[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 155 (Monday, October 17, 2011)]
[Senate]
[Pages S6587-S6590]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
LEGISLATIVE SESSION
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senate will resume legislative session.
The Presiding OFFICER. The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. I thank the Chair. Shortly, along with the Senator from
Colorado, I am going to discuss an amendment to the Agriculture
appropriations bill we have offered. But, first, I am going to yield to
the Senator from Texas for the purpose of his offering an amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Texas.
Amendment No. 775 to Amendment No. 738
Mr. CORNYN. I thank the Senator from Maine. I have an amendment at
the desk. I ask that it be called up and ask for its immediate
consideration.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, the pending amendment is
set aside.
The clerk will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Texas [Mr. Cornyn] proposes an amendment
numbered 775 to amendment No. 738.
Mr. CORNYN. I ask unanimous consent that the reading of the amendment
be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To prohibit funding for Operation Fast and Furious or similar
``gun walking'' programs)
After section 217 of title II of division B, insert the
following:
Sec. 218. No funds made available under this Act shall be
used to allow the transfer of firearms to agents of drug
cartels where law enforcement personnel of the United States
do not continuously monitor and control such firearms at all
times.
Mr. CORNYN. I will be back to talk to the substance of my amendment.
I yield the floor, and I thank the Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I rise this evening to discuss an
amendment numbered 757 that I have offered with my colleague from
Colorado, Senator Mark Udall, that would protect the flexibility of
schools to serve healthy vegetables in the National School Lunch and
School Breakfast Programs. This is a bipartisan amendment that we are
offering. It is cosponsored by Senators Crapo, Risch, Snowe, Ayotte,
Wyden, Johanns, Nelson of Nebraska, Mikulski, and Hoven.
Earlier this year, the U.S. Department of Agriculture proposed a rule
that would limit servings of a certain category of vegetables that
includes white potatoes, corn, peas, and lima beans. It would limit
them to a total of one cup per week in the National School Lunch
Program.
The proposed rule would also ban this category of vegetables
altogether from the School Breakfast Program. Our bipartisan amendment
would prevent the Department of Agriculture from moving forward with
this arbitrary limitation. I am concerned the proposed rule would
impose significant cuts on schools and would limit the flexibility they
need to serve nutritious, affordable meals to their students.
For those who are less familiar with this issue, let me give my
colleagues some background. Current law already requires the School
Lunch and School Breakfast Programs to follow the most recent dietary
guidelines for Americans. Last year, the USDA released the newest
dietary guidelines that call for all Americans of all ages to eat more
vegetables.
The 2010 dietary guidelines list four nutrients of concern. They are
potassium, dietary fiber, calcium, and vitamin D. The guidelines state
that dietary intake of these four nutrients are low enough to be of
public health concern for both adults and children.
Since USDA is concerned about a lack of these nutrients in the
American diet, it would make sense for the Department to promote good
sources of these critical nutrients. Yet the USDA's proposed rule would
actually limit vegetables that are good sources of these nutrients.
USDA should not limit their availability but instead should encourage
their healthy preparation.
For example, here are some nutritional facts about potatoes that are
often overlooked. Potatoes have more potassium than bananas, a food
commonly associated with this nutrient. Potatoes are cholesterol free,
low in fat and sodium, and can be served in countless healthy ways. In
fact, a medium baked potato contains 15 percent of the daily
recommended value of fiber--that is one of those nutrients of concern--
27 percent of the daily recommended value for vitamin B6, 28 percent of
the daily recommended amount of vitamin C. This is a great nutritional
bargain at about a nickel per serving.
I am going to go on and discuss the rest of the problems with this
rule and the solution, but I know my colleague from Colorado is under a
time constraint. So at this point I am going to yield to him, my
partner in this endeavor, for his statement. Then I will reclaim the
floor and continue with my discussion.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Manchin.) The Senator from Colorado.
Mr. UDALL of Colorado. I thank the Senator from Maine for her
graciousness and for her leadership on this important amendment that
she and I brought to the floor. Clearly, the 2012 Agriculture
appropriations bill that will direct the USDA to provide adequate
flexibility to schools to deliver students nutritious school meals
while effectively managing costs is very important. But we have to do
it in the right way. I want to share my thinking on what the right way
is.
[[Page S6588]]
In January of this year the USDA issued a proposed rule for
nutritional standards in the National School Lunch and School Breakfast
Programs that would limit total servings of certain vegetables--most
notably potatoes, corn, green peas, and lima beans--to one cup per week
and eliminate potatoes from school breakfasts.
I have heard from school lunch providers in Colorado that this
restriction will result in significant challenges for food service
operations through increased costs, reduced flexibility, and decreased
school meal participation. This is especially concerning for them in my
State, and I think as the Senator from Maine has pointed out, all over
our country because school districts are facing increasingly tight
budgets.
Many children from Colorado and across the Nation depend on school
meal programs to keep them nourished and ready to learn. That is why it
is important for school meals to include healthy food options while
also allowing sufficient flexibility to school meal providers to help
build a foundation for healthy eating going forward.
In order to achieve this goal, a very worthy goal, it is important
that we implement the bipartisan child nutrition reauthorization the
Congress passed last year. In order to ensure that implementation is
successful for both kids and schools, it is important the USDA takes
into consideration the insights and the experiences of those who are in
the school cafeterias every day across America serving meals to our
children. These are well-trained and qualified individuals who see our
children, our students, on a daily basis. They know their parents, and
they very well may be parents of students themselves.
Here is what they are saying. I will read to you from a letter the
Colorado School Nutrition Association sent me recently regarding this
proposed rule:
We believe it is a realistic and attainable goal to create
meal plans that meet the current dietary guidelines for
Americans while allowing schools the flexibility to manage
cost and maintain student participation. Improved nutrition
is a vital aspect of our nation's health, one which we
heartily support, and we believe it can be accomplished
without significant damage to the programs we are trying to
improve and without additional strain on local schools.
That is what the Collins-Udall amendment intends to do. It would
direct the USDA to not set maximum limits on the frequency that schools
can serve any one fruit or vegetable while allowing schools to continue
to moderate portion size appropriately. Our amendment will also ensure
that schools have the flexibility to serve healthy fruits and
vegetables in a manner consistent with guidelines established jointly
by the USDA and the Department of Health and Human Services, called the
Dietary Guidelines for Americans.
Some wonder why Senator Collins and I have taken such issue with this
proposed rule. Yes, we both do come from potato-producing States. We
both believe potatoes have gotten a bad rap. The truth is, when
prepared properly, the potato can provide critical nutrients to
students that will help them lead healthy lives and be ready to learn
in the classrooms.
In some areas, increased flexibility to serve this nutritious and
available vegetable can actually help schools manage costs so they can
afford to purchase other more expensive vegetables. Where I believe
school meal providers, potato producers, and health advocates can agree
is that this issue is less about any one vegetable and more about the
preparation of the vegetable. Anything can be fried or drowned in any
number of fats available to us as consumers. Let's be honest.
Even Agriculture Secretary Vilsack agreed in testimony before the
Senate Agriculture Appropriations Committee that it is not the potato,
it is the way in which potatoes are being prepared and provided. We
should be encouraging schools to prepare potatoes and other fruits and
vegetables appropriately, not limiting their flexibility and
potentially increasing their cost unnecessarily.
I have spent a good portion of my time in Congress working to promote
physical activity, getting children and families into the great
outdoors and reducing the amount of time children spend in front of the
TV and video games. Through my Healthy Kids From Day One Act and the
National Kids to Parks Initiative I have focused on getting kids to eat
healthier and become more active.
Another way we promote healthy lifestyles is making sure kids have
access to needed nutrients and balanced meals. That is why Congress
directed the USDA to ensure that all fruits and vegetables are part of
Federal food nutrition programs, particularly the school meal programs.
I believe, and I know Senator Collins believes, there is a balance we
can find, a balance that preserves needed flexibility for our cash-
strapped schools but also preserves guidelines that will ensure our
kids are getting the best nutrients possible in their school meals,
including from the potato.
So instead of pointing fingers, we need to provide commonsense
solutions that help school kids and their parents make wise choices
that in turn will make a healthier America.
A healthy country is a strong country. I believe this amendment is an
important tool to ensure that our schools can be an active and
effective participant in ensuring our children are healthy, well cared
for, and ready to become the next leaders in our goal of winning the
global economic race.
I thank the Senator from Maine for yielding time to me. I look
forward to working with her, to reaching a successful conclusion, and
to our amendment being agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Merkley). The Senator from Maine.
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I thank the Senator from Colorado for his
excellent remarks. Both of us share the goal that all Americans share
for our children--making sure they get a healthy diet. For many
children, it is so critical that the School Lunch and School Breakfast
Programs provide that diet.
Unfortunately, in many ways USDA's rule does not comply with the
dietary guidelines which recognize that Americans of all ages tend to
be short on two particular nutrients, potassium and fiber, and potatoes
are abundant in providing those.
When we think of potassium, most of us think of bananas. In fact, as
this chart shows, a potato actually has far more potassium than a
banana. Indeed, ironically, the Dietary Guidelines for all Americans
includes an appendix exclusively listing foods that are rich in
potassium. A baked potato is the first vegetable listed because it is
such an excellent source of potassium.
Potatoes can also serve as vehicles for other vegetables. I recently
discussed this issue with the director of school nutrition for two
communities in Maine, York and Kittery. Her name is Doris Demers. She
told me the kids in her school system rave about the baked potato bar,
where they can load baked potatoes with broccoli, shaved carrots,
chives, salsa, vegetarian chili, beans, and many other healthful items.
Doris also pointed out to me that this is a particularly popular option
for students who are vegetarians, and they are seeing an increasing
number of students who are vegetarians in their school system.
Yet if this rule were to go into effect, a school serving a medium
baked potato on Monday would be prevented from serving a full portion
of potatoes or corn at any other lunch during that week. Think how
absurd that result is. These two vegetables--corn and potatoes--are
central to a variety of dishes, such as soups, stews, chowders, and
Shepherd's pie.
One food service director told me of her school's attempt to get
children to eat fresh whole foods rather than heavily processed foods.
Thus, she developed a farm to school program in cooperation with a
local farmer.
The students went out into the field, picked the corn, husked it
themselves, and were served the corn for lunch, enjoying the experience
of consuming wholesome, locally grown food. Yet, as she pointed out to
me, the USDA's proposed rule would prevent her from serving an ear of
fresh corn one day of the week and a baked potato another day of the
same week. That is an utterly absurd result. That is why people get so
frustrated with some of the regulations that come out of Washington.
I am also very concerned about the impact on the School Breakfast
Program. It is a voluntary program, unlike the School Lunch Program.
Some school districts could be forced to drop out of the School
Breakfast Program
[[Page S6589]]
as a direct result of this rule because it could increase costs by up
to 50 cents per breakfast. If we start multiplying that across all the
breakfasts served by these school systems, we are soon talking about
real money. This would be a disaster if schools chose to terminate
their participation in the School Breakfast Program for those students
who rely on this program. Only Washington could impose a rule that
purports to improve school nutrition but actually causes schools to
drop out of the very program that is supposed to provide that
nutrition.
In fact, many of our colleagues in the Congressional Black Caucus in
the House have written to Secretary Vilsack expressing ``concerns
regarding the new costs the proposed rule would impose on schools
educating the highest percentage of low-income students.'' The letter
goes on to note:
For many low-income children, the best, if not all, of
their nutrition comes from programs (the USDA) administers.
The letter points out that many schools simply ``do not have the
resources that may be diverted to meet such large cost increases.''
Research has shown us time and again that eating a healthy breakfast
is critical to academic success. Eating breakfast also provides
significant health benefits, as we all know. Not eating breakfast is
associated with excess body weight, especially among children and
adolescents, and consuming breakfast has been associated with weight
loss and improved nutrition.
I hope USDA will listen to the concerns voiced by the professionals
who manage these programs. The School Nutrition Association opposes
this restriction and ``believes that consumption of an array of fruits
and vegetables should be encouraged,'' not limited.
The following organizations are opposing the USDA's proposed rule
because it would increase costs and limit their flexibility: the
American Association of School Administrators, the National School
Boards Association, the Council of Great City Schools, and the National
Association of Elementary School Principals.
In my State, the Maine Department of Education, the Maine PTA, the
Maine School Management Association, and the Maine Principals
Association have all expressed their support for our amendment and
their opposition to the USDA's ill-conceived rule. These groups
represent school administrators, superintendents, school boards, and
principals. They know; they oversee the school food service programs,
and they understand the difficulties and costs this rule would cause.
The American Association of School Administrators, for example, wrote
to express support for our amendment saying:
The overly prescriptive nature of the requirements for
providing fruits and vegetables increases the cost of meals
so drastically that school districts implementing the
changes, even receiving the higher reimbursement rate, would
still be covered for less than half of the incurred expenses.
The fact is, the proposed rule would impose significant and needless
costs on our Nation's school districts at a time when they can least
afford it.
Listen to what the cost of this rule is estimated to be by the
Department of Agriculture: The USDA estimates that this rule could cost
as much as $6.8 billion over the next 5 years. The lion's share of that
cost is going to fall on State and local agencies.
The costs associated with the proposed rule would also affect working
families who rely on the school meal programs. As the National
Association of Elementary School Principals wrote me:
USDA's proposed nutritional guidelines will force schools
to raise paid meal prices.
I ask unanimous consent that a list of organizations in support be
printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Ms. COLLINS. Mr. President, I hope our colleagues will take a closer
look at this bipartisan amendment that Senator Udall and I are
offering, with the support of many colleagues. We need to ensure that
our schools can maintain the flexibility they need to serve healthy
meals at an affordable cost.
Exhibit 1
Letters of Support
National School Groups
American Association of School Administrators (AASA):
Represents approximately 13,000 educational leaders including
superintendents, as well as school chief executive officers
and other senior level Administrators and cabinet members.
National School Boards Association (NSBA): Represent public
school boards and related school boards associations.
Council of the Great City Schools (CGCS): Represents the
needs of urban schools and inner-city students. Membership
includes school districts located in cities with populations
over 250,000 or student enrollment over 35,000. Therefore,
CGCS indirectly represents 6.8 million children, 65 percent
of which are eligible for free/reduced price lunch.
National Association of Elementary School Principals
(NAESP): Represents approximately 23,000 elementary and
middle school principals. NAESP indirectly represents
approximately 33 million children in grades pre-kindergarten
through grade eight.
National Rural Education Association (NREA)/National Rural
Education Advocacy Coalition (NREAC): These umbrella groups
represent the rural voice of America's educators. Members are
comprised of state and national organizations, as well as
individuals, who are concerned about rural education.
Association of Educational Service Agencies (AESA):
Represents approximately 550 regional service agencies
(public multi-service agency that provides support services
and programs for schools). They work with schools that
represent 80 percent of all public school students in the
nation, and are authorized by state statute (none in Maine).
Maine School Groups
Maine Parent Teacher Association (Maine PTA): Represents
approximately 100 local PTA units and 3,500 members in Maine;
membership is comprised of parents, educators, students and
school advocates.
Maine School Management Association (MSMA): This umbrella
organization represents the school boards (MSBA) and
superintendents (MSSA) in Maine. Maine Principals Association
(MPA): Represents approximately 900 members in Maine,
including elementary and secondary principals, assistant
principals, and other school administrators.
State of Maine Department of Education
Maine School Nutrition Association
Farm/Food Groups
National Potato Council
Maine Potato Board
American Frozen Foods Institute
Other Groups
Letter from several Members of the Congressional Black
Caucus
Ms. SNOWE. Mr. President, I rise today with my colleagues Senator
Collins and Senator Udall to raise the concern of nutrition guidelines
in our schools. This amendment aims to clarify school nutrition
standards to ensure that they appropriately reflect the USDA's Dietary
Guidelines for Americans.
As you may know, on January 31, 2011, U.S. Department of Agriculture
Secretary Tom Vilsack and Secretary of the Department of Health and
Human Services Kathleen Sebelius announced the release of the 2010
Dietary Guidelines for Americans, the Federal Government's evidence-
based nutritional guidance to promote health, reduce the risk of
chronic diseases, and reduce the prevalence of obesity through improved
nutrition and physical activity. However, just 2 weeks prior, on
January 13, 2011, USDA released a proposed rule to improve nutrition
requirements for the National School Lunch Program and the School
Breakfast Program to align them with the 2005 ``Dietary Guidelines for
Americans.''
This was bureaucratic confusion exemplified. Why not delay the
proposed rule for our Federal meal programs by 2 weeks and instead
release it to reflect the most recent nutrition guidelines that were
issued on January 31? While I understand and agree with the necessity
and desire to update the nutrition standards in schools, wouldn't it be
more effective to utilize the most recent, science-based guidelines to
reflect those recommendations?
In my home State of Maine, like most in the Nation, we find ourselves
struggling with an obesity epidemic. According to the Centers for
Disease Control, today in the United States, 64 percent of adults and
28 percent of high school students are either overweight or obese.
Equally, if not more disturbing, are the statistics revealing that only
23 percent of adults and 21 percent of high school students eat at
least five servings of fruits and vegetables daily.
With more than 31 million children currently participating in the
National
[[Page S6590]]
School Lunch Program and more than 11 million participating in the
National School Breakfast Program, I believe that good nutrition within
our Nation's schools is more important than ever. And that is all the
more pressing, given that many children consume at least half of their
daily calories at school, and for many students participating in these
programs, the food served at school may be the only food they regularly
eat.
For that, and many other reasons, I stand here today in support of
Senate amendment No. 757. Specifically, the amendment would ensure that
Federal school meal programs will be permitted to provide fruits and
vegetables consistent with the most recent dietary guidelines.
Specifically, the recently proposed rule to improve nutrition
requirements for the National School Lunch Program and the School
Breakfast Program would limit the total servings of starchy vegetables,
including the white potato, to one cup per week and completely
eliminate those vegetables from school breakfasts. I am particularly
disturbed by this recommendation because they actually contradict the
recently published 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, as well as
the 2005 Dietary Guidelines they are supposed to reflect.
Our most recent national Dietary Guidelines--those released this past
January--simply state that ``intake by Americans of some nutrients is
low enough to be of public health concern. They are potassium, dietary
fiber, calcium, and vitamin D.'' As you may know, there are few fruits
or vegetables that contain the levels of potassium in potatoes. In
fact, a medium potato--5.3 oz with the skin--is not only a good source
of potassium, but also contains significantly more potassium--200 mg
more--than its nearest rival, the banana.
Additionally, one serving of potato has as much fiber as broccoli and
provides 13 percent of the daily recommended value. In an attempt to
combat these deficiencies the 2010 Dietary Guidelines recommend that
all Americans, including school age children, consume 5 cups of starchy
vegetables a week. This is an increase in recommended consumption from
the recommendations of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for 3 cups of
starchy vegetables per week. And yet the proposed rule would limit the
total number of servings of starchy vegetables to one cup per week in
our school lunch program, which is entirely inconsistent with the 2005
and 2010 Dietary Guideline recommendations.
I believe that it is clear that potatoes are a nutrient powerhouse,
and the fact that the white potato offers 13 percent of a child's daily
potassium requirements for less than 5 cents per serving provides
further support for keeping potatoes in school meals, especially during
challenging budgetary times. The Federal Government should allow our
struggling schools to make fiscally responsible choices that offer the
most nutritional return on investment. In fact, USDA has estimated that
the proposed meal plan will increase school lunch costs by $6.8 billion
over 5 years, and it cannot be denied that a significant part of this
increase is due to the limit on potatoes. Limiting starchy vegetables
to 1 cup per week will increase costs by approximately 5.6 percent with
possible adverse affects on nutritional quality.
It has been well documented that, currently, nine out of ten
Americans are not achieving vegetable and fruit consumption
recommendations. I am disappointed that during such a time, that the
USDA would propose rules denying our nation's youth access to nutrient-
rich foods as part of the National School Lunch and School Breakfast
programs.
And let me just say before the issue is raised that no one is arguing
in favor of a diet based on french fries. The truth is--to combat the
wave of obesity and promote more healthy food choices we must promote
food items that present a diverse set of vitamins and minerals. No
matter how they are prepared, potatoes are currently included in
healthy school meal plans to meet national dietary guidelines. Yet many
Americans seem to believe all potatoes served in schools are in the
form of deep fried french fries.
This may have been the case at one time, but today, according to our
own school food service administrators, most potatoes served in schools
are baked, not fried. Like 80 percent of schools nationwide, the deep
fryers in York and Kittery, ME schools, for example, were removed years
ago. As the school nutrition director of those schools, Ms. Doris
Demers informed me recently that, in her 18 years working in school
nutrition, she has never seen fryers in a Maine school nutrition
program. When prepared properly, the potato is packed with nutrition
and is a cost-effective option for the school lunch and breakfast
programs.
While I will continue to endeavor with my colleagues to support
improved nutritional standards for all Americans, I am concerned that
many throughout our nation cannot help but get confused about which
guideline they should try to follow. For these reasons, I respectfully
request that my colleagues join me in encouraging USDA to be consistent
on their nutritional advice to the American public--of all ages.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Amendment No. 772 to Amendment No. 738
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, on behalf of Senator Murray, I ask
unanimous consent to set aside the pending amendment and call up
amendment No. 772.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered. The clerk
will report.
The legislative clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Illinois [Mr. Durbin], for Mrs. Murray,
proposes an amendment numbered 772 to amendment No. 738.
The amendment is as follows:
(Purpose: To strike a section providing for certain exemptions from
environmental requirements for the reconstruction of highway facilities
damaged by natural disasters or emergencies)
Strike section 128 of division C.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from New York.
____________________