[Congressional Record Volume 157, Number 156 (Tuesday, October 18, 2011)]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages E1890-E1891]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]




                  USDA PROPOSED RULE FOR SCHOOL MEALS

                                 ______
                                 

                         HON. RENEE L. ELLMERS

                           of north carolina

                    in the house of representatives

                       Tuesday, October 18, 2011

  Mrs. ELLMERS. Mr. Speaker, I rise today during National School Lunch 
Week to express my concern about the U.S. Department of Agriculture's 
proposed rule change to the National School Lunch Program. As a mother 
and a nurse and a representative of the medical community, families, 
and farmers in the second district of North Carolina, I fully support 
improving nutrition for our nation's school children, and I believe 
that we must do everything we can to protect against childhood obesity.
  But in this time of economic uncertainty, we cannot overlook the 
unintended consequences of these new and conflicting standards. A 
recent Gallup poll found that 19 percent of American families are food 
insecure. According to a study by the USDA, nearly 17 million American 
children struggle with hunger. For many of these children, school is 
their most reliable source of a well balanced meal.
  In my state more than half of the school food programs in the state 
are operating in the red, losing a total of $28 million in 2008. Their 
financial problems are mounting at a time when parents, child health 
advocates and legislators are looking to school food programs to 
improve students' nutrition at a sensible and affordable price. In 
2006, the state legislature required schools to serve more fruits, 
vegetables and whole-grain food, and fewer dishes with lots of fat and 
sugar. However, it did not kick in extra money for the higher costs of 
the more nutritious foods. Collectively, school food programs in North 
Carolina spent $683 million during the last school year. Almost half, 
47 percent, went to salaries and benefits. The rest went to food 
purchases (44 percent) and other expenses (9 percent).
  According to USDA estimates, this new school meals rule will cost 
taxpayers $6.8 billion over the next ten years. How are we going to 
afford that?
  At a time when so many are hungry and the National School Lunch 
Program is serving more children than ever, I have strong reservations 
with USDA's proposal to place serious limitations on school 
nutritionists' options

[[Page E1891]]

in building nutritious meal plans for the nation's school children and 
increase the price of school meals. In many cases, the proposal would 
eliminate foods that are both nutritious and popular with children. The 
school lunch program is intended to feed hungry kids, not pick ``good 
foods'' and ``bad foods''. The new guidelines would limit starchy 
vegetables--corn, peas and lima beans, in addition to potatoes--to two 
servings a week. That's about one cup. As a parent, I would like to see 
more of these vegetables consumed, not less. School nutritionists 
should be applauded for the work they do in constructing meals that 
kids love and give them the energy they need to succeed in the 
classroom.
  This rule will cost taxpayers $6.8 billion over the next ten years. 
In this current fiscal crisis, our school children and taxpayers cannot 
afford to adapt to inconsistent, costly and unproven regulations. USDA 
should revisit its proposal and write a rule that does not put 
limitations on school nutritionists' choices in how to best feed hungry 
children or put further economic pressures on food companies that 
supply schools and the American taxpayer.

                          ____________________