[Congressional Record Volume 155, Number 140 (Thursday, October 1, 2009)]
[Senate]
[Pages S10062-S10063]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]

      By Mr. FRANKEN (for himself, Ms. Murkowski, and Mr. Bingaman):
  S. 1737. A bill to amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch 
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 to increase the number of 
children eligible for free school meals, with a phased-in transition 
period; to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
  Mr. FRANKEN. Mr. President, in a country as wealthy as ours, it is 
shameful to let any child go hungry. That is why today, Senator 
Murkowski and I are introducing the Expand School Meals Act. By 
eliminating the reduced price meals category and replacing it with the 
free meal program, this legislation will ensure that low-income 
children are not denied nutritious food during the school day if their 
family can't afford to pay for it.
  It is important to remember that this will improve student readiness 
for school. Parents have long known, and recent studies confirm, that 
children cannot learn on empty stomachs. Hungry children perform worse 
on achievement tests, have trouble concentrating, and are more likely 
to act out in school. Securing access to healthy foods for low-income 
children is therefore not only a means of reducing child hunger, but 
also an important strategy for narrowing the achievement gap.
  There are 3.1 million low-income children across the Nation, and 
54,000 children in Minnesota are eligible for reduced-price school 
meals. This means that the families of these children pay for part of 
their children's school meals. Currently, these families must pay 40 
cents for each lunch and 30 cents for each breakfast their children eat 
at school. While this may not sound like a lot of money to members of 
Congress, to a family that is barely scraping by, especially in today's 
economy, the cost can be prohibitive.
  In this tough economy, a growing number of these families simply can 
no longer afford to pay. Low-income children in Minnesota and across 
the country are increasingly being turned away from school lunch 
counters because they don't have enough money in their meal accounts. 
In some districts, children in the reduced price meal program are 
humiliated when they are forced to pay small fees in front of their 
peers, or when they are handed cheese sandwiches instead of regular 
meals on the days they cannot afford to pay. It then becomes abundantly 
clear to all of their peers in the lunchroom that they are in the 
reduced price program. Teachers in Minnesota and elsewhere have 
reported that many children choose to avoid this stigma by just 
skipping meals.
  The indecency of turning away children from the school lunch counter 
becomes all too evident when one hears the stories of the food service 
workers and teachers who have to confront these children directly. In 
the Roseville, Minnesota, school district, for example, schools 
recently reported that parents with health problems showed up at the 
district office unable to pay for reduced-price lunch. The families,

[[Page S10063]]

however, had too much income to qualify for the free lunch program. The 
district policy is that children who cannot pay for school lunches can 
receive cheese sandwiches for three days, and then must be turned away. 
Roseville cashiers and food service managers have been using their own 
money to cover children who they know cannot pay.
  This situation is entirely unacceptable. It is unacceptable not only 
because we are allowing children to go hungry today, but also because 
we know the impact of this hunger on their future. We know that 
insufficient access to food will negatively affect their development, 
as well as their educational outcomes, which together will have a 
lasting impact on their ability to reach their potential.
  Recent studies show just how devastating the impact of food 
insecurity is on the academic and social outcomes of school children. 
For example, researchers at Cornell and the University of Michigan 
found that children ages 6 to 11 who lacked sufficient food had 
significantly lower arithmetic scores, and were more likely to have 
repeated a grade than their peers. Furthermore, they found that 
teenagers who lacked sufficient food were almost three times as likely 
to have been suspended from school. Similarly, researchers at Harvard 
Medical School, and Massachusetts General Hospital found that children 
who, according to their parents, were experiencing hunger, were two to 
four times more likely than other children to repeat a grade, access 
special education services, or receive mental health counseling.
  Based on this research, it is clear that child hunger must be one of 
the factors that we address if we are serious about closing the 
achievement gap and giving every child in America a genuine opportunity 
to succeed.
  I would like to conclude by commending my colleagues on both sides of 
the aisle for their leadership in advocating for the extension of free 
school meals to children of the working poor. These efforts began with 
Senator Elizabeth Dole, who in 2003 introduced a bill that would have 
also phased out the reduced price meals category. And in 2004, Senator 
Dole advocated for a provision to be included in the Child Nutrition 
and WIC Reauthorization Act that authorized a 5 State pilot project to 
test the feasibility of eliminating the reduced price category. Funding 
for this project, unfortunately, was never appropriated.
  Some States and districts therefore decided to take matters into 
their own hands. I am proud to represent a State that decided to 
eliminate the reduced price category for school breakfasts. Based on 
the experience of these localities, we have learned that expanding 
eligibility for free meals to children in the reduced price category 
significantly increases their participation in school breakfast and 
lunch programs.
  In light of the experiences of these localities, and the difficult 
economic times, I am hopeful that this will be the year that we expand 
eligibility for free school meals. I urge all of my colleagues to join 
us in this endeavor and do right by our children.
                                 ______