[Congressional Record Volume 147, Number 171 (Tuesday, December 11, 2001)]
[House]
[Pages H9087-H9089]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
RICHARD B. RUSSELL NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT AMENDMENTS
Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I move to suspend the rules and pass the
bill (H.R. 3216) to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch
Act to exclude certain basic allowances for housing of an individual
who is a member of the uniformed services from the determination of
eligibility for free and reduced price meals of a child of the
individual.
The Clerk read as follows:
H.R. 3216
Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of
the United States of America in Congress assembled,
SECTION 1. EXCLUSION OF CERTAIN MILITARY BASIC ALLOWANCES FOR
HOUSING FOR DETERMINATION OF ELIGIBILITY FOR
FREE AND REDUCED PRICE MEALS.
Section 9(b)(3) of the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act (42 U.S.C. 1758(b)(3)) is amended by adding at the
end the following: ``For the two-year period beginning on the
date of the enactment of this sentence, the amount of a basic
allowance provided under section 403 of title 37, United
States Code, on behalf of an individual who is a member of
the uniformed services for housing that is acquired or
constructed under the authority of subchapter IV of chapter
169 of title 10, United States Code, or any other related
provision of law, shall not be considered to be income for
purposes of determining the eligibility of a child of the
individual for free or reduced price lunches under this
Act.''.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to the rule, the gentleman from
Delaware (Mr. Castle) and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Davis)
each will control 20 minutes.
The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle).
General Leave
Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all Members
may have 5 legislative days within which to revise and extend their
remarks on H.R. 3216.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Delaware?
There was no objection.
Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
Madam Speaker, to address the decline in the condition of military
family housing, the Department of Defense initiated a housing program
which would allow commercial contractors to replace traditional base
housing with newly built or renovated privately managed base housing,
so-called privatized housing.
Yet as this program is being implemented, the gentleman from Texas
(Mr. Rodriguez) brought to my attention a serious and unintended
consequence of the program, children of junior enlisted personnel
living in privatized housing were being denied free or reduced price
meals at lunchtime. Due to DOD accounting changes, servicemembers
receiving a housing allowance under the privatized housing program were
being treated differently from those who were assigned traditional
housing and not paid an allowance. This is because the income-based
National School Lunch Program considered the housing allowance, but not
the actual house income. For this reason, servicemembers living in
traditional base housing at no cost were presumed to have less income
than servicemembers of the same rank who received a housing allowance,
but used those funds to pay a private contractor for rent and
utilities.
Unfortunately, this distinction caused military families in
privatized housing to exceed the income-based eligibility requirements
for the school lunch program, and it resulted in the loss of the free
or reduced price meals for their children. DOD intended the
privatization housing program to provide quality housing at no out-of-
pocket expense for servicemembers and their families. Unfortunately,
these families are now finding that they will have to pay approximately
$75 per child per month to replace the benefit that they received
previously under the school lunch program.
This problem is further compounded by the fact that numerous State
and Federal education, nutrition and technology programs are contingent
on the number of children eligible for the school lunch program. As a
result, entire school districts could be affected.
To adjust these problems, my legislation, H.R. 3216, amends the
school lunch program to exclude the housing allowance of servicemembers
in privatized housing for the determination of eligibility for free and
reduced price meals. Although this only affects families at about 15
military installations currently, that number is expected to increase
to about 70 installations, encompassing 70,000 housing units, including
450 units at the Dover Air Force Base in Dover, Delaware.
Our uniformed services are being asked to make tremendous personal
sacrifices to ensure the defense of our Nation. I believe we should do
all we
[[Page H9088]]
can to improve the quality of life for the families they leave behind.
Madam Speaker, for that reason, I am pleased that we are considering
this legislation today.
In conclusion, I thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Boehner), the
chairman of the Committee on Education and the Workforce, and the
ranking member, the gentleman from California (Mr. George Miller) for
allowing this measure to come to the floor. I also thank the gentleman
from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez) and the gentlewoman from California (Mrs.
Davis) for their personal interest and leadership on this issue. I urge
an ``aye'' vote on this bill.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
Madam Speaker, I rise in strong support of this bill which will
correct an unintended consequence of an important program. First, I
would like to thank the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) for
introducing this legislation. I also thank the chairman and ranking
member of the Committee on Education and the Workforce for their
consideration of this measure.
I raised this issue in the spring of this year, and I am happy to see
that we have come to a reasonable conclusion. In an effort to leverage
its limited quality life and resources, the Armed Services are
privatizing military family housing. Such privatization of military
family housing is a welcomed solution to a difficult problem in my
district and across the Nation. However, as my colleague from Delaware
mentioned, one of the unintended consequences of a well-intentioned
program is the loss of income to school districts resulting from
reduced eligibility for free and reduced school lunch programs.
Compounding this problem, numerous State and Federal education,
nutrition and technology programs are contingent on the number of
children eligible for the free and reduced meal program; and this
program we all know well as title I. The program affects only a small
number of military children today, but it will affect tens of thousands
of military families and the schools their children attend as the
military housing privatization program expands.
Many children and listed personnel living in the privatized housing
are disqualified for eligibility for free and reduced price lunch. This
is because the servicemember living in the privatized house has the
basic allowance for earnings included on their earnings statement,
although the money flows directly through the member to the private
housing developer. This added income, which is not reported for members
living in traditional on-base housing, causes many servicemembers'
children to lose eligibility for free and reduced price meals because
under Department of Agriculture rules, this amount is included as
income in determining eligibility for free and reduced price school
lunches. The Department of Defense adds the allowance to the pay
statement to assist in accounting, but the servicemember loses.
Madam Speaker, let me explain. On a Sunday, a housing community is
owned and operated by the military. And on Monday, the housing
community is operated by a private company still on Federal land, but
the servicemember, who never moved, is impacted by all this. Earlier
this year, the superintendent of the Coronado school district, Dr.
Marilyn Wheeler, first made me aware of this problem. She contacted me
when she learned that as a result of the privatization of the Silver
Strand housing area, her small district could lose more than $90,000 in
title I Federal funds which she already budgeted for in the 2001 and
2002 school year.
Title I funds have been utilized to improve school achievement at the
Silver Strand School. Student achievement has steadily improved for the
entire student body, and those identified as title I eligible have made
significant gains in closing the achievement gap.
This year's funding would have hired a full-time certificated teacher
to work with small groups of students below grade level in reading,
language arts and math; and a half-time reading specialist to work one
on one with students below the grade level in reading, and certificated
staff to work with small groups of students before or after school in
reading and math. With all of our hard work on education, it would
really be a travesty to leave this problem unresolved.
Madam Speaker, I know that others around the country were facing
similar circumstances, and I contacted the Department of Defense, the
Department of Agriculture and the Social Security Administration.
Initially, the Department of Defense did not believe it was feasible to
eliminate the housing allowance from the military leave and earnings
statement because of the negative impact it would have on the entire
housing privatization program. However, the Department now believes it
is possible, although the change will take at least 16 months.
This bill will give DOD the time it needs to adjust its practices;
and short of this effort, will correct the problem until it can be
permanently fixed in the 2003 National School Lunch Reauthorization.
Madam Speaker, I urge my colleagues to support our schools and our
military and vote ``yes'' on this legislation.
Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I yield such time as he may
consume to the gentleman from Texas (Mr. Rodriguez).
Mr. RODRIGUEZ. Madam Speaker, in 1995, Congress took important steps
to address the deterioration of conditions by nearly half of the
military families in housing by enacting the Military Housing
Privatization Initiative. The program has expedited the renovation and
construction of military family housing by having developers construct
private family housing on Federal property, which is then made
available to military personnel.
The unintended consequence of this worthwhile program is that
children of many junior personnel living in privatizing housing are
disqualified from being eligible for free and reduced price meals. The
bill before the House today will temporarily solve the problem, and
will ensure that 10,000 military children do not lose their eligibility
for free and reduced price meals.
{time} 1415
A service member living in privatized housing has their housing
allowance included on their monthly earnings statement even though the
funding passes directly to the privatized housing developer. This
reported housing allowance, which is not reported for members living in
traditional on-base housing, causes certain service members' children
to lose eligibility for free and reduced-price meals. So you have a
certain person who receives the same wages but is housed in traditional
types of homes, those kids can qualify; but the other kids that are in
a different housing do not qualify. Compounding the problem, numerous
State and Federal education, nutrition and technology programs are
contingent on the number of children eligible for the free and reduced-
price meals program. And so both the schools suffer as well as the
students suffer and families.
At Fort Hood, Texas, for example, the Army privatized nearly 6,000
housing units earlier this year. Because of the privatization effort,
more than 1,000 children of Army families will lose eligibility for
free or reduced-price meals. The Killeen, Texas, Independent School
District would lose about $1.1 million annually in State and Federal
funding.
I want to take this time to thank the Military Impacted School
Association for their efforts because they were out there in support of
all the military schools throughout the country. Working with them, I
contacted the Department of Defense to remedy this quality-of-life
problem that they were encountering. The Department of Defense
responded that it could not fix the problem without dismantling the
entire housing privatization finance method that they had intact and
suggested instead that Congress amend the national school lunch
program. In October, I introduced legislation to amend the national
school lunch program to permanently fix the problem.
The bill before the House today will fix the problem for 2 years with
no cost, as estimated by the Congressional Budget Office. A permanent
fix can
[[Page H9089]]
then be addressed in the reauthorization of the national lunch program
in the 108th Congress.
I want to thank Chairman Boehner of the Committee on Education and
the Workforce and Subcommittee Chairman Castle for their efforts in
introducing and expediting consideration of H.R. 3216. Without their
strong support and the efforts of all the staff that have been
extremely helpful, we would not be able to be here on the floor.
As members of the Armed Forces are fighting terrorism abroad and at
home, I would urge my colleagues in the House of Representatives to
pass H.R. 3216 unanimously. In these difficult times, the least we can
do while these people are serving our country is to make sure that we
take care of their children and their education.
Once again, I want to thank both chairmen and the gentlewoman from
California (Mrs. Davis) for helping out in this effort. I think it is
something that we have to come back in the 108th and make sure we take
care of it completely. In addition to that, I know that there are about
16,000 housing projects that have been implemented. There is an
additional 15,000 whose contracts are out. And then in the future we
hope to improve the housing quality for all our military. We have over
51,000 housing projects, so it is an area that we really need to look
at very seriously.
I once again thank very much both sides for this effort. The children
will appreciate it.
Mrs. DAVIS of California. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as
I may consume.
I want to thank my distinguished colleague from Texas. I know he has
worked tirelessly on this issue. I appreciate all of that and so do the
children in our school districts.
Madam Speaker, this is important bipartisan legislation that improves
the quality of life of our service members, many of whom are deployed
overseas in the face of danger, and removes a handicap to education
faced by school districts across the Nation. I urge my colleagues to
support this bill.
Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
I thank the gentlewoman from California and the gentleman from Texas
for their kind words and the concept of actually going forward with
this. I agree with the gentlewoman from California, this is legislation
which is of extreme importance, particularly in helping children who
need the extra help in an income circumstance.
I would encourage everybody also to support the legislation.
Ms. JACKSON-LEE of Texas. Madam Speaker, I rise in support of H.R.
3216. H.R. 3216 corrects a problem created by the Department of Defense
housing allowance policy by exempting military housing allowances as
income for the purpose of determining a student's eligibility for the
National School Lunch Program. It will prevent the loss of free- and
reduced-priced meal eligibility by school-age children of military when
their family home becomes privatized, or when the family moves into a
new, privatized home. This measure will take effect for two years from
the date of enactment and a permanent fix is anticipated in the 2003
National School Lunch Act reauthorization.
Military personnel generally receive in-kind housing or a housing
allowance. In-kind housing usually takes the form of housing on a
military base. Several years ago, however, the Department of Defense
initiated a pilot program that allowed private developers to build
military housing on Federal land, or manage existing military base
housing.
Currently, the Department of Agriculture treats this privatized
housing allowance as income. The result is that a family's income is
raised above the level needed to receive free-or reduce-price lunches.
There is little distinction between these families and those living in
regular civilian housing because military families living in these
privatized housing sign their housing allowance over to the developer.
Therefore, military families in privatized military housing should
remain eligible for the National School Lunch Program.
We must remember that individual directly benefiting from the
National School Lunch Program are the children. Mr. Speaker, we cannot
take away these children's free- or reduced-price lunches because of
some technicality they have no control over. These are innocent
children who require the nourishment to get them through the school day
just like any other student. Especially now, when many American mothers
and fathers are being called to war to defend our safety and freedom,
we should not deny this benefit to their deserving children. For these
children, I urge my colleagues to support H.R. 3216.
Mr. BOEHNER. Madam Speaker, recently, I was disheartened to learn
that some children of the men and women who proudly serve our country
in the U.S. armed services are unfairly losing their eligibility to
receive free- and reduced-priced school meals. This is occurring for no
reason other than that their family home is being privatized or they
have been asked to move into a new, privatized military home. Because
program eligibility is based on income, the additional compensation in
the form of a housing allowance received by military personnel to pay
for privatized military housing can result in the loss of meal
benefits, although there is no real increase in salary or disposable
income. In addition, schools attended by the children of military
personnel could lose Federal and State education aid based on free- and
reduced-priced meal counts, including their designation and funding as
title I schools.
I support the Department of Defenses' plan to improve the standards
of military housing through privatization, but Congress must resolve
this unintended consequence of the Department of Defense's housing
policy before more otherwise qualified children lose access to free-
and reduced-priced school meals.
H.R. 3216 addresses and solves this problem for the next two school
years at no cost. By excluding housing allowances used to live in
privatized military housing from income when determining a child's
eligibility to receive a free- and reduced-priced lunch, we can restore
and preserve this benefit for qualified military families.
Many of our service men and women take comfort in knowing that their
children can receive a nutritious meal in school at little or no cost.
Especially now, when many of our service men and women are being called
to war to defend our safety and freedom, we should not deny this
benefit to their deserving children.
Mr. CASTLE. Madam Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mrs. Biggert). The question is on the motion
offered by the gentleman from Delaware (Mr. Castle) that the House
suspend the rules and pass the bill, H.R. 3216.
The question was taken; and (two-thirds having voted in favor
thereof) the rules were suspended and the bill was passed.
A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.
____________________