States substantially from agricultural products
grown or produced in the United States.''.
SEC. 105. SUMMER FOOD SERVICE PROGRAM FOR CHILDREN.
(a) Definition of Private Nonprofit Organizations.--Section
13(a)(7)(B) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1761(a)(7)(B)) is amended--
(1) in clause (i), to read as follows:
``(i) operate not more than 25 sites, with not more than
300 children being served at any one site (or, with a waiver
granted by the State agency under standards developed by the
Secretary, not more than 500 children being served at any one
site);'';
(2) by striking clauses (ii) and (iii); and
(3) by redesignating clauses (iv), (v), (vi), and (vii) as
clauses (ii), (iii), (iv), and (v), respectively.
(b) Offer Versus Serve.--Section 13(f)(7) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1761(f)(7)) is amended in the first sentence by
striking ``attending a site on school premises operated
directly by the authority''.
(c) Food Service Management Companies.--
(1) Contracting for provision of meals or management of
program.--Section 13(l)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1761(l)(1))
is amended--
(A) in the first sentence--
(i) by striking ``(other than private nonprofit
organizations eligible under subsection (a)(7))''; and
(ii) by striking ``only with food service management
companies registered with the State in which they operate''
and inserting ``with food service management companies''; and
(B) by striking the last sentence.
(2) Registration.--Section 13(l)(2) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1761(l)(2)) is amended--
(A) in the first sentence of the matter preceding
subparagraph (A), by striking ``shall'' and inserting
``may''; and
(B) by striking all after the first sentence.
(3) Other provisions.--Section 13(l) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1761(l)) is amended--
(A) by striking paragraph (3); and
(B) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(3) and (4), respectively.
(d) Reauthorization of Program.--Section 13(q) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 1761(q)) is amended by striking ``1998'' and
inserting ``2003''.
SEC. 106. COMMODITY DISTRIBUTION PROGRAM.
Section 14(a) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1762a(a)) is amended in the matter preceding paragraph (1) by
striking ``1998'' and inserting ``2003''.-
SEC. 107. CHILD AND ADULT CARE FOOD PROGRAM.
(a) Eligibility of Institutions.--Section 17(a)(1) of the
National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1766(a)(1)) is amended
to read as follows:
``(1) an institution (except a school or family or group
day care home sponsoring organization) or family or group day
care home--
``(A)(i) shall be licensed, or otherwise have approval, by
the appropriate Federal, State, or local licensing authority;
or
``(ii) shall be in compliance with appropriate procedures
for renewing participation in the program, as prescribed by
the Secretary, unless the State has information indicating
that the institution or family or group day care home's
license will not be renewed;
``(B) if Federal, State, or local licensing or approval is
not available-----
``(i) shall meet any alternate approval standards
established by the appropriate State or local governmental
agency; or
``(ii) shall meet any alternate approval standards
established by the Secretary after consultation with the
Secretary of Health and Human Services; or
``(C) if the institution provides care to school children
outside of school hours and Federal, State, or local
licensing or approval is not required for such institution,
shall meet State or local health and safety standards; and''.
(b) Categorical Eligibility for Even Start Program
Participants.--Section 17(c)(6)(B) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1766(c)(6)(B)) is amended by striking ``1997'' and inserting
``2003''.
(c) Tax Exempt Status of Eligible Institutions; Removal of
Notification Requirement for Incomplete Applications.--
Section 17(d)(1) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766(d)(1)) is
amended--
(1) by inserting after the third sentence the following:
``An institution moving toward compliance with the
requirement for tax exempt status shall be allowed to
participate in the program for a period of not more than 6
months unless it can demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
State agency that its inability to obtain tax exempt status
within the 6-month period is beyond the control of the
institution in which case the State agency may grant a single
extension not to exceed 90 days.''; and
(2) by striking the last sentence.
(d) Use of Funds for Audits of Participating
Institutions.--Section 17(i) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766(i))
is amended by striking ``2 percent'' and inserting ``1
percent''.
(e) Permanent Authorization of Demonstration Project.--
Section 17(p) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766(p)) is amended by
striking paragraphs (4) and (5).
(f) Transfer of Homeless Programs.--
(1) In general.--Section 17 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(q) Participation by Emergency Shelters.--
``(1) In general.--Except as otherwise provided in this
subsection, an emergency shelter shall be eligible to
participate in the program authorized under this section in
accordance with the terms and conditions applicable to
eligible institutions described in subsection (a).
[[Page H5867]]
``(2) Licensing requirements.--The licensing requirements
contained in subsection (a)(1) shall not apply to emergency
shelters or sites operated by such shelters under the
program.
``(3) Additional requirements.--
``(A) Health and safety standards.--An emergency shelter
and each site operated by such shelter shall comply with
State or local health and safety standards.
``(B) Meal reimbursement.--
``(i) Limitation.--An emergency shelter may claim
reimbursement--
``(I) only for meals and supplements served to children who
have not attained the age of 13 and who are residing at an
emergency shelter; and
``(II) for not more than 3 meals, or 2 meals and a
supplement, per child per day.
``(ii) Rate.--A meal or supplement eligible for
reimbursement shall be reimbursed at the rate at which free
meals and supplements are reimbursed under subsection (c).
``(iii) No charge.--A meal or supplement claimed for
reimbursement shall be served without charge.
``(4) Definition of emergency shelter.--As used in this
subsection, the term `emergency shelter' has the meaning
given such term in section 321(2) of the Stewart B. McKinney
Homeless Assistance Act (42 U.S.C. 11351(2)).''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--(A) Section 13(a)(3)(C) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1761(a)(3)(C)) is amended--
(i) in clause (i), by adding ``or'' at the end;
(ii) by striking clause (ii); and
(iii) by redesignating clause (iii) as clause (ii).
(B) Section 17B of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766b) is hereby
repealed.
(g) Participation by ``At Risk'' Child Care Programs.--
Section 17 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1766), as amended by this
Act, is further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(r) `At Risk' Child Care.--
``(1) In general.--Subject to the conditions in this
subsection, institutions that provide care to at risk school
children during after-school hours, weekends, or holidays
during the regular school year may participate in the program
authorized under this section. Unless otherwise specified in
this subsection, all other provisions of this section shall
apply to these institutions.
``(2) At risk school children.--Children ages 12 through 18
who live in a geographical area served by a school enrolling
elementary students in which at least 50 percent of the total
number of children enrolled are certified eligible to receive
free or reduced price school meals under this Act or the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 shall be considered at risk.
``(3) Supplement reimbursement.--
``(A) Limitation.--Only supplements served to at risk
school children during after-school hours, weekends, or
holidays during the regular school year may be claimed for
reimbursement. Institutions may claim reimbursement for only
one supplement per child per day.
``(B) Rate.--Eligible supplements shall be reimbursed at
the rate for free supplements under subsection (c)(3).
``(C) No charge.--All supplements claimed for reimbursement
shall be served without charge.''.
SEC. 108. MEAL SUPPLEMENTS FOR CHILDREN IN AFTERSCHOOL CARE.
Section 17A of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1766a) is amended--
(1) in subsection (a)(2)(C) to read as follows:
``(C) operate afterschool programs with an educational or
enrichment purpose.''; and
(2) in subsection (b), by striking ``served to children''
and all that follows and inserting ``served to children who
are not more than 18 years of age.''.
SEC. 109. UNIVERSAL FREE BREAKFAST PILOT PROJECTS.
Section 18(i) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1769(i)) is amended to read as follows:
``(i) Universal Free Breakfast Pilot Projects.--
``(1) In General.--
``(A) Grants to states.--(i) Subject to the availability of
advance appropriations under paragraph (8), the Secretary
shall make grants to not more than 5 States to conduct pilot
projects in elementary schools under school food authorities
located in each such State--
``(I) to reduce paperwork;
``(II) to simplify meal counting requirements; and
``(III) to make changes that will increase participation in
the school breakfast program.
``(ii) The Secretary shall select States to receive grants
under clause (i), and make grants to such States, in the
first fiscal year for which appropriations are made to carry
out this subsection.
``(B) Grants to school food authorities; duration of pilot
projects.--(i)(I) A State receiving a grant under
subparagraph (A) shall make grants to school food authorities
to carry out the pilot projects described in such
subparagraph.
``(II) The State shall select school food authorities to
receive grants under clause (i), and make grants to such
authorities, in the first fiscal year for which the State
receives amounts under a grant.
``(ii) A school food authority receiving amounts under a
grant to conduct a pilot project described in subparagraph
(A) shall conduct such project for the 3-year period
beginning in the first fiscal year in which the authority
receives amounts under a grant from the State.
``(C) Participation limitation.--A school food authority
conducting a pilot project under this paragraph shall ensure
that some elementary schools under such authority do not
participate in the pilot project.
``(2) Waiver authority.--
``(A) In general.--Except as provided in subparagraph (B),
the Secretary may waive the requirements of this Act and the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) relating
to counting of meals, applications for eligibility, and
related requirements that would preclude the Secretary from
making a grant to conduct a pilot project under paragraph
(1).
``(B) Non-waivable requirements.--The Secretary may not
waive a requirement under subparagraph (A) if the waiver
would prevent a program participant, a potential recipient,
or a school from receiving all of the benefits and
protections of this Act, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966, or
a Federal statute or regulation that protects an individual
constitutional right or a statutory civil right.
``(3) Requirements for participation in pilot.--To be
eligible to participate in a pilot project under this
subsection--
``(A) a State--
``(i) shall submit an application to the Secretary at such
time and in such manner as the Secretary shall establish; and
``(ii) shall provide such information relative to the
operation and results of the pilot as the Secretary may
reasonably require; and
``(B) a school food authority--
``(i) shall agree to serve all breakfasts at no charge to
all children in participating elementary schools;
``(ii) shall not have a history of violations of this Act
or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.);
and
``(iii) shall meet any other requirement that the Secretary
may reasonably require.
``(4) Selection of pilot elementary schools.--To the extent
practicable, a State shall select school food authorities to
participate in the pilot program under this subsection in a
manner that will provide for an equitable distribution among
the following types of elementary schools:
``(A) Urban and rural elementary schools.
``(B) Elementary schools of varying family income levels.
``(5) Reimbursement rates.--A school food authority
conducting a pilot project under this subsection shall
receive reimbursement for each breakfast served under the
pilot in an amount equal to the rate for free breakfasts
established under section 4(b)(1)(B) of the Child Nutrition
Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773(b)(1)(B)).
``(6) Commodity entitlement.--A school food authority
conducting a pilot project under this subsection shall
receive commodities in the amount of at least 5 cents per
breakfast served under the pilot. The value of such
commodities shall be deducted from the amount of cash
reimbursement described in paragraph (5).
``(7) Evaluation of pilot project.--
``(A) In general.--The Secretary, acting through the
Administrator of the Food and Nutrition Service, shall
conduct an evaluation of the pilot projects in each of the
school food authorities selected for participation. Such
evaluation shall include--
``(i) a determination of the effect of participation in the
pilot project on the academic achievement, tardiness and
attendance, and dietary intake of participating children that
is not attributable to changes in educational policies and
practices; and
``(ii) a determination of the effect that participation by
elementary schools in the pilot projects has on the
proportion of students who eat breakfast.
``(B) Report.--Upon completion of the pilot projects and
the evaluation, the Secretary shall submit to the Committee
on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry of the Senate a report containing the evaluation
of the pilot required under subparagraph (A).
``(8) Reimbursement requirement under breakfast program.--
(A) Except as provided in subparagraph (B), a school
participating in a pilot project under this subsection shall
receive a total Federal reimbursement under the school
breakfast program in an amount equal to the total Federal
reimbursement for the school in the prior year under such
program (adjusted for inflation and fluctuations in
enrollment).
``(B) Funds required for the pilot project in excess of the
level of reimbursement received by the school in the prior
year (adjusted for inflation and fluctuations in enrollment)
may be taken from any non-Federal source or from amounts
appropriated to carry out this subsection. If no
appropriations are made for the pilot projects, schools may
not conduct the pilot projects.
``(9) Authorization of appropriations.--
``(A) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
such sums as may be necessary to carry out this subsection.
``(B) Requirement.--No amounts may be provided under this
subsection unless specifically provided in appropriations
Acts.''.
SEC. 110. TRAINING AND TECHNICAL ASSISTANCE.
Section 21(e)(1) of the National School Lunch Act (42
U.S.C. 1769b-1(e)(1)) is amended by striking ``1998'' and
inserting ``2003''.
[[Page H5868]]
SEC. 111. COMPLIANCE AND ACCOUNTABILITY.
Section 22(d) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1769c(d)) is amended by striking ``1996'' and inserting
``2003''.
SEC. 112. INFORMATION CLEARINGHOUSE.
(a) Authority to Establish and Maintain Clearinghouse.--
Section 26(a) of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1769g(a)) is amended by striking ``shall'' and inserting
``may''.
(b) Nongovernmental Organization.--Section 26(b) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1769g(b)) is amended in the matter preceding
paragraph (1) by inserting after ``shall be selected on a
competitive basis'' the following: ``, except that,
notwithstanding any other provision of law, the Secretary may
enter into a contract for the services of any organization
with which the Secretary has previously entered into a
contract under this section without such organization
competing for such new contract, if such organization has
performed satisfactorily under such prior contract and
otherwise meets the criteria established in this
subsection,''.
(c) Limitation on Amount Provided Under the Contract.--
Section 26 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1769g) is amended--
(1) by redesignating subsections (c) and (d) as subsections
(d) and (e), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after subsection (b) the following:
``(c) Limitation on Amount Provided Under the Contract.--
The Secretary may provide to the organization described in
subsection (b) an amount not to exceed $150,000 in each of
fiscal years 1999 through 2003.''.
(d) Funding.--Section 26(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1769g(e)) (as so redesignated) is amended to read as follows:
``(e) Funding.--
``(1) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
$150,000 for each of the fiscal years 1999 through 2003 to
carry out this section.
``(2) Requirement.--No amounts may be provided for the
clearinghouse under this section unless specifically provided
in appropriations Acts.''.
SEC. 113. ACCOMMODATION OF THE SPECIAL DIETARY NEEDS OF
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.
Section 27 of the National School Lunch Act (42 U.S.C.
1769h) is amended to read as follows:
``SEC. 27. ACCOMMODATION OF THE SPECIAL DIETARY NEEDS OF
INDIVIDUALS WITH DISABILITIES.
``(a) In General.--The Secretary may carry out activities
to help accommodate the special dietary needs of individuals
with disabilities who are participating in a covered program.
Such activities may include--
``(1) developing and disseminating to State agencies
guidance and technical assistance materials;
``(2) conducting training of State agencies and eligible
entities; and
``(3) providing grants to State agencies and eligible
entities.
``(b) Definitions.--As used in this section:
``(1) Individuals with disabilities.--The term `individuals
with disabilities' has the meaning given the term `individual
with a disability' as defined in section 7(8) of the
Rehabilitation Act of 1973 (29 U.S.C. 706(8)).
``(2) Covered program.--The term `covered program' means--
``(A) the school lunch program authorized under this Act;
``(B) the school breakfast program authorized under section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773); and
``(C) any other program authorized under this Act or the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (except for section 17) that the
Secretary determines is appropriate.
``(3) Eligible entity.--The term `eligible entity' means a
school food authority, institution, or service institution
that participates in a covered program.
``(c) Authorization of Appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated such sums as may be necessary
for each of the fiscal years 1999 through 2003 to carry out
this section.''.
TITLE II--AMENDMENTS TO THE CHILD NUTRITION ACT OF 1966
SEC. 201. STATE ADMINISTRATIVE EXPENSES.
(a) Reallocation of Amounts.--Section 7(a)(5)(B) of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1776(a)(5)(B)) is
amended--
(1) by striking ``(i)'';
(2) by striking the second sentence and all that follows;
and
(3) by adding at the end the following: ``The Secretary
shall then allocate, for purposes of administration costs,
any remaining amounts among States that demonstrate a need
for such amounts.''.
(b) Elimination of 10 Percent Transfer Limitation.--Section
7(a)(6) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1776(a)(6)) is amended to read
as follows:
``(6) Funds available to States under this subsection and
under section 13(k)(1) of the National School Lunch Act may
be used by State agencies for the costs of administration of
the programs authorized under this Act (except for the
programs authorized under sections 17 and 21) and the
National School Lunch Act without regard to the basis on
which such funds were earned and allocated.''.
(c) Reauthorization of Program.--Section 7(g) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 1776(g)) is amended by striking ``1998'' and
inserting ``2003''.
SEC. 202. SPECIAL SUPPLEMENTAL NUTRITION PROGRAM FOR WOMEN,
INFANTS, AND CHILDREN.
(a) Additional Requirements for Applicants.--
(1) Physical presence requirement.--Section 17(d)(3) of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(d)(3)) is amended
by adding at the end the following:
``(C)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), each applicant
to the program shall be physically present at each
certification determination in order to determine eligibility
under the program.
``(ii) A local agency may waive the requirement of clause
(i)--
``(I) if required to do so by requirements under the
Americans with Disabilities Act;
``(II) with respect to a child who was present at the
initial certification visit and who is receiving on-going
health care from a provider other than such local agency, if
the agency determines that the requirement of clause (i)
would present a barrier to participation; or
``(III) with respect to a child (aa) who was present at the
initial certification visit, (bb) who was present at a
certification determination within the 1-year period ending
on the date of the certification determination described in
clause (i), and (cc) who has one or more parents who work, if
the agency determines that the requirement of clause (i)
would cause a barrier to participation.''.
(2) Income documentation requirement.--Section 17(d)(3) of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(d)(3)), as
amended by paragraph (1), is further amended by adding at the
end the following:
``(D)(i) Except as provided in clause (ii), in order to be
eligible for the program, each applicant to the program shall
provide--
``(I) documentation of household income; or
``(II) documentation of participation in a program
described in clauses (ii) and (iii) of paragraph (2)(A).
``(ii)(I) A State agency may waive the requirement of
clause (i)--
``(aa) with respect to an applicant for whom the necessary
documentation is not available; or
``(bb) with respect to an applicant, such as homeless women
or children, for whom the agency determines the requirement
of clause (i) would present a barrier to participation.
``(II) The Secretary shall prescribe regulations to carry
out division (aa).''.
(b) Education and Educational Materials Relating to Effects
of Drug and Alcohol Use.--Section 17(e)(1) of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1786(e)(1)) is amended by adding at the end the
following: ``A local agency participating in the program
shall provide education or educational materials relating to
the effects of drug and alcohol use by a pregnant,
postpartum, or breastfeeding woman on the developing child of
the woman.''.
(c) Distribution of Nutrition Education Materials to State
Agencies Administering the Commodity Supplemental Food
Program.--Section 17(e) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(e)) is
amended--
(1) by redesignating paragraphs (4) and (5) as paragraphs
(5) and (6), respectively; and
(2) by inserting after paragraph (3) the following:
``(4) The Secretary may provide nutrition education
materials, including breastfeeding promotion materials,
developed with funds appropriated to carry out the program
under this section in bulk quantity to State agencies
administering the commodity supplemental food program
authorized under sections 4(a) and 5 of the Agriculture and
Consumer Protection Act of 1973 at no cost to that
program.''.
(d) Identification of Recipients Participating at More Than
1 Site.--Section 17(f) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(f)) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(23) Each State agency shall implement a system designed
to identify recipients who are participating at more than 1
site under the program.''.
(e) Identification of High Risk Vendors; Compliance
Investigations.--
(1) In general.--Section 17(f) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1786(f)), as amended by this Act, is further amended by
adding at the end the following:
``(24) Each State agency--
``(A) shall identify vendors that have a high probability
of program abuse; and
``(B) shall conduct compliance investigations of such
vendors.''.
(2) Regulations.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the
Secretary of Agriculture shall promulgate final regulations
to carry out section 17(f)(24) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1786(f)(24)), as added by paragraph (1).
(f) Reauthorization of Program.--Section 17(g)(1) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(g)(1)) is amended in the first sentence
by striking ``1995 through 1998'' and inserting ``1999
through 2003''.
(g) Purchase of Breast Pumps.--Section 17(h)(1)(C) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(1)(C)) is amended--
(1) by striking ``(C)'' and inserting ``(C)(i)''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(ii)(I) Notwithstanding any other provision of this
section, with respect to fiscal year 2000 and subsequent
fiscal years, a State agency may use amounts made available
under clause (i) for the purchase of breast pumps.
``(II) A State agency that exercises the authority of
subclause (I) shall expend from amounts allocated for
nutrition services and administration an amount for the
purchase of breast pumps that is not less than the amount
expended for the purchase of breast pumps from amounts
available for nutrition
[[Page H5869]]
services and administration for the prior fiscal year.''.
(h) Nutrition Services and Administration.--
(1) Allocation of amounts.--Section 17(h)(2)(A) of such Act
(42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(2)(A)) is amended in the first sentence by
striking ``1995 through 1998'' and inserting ``1999 through
2003''.
(2) Level of per participant expenditure.--Section
17(h)(2)(B)(ii) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(2)(B)(ii)) is
amended by striking ``15 percent'' and inserting ``10 percent
(except that the Secretary may establish a higher percentage
for small State agencies)''.
(i) Conversion of Amounts for Food Benefits to Amounts for
Nutrition Services and Administration.--Section 17(h)(5)(A)
of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(5)(A)) is amended in the
matter preceding clause (i) by striking ``achieves'' and all
that follows through ``such State agency may'' and inserting
``submits a plan to reduce average food costs per participant
and to increase participation above the level estimated for
such State agency, such State agency may, with the approval
of the Secretary,''.
(j) Infant Formula Procurement.--Section 17(h)(8)(A) of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(8)(A)) is amended by adding at
the end the following:
``(iii) A State agency using a competitive bidding system
for infant formula shall award contracts to the bidder
offering the lowest net price unless the State agency
demonstrates to the satisfaction of the Secretary that the
weighted average retail price for different brands of infant
formula in the State does not vary by more than five
percent.''.
(k) Infrastructure and Breastfeeding Promotion/Support
Activities.--Section 17(h)(10)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1786(h)(10)(A)) is amended by striking ``For each of fiscal
years 1995 through 1998,'' and inserting ``For each fiscal
year through 2003,''.
(l) Consideration of Price Levels of Retail Stores for
Participation in the Program.--
(1) In general.--Section 17(h) of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1786(h)) is amended by adding at the end the following:
``(11)(A) For the purpose of promoting efficiency and to
contain costs under the program, a State agency shall, in
selecting a retail store for participation in the program,
take into consideration the prices that the store charges for
foods under the program as compared to the prices that other
stores charge for such foods.
``(B) The State agency shall establish procedures to insure
that a retail store selected for participation in the program
does not subsequently raise prices to levels that would
otherwise make the store ineligible for selection in the
program.''.
(2) Regulations.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the
Secretary of Agriculture shall promulgate final regulations
to carry out section 17(h)(11)(A) of the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)(11)(A)), as added by paragraph
(1).
(m) Management Information System Plan.--Section 17(h) of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(h)), as amended by this Act, is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(12)(A) In consultation with State agencies, retailers,
and other interested persons, the Secretary shall establish a
long range plan for the development and implementation of
management information systems (including electronic benefit
transfers) to be used in carrying out the program.
``(B) Not later than 2 years after the date of the
enactment of this paragraph, the Secretary shall submit to
the Committee on Education and the Workforce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition,
and Forestry of the Senate a report on actions taken to carry
out subparagraph (A).
``(C) Prior to the date of the submission of the report of
the Secretary required under subparagraph (B), the cost of
systems or equipment that may be required to test management
information systems (including electronic benefit transfers)
for the program may not be imposed on a retail food store.''.
(n) Use of Funds in Preceding and Subsequent Fiscal
Years.--
(1) In general.--Clauses (i) and (ii) of section
17(i)(3)(A) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(i)(3)(A)(i) and (ii))
are amended to read as follows:
``(i) not more than 1 percent (except as provided in
subparagraph (C)) of the amount of funds allocated to a State
agency under this section for supplemental foods for a fiscal
year, and not more than 1 percent of the amount of funds
allocated to a State agency under this section for nutrition
services and administration for a fiscal year, may be
expended by the State agency for allowable expenses incurred
under this section for supplemental foods and nutrition
services and administration, respectively, during the
preceding fiscal year; and
``(ii)(I) a State agency may expend, from amounts allocated
to the agency for nutrition services and administration, an
amount equal to not more than 1 percent of the total amount
of funds allocated to the agency under this section for a
fiscal year for allowable expenses incurred under this
section for nutrition services and administration during the
subsequent fiscal year; and
``(II) with the prior approval of the Secretary, a State
agency may expend, from amounts allocated to the agency for
nutrition services and administration, an amount equal to not
more than one-half of 1 percent of the total amount of funds
allocated to the agency under this section for a fiscal year
for the development of a management information system,
including an electronic benefit transfer system, during the
subsequent fiscal year.''.
(2) Conforming amendments.--Section 17 of such Act (42
U.S.C. 1786) is amended--
(A) in subsection (h)(10)(A) (as amended by this Act), by
inserting after ``nutrition services and administration
funds'' the following: ``and food benefit funds''; and
(B) in subsection (i)(3)--
(i) by striking subparagraphs (C) through (G); and
(ii) by redesignating subparagraph (H) as subparagraph (C).
(o) Farmers Market Nutrition Program.--
(1) Matching fund requirement.--Section 17(m)(3) of such
Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(m)(3)) is amended in both the first and
second sentences by striking ``total'' each place it appears
and inserting ``administrative''.
(2) Ranking criteria for state plans.--Section 17(m)(6) of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(m)(6)) is amended--
(A) by striking subparagraph (F); and
(B) by redesignating subparagraph (G) as subparagraph (F).
(3) Reauthorization of Program.--Section 17(m)(9)(A) of
such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(m)(9)(A)) is amended by striking
``1996 through 1998'' and inserting ``1999 through 2003''.
(p) Disqualification of Certain Vendors.--
(1) In general.--Section 17 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786) is
amended by adding at the end the following:
``(o) Disqualification of Vendors Convicted of Trafficking
or Illegal Sales.--
``(1) In general.--Except as provided in paragraph (5), the
State agency shall permanently disqualify a vendor convicted
of trafficking in food instruments (including any voucher,
draft, check, or access device, including an electronic
benefit transfer card or personal identification number,
issued in lieu of a food instrument pursuant to the
provisions of this section), or selling firearms, ammunition,
explosives, or controlled substances (as defined in section
102 of the Controlled Substances Act) in exchange for food
instruments.
``(2) Notice of disqualification.--The State agency shall
provide the vendor with notification of the disqualification
and shall make such disqualification effective on the date of
receipt of the notice of disqualification.
``(3) Prohibition on receipt of lost revenues.--A vendor
shall not be entitled to receive any compensation for
revenues lost as a result of the disqualification under this
subsection.
``(4) Hardship exception in lieu of disqualification.--
``(A) In general.-- A State agency may permit a vendor that
would otherwise be disqualified under paragraph (1) to
continue to redeem food instruments or otherwise provide
supplemental foods to participants if the State agency
determines, in its sole discretion according to criteria
established by the Secretary, disqualification of the vendor
would cause hardship to participants in the program
authorized under this section.
``(B) Civil money penalty.--Whenever a State agency
authorizes a vendor that would otherwise be disqualified to
redeem food instruments or provide supplemental foods in
accordance with subparagraph (A), the State agency shall
assess the vendor a civil money penalty in lieu of a
disqualification.
``(C) Amount.-- The State agency shall determine the amount
of the civil penalty according to criteria established by the
Secretary.''.
(2) Regulations.--
(A) In general.--Not later than March 1, 1999, the
Secretary of Agriculture shall promulgate final regulations
to carry out section 17(o) of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786(o)),
as added by paragraph (1).
(B) Additional requirement.--The final regulations
described in subparagraph (A) shall include criteria for
determining the amount of civil money penalties in lieu of
disqualification and for making hardship determinations under
such section.
(q) Study and Report by Economic Research Service.--Section
17 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786), as amended by this Act, is
further amended by adding at the end the following:
``(p) Study and Report by Economic Research Service.--
``(1) Study.--The Secretary, acting through the
Administrator of the Economic Research Service, shall conduct
a study on the effect of cost containment practices
established by States under the program for the selection of
vendors and approved food items (other than infant formula)
on the following:
``(A) Program participation.
``(B) Access and availability of prescribed foods.
``(C) Voucher redemption rates and actual food selections
by participants.
``(D) Participants on special diets or with specific food
allergies.
``(E) Participant use and satisfaction of prescribed foods.
``(F) Achievement of positive health outcomes.
``(G) Program costs.
[[Page H5870]]
``(2) Report.--Not later than 3 years after the date of the
enactment of the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization
Amendments of 1998, the Administrator shall submit to the
Secretary of Agriculture, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce of the House of Representatives, and the Committee
on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of the Senate a
report containing the results of the study conducted under
paragraph (1).''.
(r) Collection and Use of Penalties From Vendor and
Recipient Fraud and Abuse.--Section 17 of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1786), as amended by this Act, is further amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(q) Use of Penalties From Vendor and Recipient Fraud and
Abuse.--Amounts collected from penalties from vendors and
recipients relating to violations of any provision of this
section (including any regulation established to carry out
this section) for fraud and abuse under the program may be
used for nutrition services and administration and food
benefits only for the 1-year period beginning on the date on
which amounts under the penalty are received.''.
(s) Maximum Amount of Fine for Certain Violations Under the
Program.--Section 17 of such Act (42 U.S.C. 1786), as amended
by this Act, is further amended by adding at the end the
following:
``(r) Maximum Amount of Fine for Certain Violations Under
the Program.--The maximum amount of a fine with respect to
the embezzlement, willful misapplication, stealing, obtaining
by fraud, or trafficking in food instruments of funds,
assets, or property that are of a value of $100 or more under
the program shall be $25,000.''.
(t) Criminal Forfeiture.--Section 17 of such Act (42 U.S.C.
1786), as amended by this Act, is further amended by adding
at the end the following:
``(s) Criminal Forfeiture.--
``(1) In general.--In imposing a sentence on a person
convicted of an offense in violation of any provision of this
section (or any regulation promulgated under this section), a
court shall order, in addition to any other sentence imposed
under this section, that the person forfeit to the United
States all property described in paragraph (2).
``(2) Property subject to forfeiture.--All property, real
and personal, used in a transaction or attempted transaction,
to commit, or to facilitate the commission of, a violation
(other than a misdemeanor) of any provision of this section
(or any regulation promulgated under this section), or
proceeds traceable to a violation of any provision of this
section (or any regulation promulgated under this section),
shall be subject to forfeiture to the United States under
paragraph (1).
``(3) Interest of owner.--No interest in property shall be
forfeited under this subsection as the result of any act or
omission established by the owner of the interest to have
been committed or omitted without the knowledge or consent of
the owner.
``(4) Proceeds.--The proceeds from any sale of forfeited
property and any monies forfeited under this subsection shall
be used--
``(A) first, to reimburse the Department of Justice for the
costs incurred by the Department to initiate and complete the
forfeiture proceeding;
``(B) second, to reimburse the Department of Agriculture
Office of Inspector General for any costs the Office incurred
in the law enforcement effort resulting in the forfeiture;
``(C) third, to reimburse any Federal or State law
enforcement agency for any costs incurred in the law
enforcement effort resulting in the forfeiture; and
``(D) fourth, by the State agency to carry out the
approval, reauthorization, and compliance investigations of
vendors.''.
SEC. 203. NUTRITION EDUCATION AND TRAINING PROGRAM.
Section 19(i) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1788(i)) is amended--
(1) by striking paragraphs (1) and (2);
(2) by redesignating paragraphs (3), (4), and (5) as
paragraphs (1), (2), and (3), respectively; and
(3) in paragraph (1) (as redesignated)--
(A) in the paragraph heading, by striking ``1997 through
2002 '' and inserting ``1999 through 2003''; and
(B) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) In general.--There are authorized to be appropriated
to carry out this section such sums as are necessary for
fiscal years 1999 through 2003.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) and the gentleman from California (Mr.
Martinez) each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling).
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3874, the Child
Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Amendments of 1998. This bill makes
important changes to our Nation's vital child nutrition programs.
Members who have worked with me during my years in Congress know that I
consider these to be some of the most important programs serving our
Nation's children. My support of these programs comes primarily from my
years as an educator where I learned firsthand that children who did
not consume nutritious meals did not perform very well in school.
I am most pleased that this year we have been able to work in a
bipartisan manner with USDA and the nutrition community to craft the
legislation before us. We need to work together to ensure our Federal
child nutrition programs are effective in providing nutritious meals to
participants while increasing accountability and effectiveness.
There is no new spending in this bill. Every new cost provision has
an offset. The bill before us today strives to maintain program
integrity by fighting fraud and abuse in the WIC program. The Committee
on Appropriations has identified problems within the WIC program that
this bill addresses. The WIC program has helped improve the health of
pregnant women and of infants and children. It has made tremendous
strides in reducing the number of low birth weight babies and birth
defects caused by poor nutrition. Addressing issues of fraud and abuse
will only help ensure that program dollars provide important nutrition
services to participants while not being wasted on individuals who
illegally benefit from the program.
The bill also makes numerous changes to nutrition programs that
provide greater flexibility to States and local providers. I understand
the burden placed on schools operating multiple nutrition programs.
I believe some of the most important flexibility provisions contained
in this bill are those that support a seamless nutrition program for
schools operating a variety of child nutrition programs. These
provisions allow schools currently offering meals under the School
Lunch Program, School Breakfast Program, Child and Adult Care Food
Program and the Summer Food Service Program to apply for a single
monthly claim for all meals using a single, common claiming procedure;
to have meal patterns be consistent throughout all meal programs,
including current offer versus serve rules; and to have a single
permanent agreement between school food authorities and the States'
Departments of Education.
Another important provision seeks to address problems of juvenile
crime by providing a snack to children participating in afterschool
programs, with an educational or enrichment purpose, keeping them at
the school rather than on the streets.
Over the past few years, I have sought to make our Nation's child
nutrition programs more effective in providing important nutrition
services to children. Our main goals must remain to provide nutritious
meals to children and their families and to allow those closest to the
children the flexibility to determine how to most effectively serve
their needs. The bill embraces those principles and deserves our
support.
I want to commend the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), who
carried the load to a great degree in the subcommittee; the gentleman
from California (Mr. Riggs), the chairman of the subcommittee; the
gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez); and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey), who knows a good bit about nutrition. When it
comes to campaign finance, well, but nutrition, yes.
I urge my colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
{time} 1415
Ms. WOOLSEY. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of H.R. 3874 for the reauthorization
of the child nutrition programs. I also rise to compliment the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling), the chairman, the gentleman
from Delaware (Mr. Castle), the subcommittee chairman, and the
gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez), our ranking member, for a
very positive effort.
This was a bipartisan effort that has resulted in a very good bill.
This is a good bill that will benefit children in schools and children
in child care facilities across America. I am pleased that it includes
my pilot program for universal school breakfasts.
It also includes a provision from my bill to increase the number of
schools that can participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program
and raise the age of students who are eligible for snacks in these
programs.
[[Page H5871]]
The school breakfast pilot project will allow five elementary schools
nationwide to make school breakfasts available to all of their students
free of charge, not based on economic status, all students. We already
have two studies which prove that children who eat breakfast improve
both their grades and their classroom behavior.
But in today's world, where two working parents are the norm and long
commutes are common, more and more families are out the door and on the
road early in the morning with no time to sit down for breakfast.
Whether we like it or not, many of these children arrive at school
hungry. So, unless you want to pass a law requiring every family to
feed their children breakfast before they go to school in the morning
and then hire a bunch of breakfast police to enforce it, we need to
look at schools and school breakfast programs in a different way.
Of course, I believe that this will be a better bill if, in the end,
it includes the Senate's language on the school breakfast program. Both
the Senate and the administration support a fully funded pilot program,
so the House can, I hope, agree and defer in conference.
Mark my words, Mr. Speaker, the next time we reauthorize child
nutrition programs, the legislation will include school breakfasts for
all elementary school children, because I am confident that this pilot
project will prove that school breakfast is not a welfare program. It
is an education program.
I am also pleased that H.R. 3874 will make it easier for schools and
community organizations to offer after-school programs to teenagers.
This bill does this by raising the age of eligibility for after-school
snacks from 13 to 18 years old, which makes it much more affordable to
offer programs. We know that the vast majority of juvenile crime and
teen pregnancies occur after the school bell rings and before the
dinner bell rings. We desperately need more after-school programs for
adolescents.
But feeding adolescents, even when it is just a snack, can be very
expensive. H.R. 3874 will open the Child and Adult Care Food Program to
low-income teens and to more after-school programs.
This is not ``Twinkies for teens''. The Police Athletic League and
other law enforcement organizations have strongly endorsed the benefits
of after-school programs for adolescents. H.R. 3874 will make more of
these programs possible.
Before my enthusiasm causes any of my colleagues on the other side of
the aisle to reconsider their support of this bill, thinking that it
might be too generous, let me say that it certainly does not do
everything that I would want it to do and everything that I think
should be included. In particular, I hope that we can continue to work
together to expand the Child and Adult Care Food Program to more low-
income children, those who are in for-profit child care centers.
H.R. 3874 is a good bill. It is a bill that will benefit millions of
children. Children are 25 percent of the population in America, but
they are 100 percent of America's future. This bill is a sound
investment in our children and our future. I urge my colleagues to
support it.
Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of the time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield such time he may consume to the
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), who played a major role in
crafting this legislation.
Mr. CASTLE. Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr.
Goodling) has been, as he indicated and as many have told me, a long-
time supporter of child nutrition programs for the entire time he has
been in this Congress which has been a number of years now. I think all
the country and all the children of the country should appreciate that.
I, too, rise in strong support of H.R. 3747, which is known as the
Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Amendments of 1998. I am
pleased to state, as we have seen on the floor today, that this a
bipartisan bill worked out over many long hours of negotiations with
members on the committee, the nutrition community, and the United
States Department of Agriculture. In fact, Shirley Watkins who heads
this for the Department of Agriculture, wrote a letter to me saying: I
appreciate you and your staff including the Department of Agriculture
in the effort to enact an excellent child nutrition program. You have
our commitment to work with you to expeditiously complete the enactment
process. Thanks for your continued support.
Obviously, we would like to thank the gentleman from California (Mr.
Martinez), the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey), the gentleman
from California (Mr. Riggs), and their staffs for working with us to
reach this bipartisan agreement on this legislation.
When we say bipartisan agreement, it is not quite that simple. I
remember the gentleman from California (Mr. Martinez) being across the
table asking me rather hard questions, and the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey) and others, as a matter of fact, sort of
coming at me with, can we not do more here or there? But it worked out
in the long run, and that is what counts, and we appreciate all of
their concern.
We know we have not addressed everyone's ultimate concerns, but I
believe we do have a good bill that will go a long way towards
improving our Nation's child nutrition programs by reducing red tape
and bureaucracy, fighting and punishing fraud and abuse, giving program
providers more flexibility, ensuring our Nation's children have access
to healthy meals in school, in child care settings, in after-school
programs and during the summer months, and providing low-income
pregnant and postpartum women, their infants and young children access
to nutritious foods.
Of great significance is the fact that we have been able to make
these important changes and save money at the same time. This bill
would save a total of $69 million over 5 years.
While this legislation contained numerous changes to Federal child
nutrition programs, I would like to focus on what I consider to be the
key provisions of the legislation.
The first provision deals with the provision of snacks to children in
after-school care programs. I share the concerns of many Members of
this body with respect to juvenile crime that occurs between the hours
school ends and their parents return home from work. In fact, I just
had a round table in Delaware about this just moments before I came
down here. Beyond crime, unsupervised youth may be involved in other
undesirable behaviors, such as using drugs and alcohol, smoking, or
engaging in sexual activities.
Parents, schools, and communities throughout the United States are
seeking solutions to this problem. Many families would like their
children to be involved in structured activities after school, but they
simply cannot find affordable options.
In response, many schools and communities are setting up after-school
programs with an education or enrichment program. H.R. 3874 supports
these programs through amendments to two nutrition programs, allowing
the provisions of snacks to children in after-school programs.
First, it amends the Child and Adult Care Food Program to assist
organizations operating in high poverty areas to provide a snack to at-
risk children through age 18 who are enrolled in after-school programs.
Second, it amends an after-school care program under the School Lunch
Act to permit the provision of snacks to children through the age of 18
who are participating in after-school programs with an educational or
enrichment purpose. I believe that these changes will contribute to
ongoing efforts to reduce juvenile crime and drug and alcohol abuse and
prevent teen pregnancy.
Another important provision in this legislation recognizes how hard
private, nonprofit organizations have worked to overcome their past
history of program abuse and operate quality summer food programs to
provide meals to low-income children during the summer months when
school is not in session. As a result, we lift remaining restrictions
on their participation in this program.
Finally, we have modified the WIC program to provide greater
flexibility to States and local providers in meeting the needs of
program participants and to address concerns raised about fraud and
abuse.
Antifraud provisions contained in this legislation include:
disqualifying
[[Page H5872]]
WIC vendors convicted of trafficking in WIC food instruments or the
sale of firearms, ammunition, explosives, or drugs in exchange for WIC
food instruments; requiring individuals to be physically present in
order to be certified for the WIC program benefits; requiring WIC
participants to have income documentation; requiring States to take
into consideration the prices stores charge for WIC foods in relation
to prices charged by other stores in making vendor selections.
It allows States to keep any collections and recoveries of improperly
paid benefits for use no later than the Federal fiscal year following
recovery. It raises the maximum fine for trafficking and other
violations under WIC from $10,000 to $25,000.
Mr. Speaker, these are but a few of the highlights of the child
nutrition bill we are considering today. This is a good bipartisan bill
that will strengthen the child nutrition programs. I encourage my
colleagues to support this important legislation.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I might
consume.
Mr. Speaker, I rise in very, very strong support of this legislation
to reauthorize WIC and make important changes, as was outlined by the
gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), in school nutrition programs.
It is a demonstrated fact, and I do not think anybody can contradict
it, that those children who do not receive adequate nutrition in their
early years will struggle throughout their lives.
We also know that hungry children cannot learn. The school lunch
program was created actually to address the malnutrition of our
Nation's soldiers. Staggering numbers of young men drafted to serve in
World War II lacked the health and strength required to defend this
country.
Today, we acknowledge that the education of our children is even more
important for the future security of the United States, and thus we
reaffirm our commitment to the child nutrition programs.
Perhaps the most crucial years for children to receive proper
nutrition are from the time they are conceived through their preschool
years. Recent studies have confirmed that significant growth occurs in
early childhood, and if children lack the nutrition to develop fully,
they will likely experience lifelong difficulties.
The special supplemental nutritional program for women, infants, and
children, or WIC as it is better known, provides mothers with access to
healthy foods and nutrition education when they are pregnant, and
continues this assistance throughout the infancy and the early years of
their children.
Once children are in school, the national School Breakfast and Lunch
Program helps to ensure that children have the nutrition necessary to
learn. It is only fitting that the effort to continue the Federal
Government's dedication to the health of our children is and was
bipartisan.
Throughout the years, Congress has united to strengthen these child
nutrition programs by assessing the issues of meal standards, food
safety, program eligibility, cost containment efforts, and
accountability. The bill before us continues these efforts to enhance
the nutrition programs while incorporating provisions to address the
needs of today's children.
Many of these ideas were first articulated in the reauthorization
legislation that was introduced by myself on behalf of the
administration, H.R. 3666. In addition, the inclusion of many of the
innovative changes in the legislation before us today was made possible
by the tireless efforts of the gentlewoman from California (Ms.
Woolsey) and the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).
Last year, the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Woolsey) introduced
H.R. 3086, the Meals For Achievement Act, which called for the creation
of universal breakfast program and the provision of nutrition support
for after-school programs. I am proud to be an original cosponsor of
that legislation. Through the diligence of the gentlewoman from
California (Ms. Woolsey), these proposals are reflected now in H.R.
3874.
The importance of after-school programs to the safety of our children
cannot be denied. A recent Justice Department study confirms that most
juvenile crime is committed between 3 p.m. and 6 p.m. That is why
helping communities increase the number of after-school programs is a
priority of the Clinton Administration and many Members of this
Congress.
H.R. 3874 expands the Child and Adult Care Food Program to enable
schools and community organizations serving at-risk teenagers after
school to provide healthy snacks. Thus, these after-school provisions
furnish an added incentive to young people to get off the streets and
into positive programs that help put them on the path to successful,
healthy futures and enterprises.
I am equally pleased that we were able to work together to include in
H.R. 3874 a universal breakfast pilot program. Children miss breakfast
for a variety of reasons, but they all need to start the day with a
nutritious meal in order to be ready to learn.
Of course, we can only be sure that the pilot will take place if it
is a mandatory program. Unfortunately, the language in H.R. 3874 only
authorizes discretionary funding.
The Senate committee, however, approved by unanimous vote legislation
that will authorize a mandatory universal breakfast pilot. Recently,
the administration strongly endorsed the Senate's language. It is my
hope that in conference the House will recede to the Senate's position
on this matter.
Thus, we can be certain that universal breakfast programs will
proceed and ultimately affirm that providing breakfast for all children
is a means to ensure education success in this country.
{time} 1430
Before I close, I must also thank the gentleman from Pennsylvania
(Mr. Goodling) and the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle), who have
worked so closely with this side of the aisle to fashion legislation
that all Members can support and support proudly. I urge my colleagues
to support its passage.
Mr. RIGGS. Mr. Speaker, I rise in strong support of H.R. 3874, the
``Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Amendments of 1998.'' This is
a strong bipartisan bill that makes important changes to our nation's
child nutrition programs.
While many Members contributed to this legislation, including
Representative Martinez, I particularly thank Congressman Mike Castle.
He has performed a tremendous job in putting together this legislation.
Congressman Castle already has outlined many of the key provisions of
this legislation. Let me focus on several key provisions.
As a former member of the House Committee on Appropriations I know
the WIC program is being closely monitored. We took all possible steps
necessary to insure the integrity of this program. In addition to the
provisions outlined by Congressman Castle, I added three provisions to
H.R. 3874 to help reduce fraud and abuse.
One provision would require State WIC agencies to design and
implement systems to identify recipients who might be participating at
more than one site. We need to guard against the potential for
participation at multiple WIC sites.
State WIC agencies also would have to identify vendors that have a
high probability of program abuse and follow up with compliance
investigations. Right now WIC agency oversight of vendors varies
considerably from State to State, but identification and investigation
of high-risk vendors should be at least a minimum standard.
A criminal forfeiture amendment provides that those convicted of
trafficking face forfeiture of property associated with the
trafficking. This is now the rule for the Food Stamp program.
I also strongly support the afterschool care provisions included in
this legislation. Last year, the House passed H.R. 1818, the Juvenile
Crime Control and Delinquency Prevention Act of 1997. This legislation
authorized a variety of activities aimed at preventing juvenile crime.
Several of the witnesses who appeared before our Committee on the
issue of juvenile crime spoke about the need for high quality
afterschool care programs to provide educational and enrichment
activities for youth during the hours when they are most likely to
engage in delinquent activities. This legislation would support
afterschool programs through federal reimbursement for snacks in
afterschool care programs operated by schools, which have an
educational or enrichment purpose. It also would reimburse for free
snacks for at-risk children ages 12-18 in afterschool programs in low-
income areas through the Child and Adult Care Food Program.
Mr. Speaker, this bill also includes a variety of other provisions
that streamline federal child nutrition programs and provide state and
local providers additional flexibility in providing services to program
participants. It is a good bill that deserves the support of all
Members.
[[Page H5873]]
I encourage my Colleagues to support H.R. 3874.
Mr. PAUL. Mr. Speaker, Congress should reject H.R. 3874, a bill
reauthorizing the Women's, Infant, and Children's (WIC) program and
other childhood nutrition programs, and the flawed redistributionist,
welfare state model that lies behind this bill. Although the goals of
this legislation are noble, the means toward achieving the goals
embodied therein are unconstitutional and ineffective.
Providing for the care of the poor is a moral responsibility of every
citizen, however, it is not a proper function of the Federal Government
to plunder one group of citizens and redistribute those funds to
another group of citizens. Nowhere in the United States Constitution is
the Federal Government authorized to provide welfare services. If any
government must provide welfare services, it should be State and local
governments. However, the most humane and efficient way to provide
charitable services are through private efforts. Among their other
virtues, private charities are much more likely to provide short-term
assistance rather than fostering long-term dependency upon government
programs.
Mr. Speaker, I know that you, and many of my colleagues, understand
that private charities are also much better able to target assistance
to the truly needy than government programs, which are burdened with
bureaucratic rules of eligibility, as well as procedures designed to
protect the ``due process'' rights of recipients, which cannot be
adequately changed to meet unique individual circumstances. Thus, many
people who are genuinely needy do not receive needed help. In fact,
more than 40 percent of all families living below the poverty level
receive no government assistance. Private charities can also be more
effective because they do not have to fulfill administrative
requirements, such as the WIC program's rebate system, which actually
divert resources from the needy.
Private charities are also able to place an emphasis upon reformation
of personal behavior while not imposing the controls on personal life
that government programs, such as WIC, impose on the program
recipients. When a pregnant woman signs up to receive WIC vouchers, she
is trading away a large amount of her personal freedom. Her choices of
where to shop will be restricted to WIC-approved vendors and her choice
of what foods to buy will be restricted to those foods which match the
WIC nutrition specifications. WIC recipients are also required to
participate in WIC parenting and nutrition classes.
As an OB/GYN I certainly recognize the importance of proper nutrition
for pregnant women and young children. However, as a constitutionalist,
I strenuously object to the federal government coercing pregnant women
into accepting such services and restricting their choices of food
products. The founders of this country would be flabbergasted if they
knew that the federal government had monopolized the provisions of
charitable services to low-income women, but they would be horrified if
they knew the federal government was forbidding poor women from
purchasing Post Raisin Bran for their children because some federal
bureaucrats had determined that it contains too much sugar!
Mr. Speaker, the fact that the manufacture of foods such as Raisin
Bran battle to get their products included in this program reveals the
extent to which WIC is actually corporate welfare. Many corporations
have made a tidy profit from helping to feed the poor and excluding
their competitors in the process. For example, thanks to the WIC
program, the federal government is the largest purchaser of infant
formula in the nation.
According to the Congressional Research Service, food vendors
participating in WIC received 9.86 billion in Fiscal Year 1997--75% of
the total funds spent on the WIC program! This fiscal year, producers
of food products approved by the federal government for purchase by WIC
participants are expected to receive $10 billion dollars in taxpayer
dollars! Small wonder the lobbyists who came to my office to discuss
WIC were not advocates for the poor, but rather well-healed
spokespersons for corporate interests!
Any of my colleagues who doubt that these programs serve the
interests of large corporations should consider that one of the most
contentious issues debated at Committee mark-up was opposition to an
attempt to allow USDA to purchase non-quote peanuts (currently the only
peanuts available for sale are farmers who have a USDA quota all other
farmers are forbidden to sell peanuts in the US) for school nutrition
programs. Although this program would have saved the American taxpayers
$5 million this year, the amendment was rejected at the behest of
supporters of the peanut lobby. A member of my staff, who appropriately
asked why this amendment could not pass with overwhelming support, was
informed by a staffer for another member, who enthusiastically supports
the welfare state, that the true purpose of this program is to benefit
producers of food products, not feed children.
The main reason supporters of a free and moral society must oppose
this bill is because federal welfare programs crowd out the more
efficient private charities for two reasons. First, the taxes imposed
on the American people in order to finance these programs leave
taxpayers with fewer resources to devote to private charity. Secondly,
the welfare state erodes the ethic of charitable responsibility as
citizens view aiding the poor as the government's role, rather than a
moral obligation of the individual.
The best way to help the poor is to dramatically cut taxes thus
allowing individuals to devote more of their own resources to those
charitable causes which better address genuine need. I am a cosponsor
of HR 1338, which raises the charitable deduction and I believe
Congress should make awakening the charitable impulses of the American
people by reducing their tax burden one of its top priorities. In fact,
Congress should seriously consider enacting a dollar-per-dollar tax
credit for donations to the needy. This would do more to truly help the
disadvantaged than a tenfold increase in spending on the programs in HR
3874.
In conclusion, Congress should reject HR 3874 because the programs
contained therein lack constitutional foundation, allow the federal
government to control the lives of program recipients, and serve as a
means of transferring monies from the taxpayers to big corporations.
Instead of funding programs, Congress should return responsibility for
helping those in need to those best able to effectively provide
assistance; the American people acting voluntarily.
Mr. KUCINICH. Mr. Speaker, I rise today in strong support of H.R.
3874, the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Amendments of 1998.
This bill not only reauthorizes the expiring WIC, Summer Food Service,
State Administrative Expenses, and Commodity Assistance programs, it
also makes some important improvements to them. We've increased State's
flexibility in administering these programs, expanded eligibility and
services for after school programs, and taken steps to reduce fraud in
the WIC program. My colleagues have even managed to orchestrate a
savings of $69 million over five years. This is a good bipartisan bill
that will help millions of children, but I think it could have gone
farther.
There is something missing from the bill that would increase
participation in the Summer Food Service Program. This bill removes
many barriers for sponsors of the program, thus encouraging more
organizations to join. Because of expanded outreach efforts by state
agencies and anti-hunger groups, many more small community-based
organizations and private non-profit institutions are eager to provide
summer food service programs.
However, many of these organizations lack the resources to purchase
needed equipments such as milk coolers, ovens, microwaves, serving
utensils, and food storage equipment. They also need funds to advertise
and promote their programs. These one-time, non-recurring costs are
often more than small organizations can handle.
Over 80% of children who are eligible for this program remain
unserved by it. It's not because there isn't a need for more summer
food sponsors, and it's not because these kids aren't hungry. The
Second Harvest National Food Bank Network recently found, among those
food banks reporting seasonal changes in requests for emergency food,
nearly half report that requests for emergency food for children
increase during the summer months when school is out.
In my district in Cleveland, for example, 63% of the local charities
reported an increase in the number of children requesting emergency
food assistance during the summer. Over half of the kids requesting
emergency food received free or reduced price school meals and are
eligible for participation in the summer food service program, but only
11.3% actually participate. During school, these low-income children
receive up to \1/2\ of their nutrients from school meals. During the
summer, they do not have access to school breakfasts or lunches.
Offering sponsors a boost to help them get started would be a
relatively inexpensive way, especially given the savings from the bill,
to encourage more organizations to establish summer food service
programs. A grant program to help defer the one-time costs associated
with beginning a summer food program would allow more organizations to
participate in low-income and rural areas that are typically
underserved by this program.
I had hoped to work with my friends on the other side of the aisle to
bring a grant program like this back to the Summer Food Service program
before we brought this bill to the floor. And while it is not a
particularly expensive concept and even though no one seems to be
philosophically or ideologically opposed to the idea, we were unable to
resolve the issue to include it in this bill. I think that is
unfortunate for the millions of kids for whom summer vacation means
hunger instead of fun.
[[Page H5874]]
I'd like to thank the Food Research and Action Center for their
support and tireless efforts to increase the reach and scope of
programs like Summer Food Service. And I encourage my colleagues to
continue our work on this issue. I think there is a lot more we can do
for these kids. The Summer Food Service Program is one of the least
known and most underutilized of the federal nutrition programs. There
is no reason for so many children to be hungry and under-nourished
during the summer when we could increase participation in the program
by offering one-time grants to help more sponsors get started.
Mr. BILIRAKIS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today to express my strong support
for H.R. 3874, the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Amendments
of 1998.
I have always been a strong supporter of WIC because it gives women
and young children access to the foods necessary for healthy
development. WIC provides specific nutritious foods to at-risk, income-
eligible, pregnant, postpartum and breast feeding women, infants and
children up to five years of age. WIC gives women and young children
the means to obtain highly nutritious foods like iron-fortified infant
formula, calcium-rich milk, eggs, juice, and cereal.
During pregnancy, one of the most fragile periods in a woman's life,
WIC enhances dietary intake, which improves weight gain and the
likelihood of a successful pregnancy. After birth, WIC continues to
promote the health of infants and is responsible for reducing low birth
weight and infant mortality. Children who participate in WIC receive
immunizations against childhood diseases at a higher rate than children
who are not WIC participants. WIC also helps to reduce anemia among
children.
As we know, children receiving nutritious meals are in a better
position to focus on their daily studies. Proper nutrition is an
integral part of our children's educational experience. In fact, WIC
has been linked to improved cognitive development among children. WIC
children are more prepared to learn compared to those children who lack
proper nutritionally balanced diets.
In short, WIC is supported by many people and continues to be a
popular program. It yields tremendous returns on our investments and
improves the health and well being of pregnant women, infants and
children. I urge my colleagues to show their support for the WIC
Program by voting in favor of H.R. 3874.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Mr. Speaker, thank you for the opportunity
to speak on this important issue. I support this bill which will
guarantee that families are able to access the food they need. In
addition, this program will extend funding for state school lunch
programs and provide low income families' children with a national food
program.
H.R. 3874 reauthorizes this program thorough 2003 to allow the Women,
Infants and Children (WIC) nutrition program provides nutrition,
education and supplemental food to low-income pregnant and post-partum
women, infants and children up to age five. These necessary services
are provided free of charge to eligible individuals and families. This
bill also contains a number of other provisions including ones that
extend funding for administration expenses for the State school lunch
program and reauthorize a national summer food program for children of
low income families.
In my own homestate of Texas, in the 18th Congressional District, a
total of 109,596 women, infants and children receive WIC services each
month. This means that in Harris County, TX 12,917 pregnant women,
5,259 breast feeding mothers, 9,448 postpartum mothers, how have
recently given birth, and 29,934 infants, and 52,038 children can
receive the help that they need. One-seventh of the State of Texas'
683,000 WIC recipients reside in Harris County, TX.
This program is not as glamorous as others--the WIC program is
formula, milk, juice, and bread. The majority of those served are poor
infants and children, those who are most often overlooked. To cut the
WIC program does not materially reduce the numbers of women, infants
and children who are in need. This program is one of the best run, most
efficient and effective programs that the Federal Government has
initiated.
According to the Government Accounting Office, for every dollar spent
on the WIC program the tax payer saves $3.50. This is the reason the
WIC Program received very strong bi-partisan support throughout its
history.
We must continue to support this program. What can be more important
than making sure our country's children are healthy and safe? I
strongly support this bill and I encourage my colleagues to support it
as well.
Mr. MARTINEZ. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion offered by the
gentleman from Pennsylvania (Mr. Goodling) that the House suspend the
rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3874, as amended.
The question was taken.
Mr. GOODLING. Mr. Speaker, on that, I demand the yeas and nays.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 5 of rule I and the
Chair's prior announcement, further proceedings on this motion will be
postponed.
____________________