[Congressional Record Volume 162, Number 65 (Wednesday, April 27, 2016)]
[House]
[Pages H2054-H2059]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
CHILD NUTRITION
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Under the Speaker's announced policy of
January 6, 2015, the gentleman from Virginia (Mr. Scott) is recognized
for 60 minutes as the designee of the minority leader.
General Leave
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I ask unanimous consent that all
Members have 5 legislative days to revised and extend their remarks and
include extraneous material on the subject of my Special Order.
The SPEAKER pro tempore. Is there objection to the request of the
gentleman from Virginia?
There was no objection.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, more than 60 years ago, Congress
responded to the Defense Department's concern that so many children
were malnourished, they would be unfit for military service, that they
passed the National School Lunch Act as a measure of national security
to safeguard the health and well-being of our Nation's children.
Through the enactment of the first Federal child nutrition program,
Congress recognized that feeding hungry children is not just a moral
imperative, it is vital to the health and security of our Nation.
Mr. Speaker, I serve as the ranking member of the House Committee on
Education and the Workforce. Our committee is tasked with making sure
that all children have an equal shot at success, so it is only fitting
that child nutrition programs fall within our committee's jurisdiction.
Just as there is a Federal role in ensuring that all children have
access to quality education, regardless of where they live, what they
look like, or their family's income, there is also a Federal role in
ensuring that every child has access to healthy and nutritious food.
Research has repeatedly shown us that a lack of adequate consumption
of specific foods, especially fruits and vegetables, is associated with
lower grades among students; and child obesity affects all aspects of a
child's life, from their physical well-being to their academic success
and self-confidence.
So we have a choice to make. We can put money into these programs now
and support healthy eating in schools, or we can cut corners and spend
more money down the road on chronic diseases and other social services,
putting the well-being of our children and our Nation's future at risk.
Either way, we will spend the money. In fact, researchers estimate
that $19,000 was the incremental lifetime medical costs of an obese
child relative to a normal weight child who maintains that normal
weight throughout adulthood. So it is important to keep
[[Page H2055]]
this tradeoff in mind as we talk about reauthorization of child
nutrition programs.
The hallmark of a good reauthorization is that it makes progress; it
moves us forward; it builds on what works and improves on what needs to
be improved. So with this in mind, Democrats are ready to make
improvements to the child nutrition programs and to protect the
progress that has been made.
For example, we have made progress in creating a healthier school
environment for students. The nutrition standards enacted after the
2010 bipartisan reauthorization are working. Around 99 percent of all
schools are meeting the standards. Kids are eating better foods.
Studies show that kids are eating up to 16 percent more vegetables and
23 percent more fruit at lunch.
{time} 1845
Now, unfortunately, many are now advocating that we roll back the
standards, and the Republican draft bill released last week makes
numerous steps backwards by making less nutritious foods available in
schools.
Another example of progress is the community eligibility provision.
Enacted in the 2010 reauthorization, the community eligibility
provision, or CEP, allows schools to provide free nutritious meals to
all students without using the paper applications when a large portion
of the students are deemed eligible because they are already receiving
certain social benefits.
Schools love this, teachers love this, families love it, and kids
love it. So why go backwards?
Again, unfortunately, the Republican bill does just that by making it
harder for schools to use CEP, kicking thousands of schools out of CEP
and back into the individualized paper application process.
So we are talking about a hugely popular option for schools that
improves the health of children, makes everyone's job easier. If it
ain't broke, don't fix it. And if it ain't broke, you shouldn't make a
special effort to try to break it.
Our work on reauthorization of our school nutrition programs
represents a great opportunity to continue to change the way children
eat, to expand their access to nutritious meals, and to end the child
hunger crisis in our Nation.
So we should ask ourselves if these are goals that we are willing to
compromise or whether we will continue on that path that has resulted
in healthier schools and communities.
The success of these programs are too many to mention, but it is my
hope that we will continue to build on our success and invest in the
future of our country.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to my friend from Ohio (Ms. Fudge), the ranking
member on the Subcommittee on Early Childhood, Elementary, and
Secondary Education.
Ms. FUDGE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. Speaker, more than 21 percent of American children live in
poverty. More than 15 million children live in food-insecure
households. In fact, households with children are more likely to be
food insecure than those without.
In my home State of Ohio, 16.9 percent of households experience food
insecurity, and Ohio's rate is higher than the national average of
14.3.
Programs that affect child nutrition, such as the National School
Lunch Program, the National School Breakfast Program, and the Summer
Food Service Program, are essential tools in the fight to end child
hunger.
Access to healthy foods during the school day and throughout summer
feeding programs is essential to helping children thrive both
academically and developmentally.
The Improving Child Nutrition and Education Act would increase the
burden on schools with new verification requirements and increased
community eligibility thresholds, or CEP.
I represent one of the Nation's most impoverished districts, with
nearly 200,000 people living in poverty. Out of 435 districts and the
District of Columbia, my district ranks 420th. Only 16 other districts
in the United States fare worse than mine.
If passed, the changes to CEP alone could result in children across
the country losing access to free and reduced-price meals at school,
and that is unacceptable, Mr. Speaker.
The bill fails to make critical investments in the summer meal
program. Meals served through the summer feeding program may be the
only ones some children have in a day.
If the sponsors of the bill truly wanted to improve child nutrition,
they would invest in summer meals to ensure eligible children do not go
hungry during the summer months.
As we move towards reauthorization, we must strengthen and expand
child nutrition programs. Our children's health and education are not
budget-saving gimmicks.
I firmly believe that any attempt to reauthorize child nutrition
programs must improve access to healthy foods year-round. This bill
does not even come close to meeting the minimum requirement.
We must engage in bipartisan conversations about how to best meet the
needs of all children.
I thank the gentleman for yielding.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentlewoman for her
comments.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr.
DeSaulnier), a hardworking member of the Committee on Education and the
Workforce.
Mr. DeSAULNIER. Mr. Speaker, it is a pleasure to rise in support of
my colleagues in urging the reauthorization of this act based on
nutritional value and investment in this country's future and our young
people.
Specifically, I want to take a minute to talk about the simultaneous
issues of extreme hunger and obesity in this country and in my home
State of California, which are nothing short of staggering.
Fourteen percent of people in California are food insecure. Twenty-
three percent of California's children are food insecure. In my
district, 14 percent of the total population is food insecure.
In the United States, three out of four public school teachers tell
us that students regularly come to class hungry. Eighty-one percent say
it happens at least once a week. Over 15 million American kids struggle
with hunger.
On the other hand, American kids who eat school breakfast miss less
school, get better grades, and are more likely to graduate from high
school.
At the same time, there is a childhood obesity epidemic in this
country. Childhood obesity has more than doubled in children and
quadrupled in adolescents in the past 30 years, according to the
Centers for Disease Control.
In 2012, more than one-third of children and adolescents were
overweight or obese. One in three children in California are currently
overweight or obese, according to the Pew Endowment Foundation.
Research shows that children living in States with strong school
nutrition standards are more likely to maintain healthier weights.
The estimated annual health costs of obesity-related illness in the
U.S. is a staggering $190.2 billion, or nearly 21 percent of annual
medical spending in the United States.
Childhood obesity alone is responsible for $14 billion in direct
medical costs. Ironically, the Federal Government spends $15 billion
every year on school food.
The work that we began with the Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act in 2010
is having an important and positive effect on both of these problems at
once.
School meal participants are less likely to have nutrient
inadequacies and are more likely to consume fruit, vegetables, and milk
at breakfast and lunch.
Low-income students who eat both school breakfast and lunch have
significantly better overall diet quality than low-income students who
do not eat school meals.
The school meal nutrition standards are having a positive impact on
student food selection and consumption, especially for fruits and
vegetables.
Few packed lunches and snacks brought from home meet National School
Lunch Program standards and Child and Adult Care Food Program
standards.
Children in after-school programs consume more calories, more salty
foods, and sugary foods on days that they bring their own snacks than
on days they only eat the afterschool snack provided by the National
School Lunch Program.
[[Page H2056]]
In California, I am pleased to say that we have figured it out for
the kids, for their parents, for the purveyors who provide all of this
healthy product, and for the students, the school administrators, and
rank-and-file staff who distribute these foods.
Over 93 percent of school districts nationwide have met the improved
lunch and breakfast standards, certifying them to receive Federally
authorized school lunch reimbursement rate increases.
In California, we exceed the national compliance rates with 100
percent of our schools currently in compliance.
These standards are going a long way toward decreasing the health
costs associated with malnutrition for both hungry and obese children.
We must double down on these efforts, not turn away from them. Our
children deserve at least this much from us.
I look forward to working with my colleagues on this effort.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from
Wisconsin (Ms. Moore), a strong child advocate.
Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for recognizing me. I
am really pleased to join the Ranking Member, Bobby Scott, a mentor of
mine and a good friend, Marcia Fudge, and others about the
reauthorization of school meals and the WIC program. They are truly
champions for ending hunger among children in this country.
And I believe no conversation could occur about hunger without having
the indomitable Mr. McGovern with us this evening.
Mr. Speaker, the Child Nutrition Reauthorization is really a critical
opportunity for us to talk about the importance of improving access to
healthy meals in schools and for maintaining strong nutrition
standards.
For too many kids, Mr. Speaker, the only sure meals that they can
count on on any given day are provided in school.
Yet, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the majority on the other side of
the aisle are talking about how to make it harder for children,
especially low-income children who are eligible for free and reduced-
price meals, breakfast and lunch, to access these programs.
We should be using this reauthorization to address known gaps and to
help children connect to these healthy meals. Nearly 10,000 more
schools offer school lunch than offer school breakfast programs, and we
should be trying to expand school breakfast rather than restricting
them.
The Healthy, Hunger-Free Act in the nationwide implementation of the
community eligibility program was so insightful. But, yet, we need to
do more. Over 162,000 kids in my State qualify for free or reduced
meals for lunch, and we need to reach them.
Now, what does the reauthorization that Republicans are bringing
before us entail? What does it talk about? It talks about scaling back
the successful and proven community eligibility provision which we just
implemented nationwide last year and really haven't scaled up to what
it could be.
This innovative program actually works. We have proven it. We have
metrics that prove that the program increases access and participation
for low-income students, and it helps to reduce administrative burdens
and costs for school staff.
Now, Mr. Speaker, you have heard my colleagues here talk about
obesity. Now, obesity is not just a cosmetic problem. It is a major
health problem.
We also last year put new nutrition standards in to ward off obesity.
Ninety-seven percent--97 percent--of the schools have successfully met
these new standards, and USDA has shown great eagerness to work with
those who have not.
Of course, these new requirements require more servings of fruits,
vegetables, whole grains, fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in schools
while cutting sodium-saturated fats and trans fats.
Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that, when you introduce these foods to
children at a young age, they will start to prefer them and we can
really transform their lives.
I want to skip over many of my comments and just add them to the
Record because I just want to focus on one little disease that is
associated with poor nutrition, and that is diabetes.
The burden to individuals and families is gargantuan. You hear of
people losing their limbs because of diabetes. But, Mr. Speaker, I want
to talk about the burden to the economy and to the budget by allowing
diabetes to run amok.
Diabetes is a budget-busting disease. It is an epidemic that is
affecting an increasing number of Americans, including more and more of
our youth.
Right now--right now--in 2014, 29 million people in the United
States, 9.3 percent of our population, have had diabetes. That is about
1 in 11 people. According to the CDC, by 2050, that number could be as
high as 100 million, or 1 in 3 persons.
{time} 1900
The time to stop this is now while we are reauthorizing the child
nutrition bill. We can help our children develop healthy eating habits.
I have seen kids love avocados, love grapes, and love these things that
are introduced to them while they are young. Our investment in school
lunch and school breakfast pales in comparison to the cost of treating
diabetes.
In 2012, diabetes and its related complications accounted for $245
billion in total costs. Now, that is $176 billion in direct medical
costs--think Medicaid and Medicare--and lost wages and work. The CDC
estimates that the growth in these--if their predictions hold, if we
don't do something, just think, this will go from 1 in 11 people having
diabetes to 1 in 3. So we are looking at 2050--2050, I don't think I am
going to be around in 2050--this is clearly a clarion call to feed our
children properly now.
In the school year 2016, we spent $12.5 billion on the school lunch
program and $4.3 billion on the school breakfast program. Compare that
with the $245 billion that we have spent on diabetes for just 1 year.
With that, I will add the rest of my comments to the Record. I would
just say, Mr. Scott and Mr. Speaker, that school breakfast, school
lunch, and WIC, it is a doggone good deal when you think about it.
Mr. Speaker, child nutrition reauthorization is a critical time for
us to talk about the importance of improving access to healthy foods in
schools, and for maintaining strong nutrition standards. For too many
kids, the only sure meals they can count on on a given day are the ones
provided in school.
Yet, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are talking about
how to make it harder for children, especially low-income children who
are eligible for free and reduced price meals, to access these
programs.
The draft Republican Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill is an
assault on the programs that help to ensure that our children and get
the nutrition they need to be active and engaged learners. A growling
stomach does not advance educational achievement. They want to roll
back programs that have been proven to help eligible children get
access to school breakfast and school lunch programs.
It is reportedly titled the ``Improving Child Nutrition and Education
Act of 2016'' but it really should be the ``Increasing Child Hunger and
Hobbling Education Act.''
We should be using child nutrition reauthorization to address know
gaps and help connect more children to healthy meals. Nearly 10,000
more schools offer school lunch than offer a school breakfast program.
Participation in school breakfast programs, though improving since the
enactment of the Healthy Hunger Free Act and the nationwide
implementation of CEP, still lags drastically behind participation in
the school lunch program. Only about half of students who eat school
lunch nationwide eat a school breakfast. My state of Wisconsin is at
the bottom when it comes to the number of schools that participate in
school breakfast nationwide. Over 162,000 kids that qualify for Free or
Reduced meals are eating lunch, but miss breakfast and Wisconsin loses
$22 million federal breakfast reimbursement dollars annually. We need
to be discussing how to help the states and schools do better.
Mr. Speaker, we just passed the Every Student Succeeds Act last year
reauthorizing federal elementary and secondary education policy. Let me
tell you, no child can succeed when they're hungry. Any teacher can
tell you that. So can a range of experts who have conducted studies on
this issue and found overwhelmingly that hunger does not promote
academic achievement.
So what are Republicans talking about doing in this reauthorization:
Scaling back the successful and proven Community Eligiblity Provision
(CEP) which just went into effect nationwide last year. This is an
innovative program authorized in 2010 that makes it easier for high
need schools and school districts to serve free meals to all students
by eliminating traditional free/reduced priced applications.
[[Page H2057]]
With all the rhetoric about wasteful government spending and
duplicative programs, what happens when we have successful and proven
federal programs and policies that work like CEP, like SNAP?
Republicans want to cut them and roll them back.
This program has been proven--I emphasize that word again--to
increase access and participation in the school meals programs for the
low-income students while helping to reduce administrative burdens and
costs for school staff. School meal programs benefit from the economics
of scale. The more kids who participate, the cheaper it is to serve
each child. Thousands of schools have adopted CEP and are seeing
benefits including the 156 schools in the Milwaukee Public School
system. In its first year, MPS reported serving 22% more school
breakfasts. School lunches also saw a gain. CEP means fewer kids are
going hungry in Milwaukee and nationwide.
Enacting the GOP bill would means that 7,000 schools that now
currently participate would be dropped. That is a gigantic step
backwards for the health and nutrition of tens of thousands, even
hundreds of thousands, of school children who are at key stages of
development, physically and academically.
Not to mention the students in thousands of schools currently
eligible to participate in CEP but would be kicked off under the
Republican bill.
We have put in place new nutrition standards for school meals--97% of
schools have successful met these new standards and the USDA has shown
great eagerness to work with those that have not to do so. These new
requirements require more servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains,
and fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in school meals while cutting
sodium, saturated fat and transfats.
Now, some are trying to block the new rules and the savings to our
nation both short term and long term for helping kids develop lifelong
healthy eating habits.
Let me just talk about the burden to individuals and taxpayers of
just one disease: diabetes--a budget busting disease. This is an
epidemic affecting an increasing number of Americans, including more
and more of our youth.
The number of Americans with diabetes is estimated to drastically in
the next three decades. In 2014, 29 million people in the U.S. (9.3
percent) had diabetes (about 1 in 11). According to the CDC, by 2050
that number could be as high as 100 Million Americans (or 1 in 3).
The time to stop this trend is right now when we can help our
children develop healthy eating habits that will stay with them for the
rest of their lives and a taste for healthy and nutritious foods
through the school nutrition programs.
I want to compare our investments in school lunch and breakfast
programs and helping to provide nutritious meals that will support
lifelong eating habits to young people with what it will cost us to
treat diabetes.
Diabetes is an extremely expensive condition for our healthcare
system given that it is associated with a number of complicated health
effects. In 2012, diabetes and its related complications accounted for
$245 billion in total costs, including $176 billion in direct medical
costs (think Medicaid and Medicare) and lost work and wages. If the CDC
estimates about the growth in cases holds, the cost of just this one
disease will grow dramatically over the next three decades. These costs
will be picked up by all of us, including through Medicare and
Medicaid.
In contrast, in FY 2016, we will spend $12.5 billion on the school
lunch program and $4.3 billion on the school breakfast program.
Maintaining healthy and nutrition meals and standards and ensuring that
all who are eligible can participate in these programs seems like a
very wise investment to me.
The GOP proposal would bar schools from including the eligibility
requirements for school meals on the school meal applications.
Absolutely absurd. What public policy purpose is served by such a
requirement other than to make sure people don't know about a benefit
to which they are entitled.
I also want to emphasize the need to further strengthen WIC during
this reauthorization. WIC works. That's what the research tells us. The
program helps improve health and nutrition outcomes for at risk women,
infants, and children. WIC breastfeeding rates are rising. We all know
the benefits of breastfeeding for both mother and child.
We can make WIC better by increasing the certification period for
infants and women, taking steps to ensure that children a better
transition by WIC eligible children from the program to the school
meals programs Under current law, children that age out of WIC may not
be enrolled in school (and participating the school meals programs),
risking gains to their health and well-being from having participated
in WIC.
How about making WIC work better for our men and women in uniform?
Yes, there are members of our military who receive WIC. In fact, I know
of efforts in the last year to close a WIC clinic located on a military
base in Washington State serving over 700 people including Navy
families.
There is room for bipartisanship. The Senate Agriculture Committee
reported a bipartisan bill--which while not perfect and I don't support
every element--reflects an honest effort to reach across the aisle that
is simply nonexistent in this chamber at this point.
And that is a shame. For the children who rely on the school meal
programs to meet their nutritional needs. For the schools and school
administrators who fight hard every day to put the students under their
charge in a position to succeed. For the American taxpayer, who expect
us to govern.
I know the will is there on this side of the aisle to work together
on things like increasing the breakfast (and lunch for that matter)
reimbursement rates. To support grant programs to help increase access
to school breakfast which remains woefully undersubscribed compared to
the school lunch program. We can provide grants to support innovative
and proven models such as Breakfast after the bell and in the Classroom
as well as school equipment grants to help offset some of the costs.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I thank the gentlewoman. The gentlewoman is
absolutely right.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr.
McGovern), who is one of our strongest advocates for ending hunger in
America.
Mr. McGOVERN. I want to thank my colleague from Virginia (Mr. Scott)
for organizing this today and for his leadership on child nutrition
programs. I want to thank all my colleagues for being here. This is an
important issue. There is no question about that.
We are here because we are outraged. We are outraged at Republican
attempts to undermine our child nutrition programs. We are outraged at
their lousy child reauthorization bill. It is a terrible, terrible,
terrible bill. My friends should be ashamed of this bill.
Mr. Speaker, a nutritious school meal is just as important to a
child's success in school as a textbook. Hungry children can't
concentrate. They can't focus on their studies. In short, hungry
children cannot learn. That is a fact. Everybody knows that. Yet we
have a bill that my Republican friends have drafted that will increase
hunger and that will actually take food out of the mouths of children.
It is outrageous.
Together, our child nutrition programs, WIC, school breakfast and
lunch, the Summer Food Service Program, and the Child and Adult Care
Food Program provide nutritional support for children year round in
places where they live, learn, and play.
Unfortunately, H.R. 5003, which is the Republican reauthorization
bill, includes a number of harmful provisions that would roll back
years of progress and hamper the ability of children to access healthy
meals. As I said, to be very blunt, it makes hunger worse in this
country.
Specifically, the bill would undermine the successful Community
Eligibility Provision, which some of my colleagues have talked about
first, included in the last reauthorization bill that has allowed high-
poverty school districts to offer universal school meals to all
students. In its first 2 years, CEP helped more than 8.5 million low-
income students access free meals.
Instead of building on the success of this program, my Republican
friends would severely restrict schools' eligibility for the community
eligibility option. The Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
estimates that 7,022 schools currently using community eligibility
would lose it under this Republican bill, and another 11,647 schools
that qualify for community eligibility but who have not yet adopted it
would be prevented from doing so in the future.
As we approach the summer months, it is also important to remember
that child hunger gets worse in the summer. Consider this: for every
six children who get a lunch in school each day, only one receives a
meal in the summertime. Instead of being a carefree time for children
who depend on getting healthy, reliable meals during the school year,
the summer months can be a time of stress, anxiety, and hunger. But it
doesn't have to be this way.
Unfortunately, this Republican bill cuts the successful summer EBT
pilot program which provides a temporary boost in food assistance
benefits during the summer months for families whose
[[Page H2058]]
children receive free school meals during the school year, and it fails
to make necessary investments to expand the reach of summer food
service programs so that more kids have access to healthy summer meals
in their neighborhoods.
In addition, Mr. Speaker, this bill rolls back, as my colleagues have
mentioned, evidence-based standards that make school meals healthier.
USDA estimates that more than 90 percent of schools have successfully--
have successfully--implemented these standards.
My grandmother used to say to me when I was growing up that an apple
a day keeps the doctor away. I wish she was still alive so I could tell
her she was right. Food is medicine. When we eat good food, we eat
nutritious food, we tend to have healthy lives. If you eat bad food, if
you eat junk food, then you end up getting health issues like diabetes,
like high blood pressure, and like obesity. I could go on and on and
on.
Why in the world would anybody want to lower the nutrition standards
in our school meals to give our kids junkier, less nutritious food?
What sense does that make?
If my colleagues who are advocating these reversals of smart policy
are doing so only because they want to save a few dollars, then let me
tell you something: you are saving nothing.
If we don't get this right, if we don't insist that our kids have
access to nutritious, healthier food, the medical costs associated with
the health challenges that they will experience are astronomical, as my
colleague from Wisconsin mentioned earlier, hundreds of billions of
dollars in avoidable healthcare costs as a result of children not
having access to good food.
Mr. Speaker, 15 million children face hunger in this country. Instead
of undoing the success we have already achieved, Congress should be
focused on ways we can strengthen these vital child nutrition programs.
Mr. Speaker, let me say, finally, it is hard for me to understand why
we have to be here today, why everything is a fight when it comes to
dealing with issues of hunger and when it comes to dealing with issues
and making sure our kids get access to good nutrition. It is always a
fight. It is always a fight to protect so many vital food and nutrition
programs that help our kids. There is either a shocking ignorance about
the reality of the poverty that millions of our children face in this
country or there is simply indifference. Those are the only two ways I
can explain what is going on in this Chamber. Whichever one it is, it
is a sad excuse for what my Republican friends are trying to do.
Let's come together. This should be a bipartisan issue. There was a
time when fighting hunger and when making sure that our kids had access
to nutritious food was a bipartisan issue. George McGovern and Bob Dole
worked together in the 1970s to strengthen our food and nutrition
programs. But now in this Chamber these issues have become
controversial.
It is sad because there are a lot of people in this country who are
depending on us to find ways to end hunger in America. They are
depending on us to make sure that their kids, when they go to school,
have access to nutritious food, and that they have access to nutritious
food during the summer months as well.
Why are my friends making it so difficult?
Enough. Enough of this. Stop beating up on the most vulnerable people
in this country. Let's come together. Let's reject this awful draft of
the Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill. Let's come together and do
this right. It is the least we can do.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I thank the gentleman for all of his advocacy
on ending hunger.
Mr. Speaker, I now yield to the gentleman from California (Mr.
Takano), an effective member of the Committee on Education and the
Workforce.
Mr. TAKANO. I thank the ranking member. I appreciate the time
allotted.
Mr. Speaker, in my 24 years as a public schoolteacher, I learned a
lot about helping students reach their potential. I learned about
project-based learning and STEM education, and I learned about the
importance of arts and music in keeping students engaged and excited.
But I also learned that there is no lesson plan or study guide that can
improve a student's performance if they are hungry. Good nutrition is
the foundation to a good education.
With that experience in mind, I rise to express my frustration and
sadness with the Republicans' proposal to reauthorize the so-called
Improving Child Nutrition and Education Act. The draft bill published
last week includes several provisions that would restrict students'
access to nutritious food, particularly children in America's poorest
neighborhoods.
The proposal undermines nutritional standards for schools despite
those standards receiving overwhelming support from pediatricians and
public health officials. It weakens a popular program designed to give
poor students access to fresh fruits and vegetables in communities
where they are scarce, and it increases the burden on poor families to
prove that their children are eligible for lunch programs.
But the impact of these provisions is mild compared to what
Republicans are proposing to do with CEP, or the Community Eligibility
Provision. CEP streamlines National School Breakfast and Lunch Programs
by automatically enrolling students who live in areas with high rates
of poverty. It was passed with bipartisan support just 6 years ago and
it is responsible for feeding more than 3 million students every year.
Now Republicans are seeking to change the CEP formula to kick many
poor communities out of the program. Their goal is to save money by
allowing fewer students to enroll in breakfast and lunch programs. Not
only is this bad policy that will hurt student performance in low-
income schools, it is cruel. In my district alone, this would affect
more than 6,000 students. Nationwide it will severely damage a program
that is critical to both fighting child poverty and closing the
achievement gap in education.
There is a troubling asymmetry to conservatives' approach to
spending. When it comes to tax cuts for large businesses that cost this
country billions of dollars, conservatives are generous with taxpayer
money. But when it comes to hungry students in America's poorest
communities, that is when it is time to cut back. That is when it is
time to be stingy. That is when they turn their backs on people in
need.
Earlier this week, Speaker Ryan said that conservatism is just a
happy way of life. This brand of conservatism is not a happy way of
life for thousands of hungry children who will lose access to food at
school. It is not a happy life for the parents of those children who
are struggling every day to provide for them, and it is not a happy
life for the generation of students who do not have the foundation to
reach their potential.
Who could be happy when so many Americans are suffering?
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. I thank the gentleman, Mr. Takano. I thank the
gentleman for his leadership on the committee.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentlewoman from California (Ms. Lee),
the leader of the Democratic Whip's Task Force on Poverty, Income
Inequality, and Opportunity.
Ms. LEE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the ranking member for yielding and
also for his long-term and longstanding commitment to child nutrition
programs and to our Nation's children.
I have to say to Mr. Takano that I am not happy at all, and I don't
think many of us are happy at what is taking place with regard to this
Improving Child Nutrition Education Act and what is happening to our
children who many go to bed hungry at night. So I thank the gentleman
very much for his leadership.
Let me just say to Mr. Scott, who is our ranking member, it is very
important that we recognize the gentleman's leadership and know that he
is on this committee fighting each and every day to make sure that this
reauthorization bill, which would take food out of mouths of American
schoolchildren, does not do that. So I thank the gentleman for his
fight on the committee.
Let me say just a couple of things with regard to H.R. 5003. It would
turn the clock back on years of progress and prevent children from
eating healthy meals every day. This Republican child nutrition bill
would roll back critical, evidence-based nutrition standards made in
the 2010 reauthorization bill,
[[Page H2059]]
which we were very actively involved with.
Sadly, but unsurprisingly, it would also deny eligible children
access to the Free or Reduced Price School Meals Program, and it would
slash funding for some electronics benefits transfer.
{time} 1915
I just have to say that as a young, single mother on public
assistance and food stamps, I don't know what I would have done had my
children not had school lunches. This was a bridge over troubled waters
for me, and my children and I have to thank my government for that
helping hand. But today, in 2016, this bill will roll back these
programs, which means more hungry kids in our schools and in our
neighborhoods.
That is why several of us are sending a letter to the Education and
the Workforce Committee outlining our deep concerns with the changes to
our child nutrition programs. I hope that everyone on our side of the
aisle signs this important letter, and I hope that the majority will
read it carefully. It lays out some of the basic problems in this bill.
We want to make sure that everyone on the committee and this entire
body understands the impact of what this will cause.
When we take away access to these meals, we jeopardize children's
health, their educational attainment, and, really, their future. We
know that children who have access to healthy meals are more likely to
do well in school, have decreased behavioral problems, and come to
class ready to learn. That is what we should want for all of our
children.
For the children growing up in high-poverty neighborhoods and who
lack equal access to healthy meals, these school meals really are a
lifeline. We are not just talking about a few students. The numbers are
clear. More than 15.3 million children are living in food-insecure
households. Let me say that again. More than 15 million kids are at
risk of going to bed hungry every night in America, the richest and
most powerful country in the world.
We also know that childhood hunger is far from colorblind. Children
of color are disproportionately affected by hunger every day. For
example, in 2014, one in three African American children and one in
four Latino children were food insecure. For children who live in rural
communities, food insecurity is coupled with other barriers, like lack
of access to transportation to get to summer feeding sites. More than
17 percent of rural households--that is 3.3 million households--are
food insecure.
Child hunger and the lack of nutritious food is a problem that
affects every child in every ZIP Code. It is endemic in our country, in
rural, urban, and suburban schools. Every Member of Congress has
constituents who are hungry. This should be a priority for all of us.
I have seen the impact of food insecurity in my own community in
Oakland, California, where one in four children at the Oakland Unified
School District do not have access to affordable, nutritious food.
These families are forced to make impossible choices to feed their
children, especially during the summer months when schools are closed.
These families are making decisions every day between food and
medicine, food and rent, or food and paying the electric bill.
Mr. Speaker, we need real solutions to these very real problems. Let
me just mention my legislation, the Half in Ten Act, H.R. 258, that
would develop a national strategy to cut poverty in half over the next
decade. That is more than 23 million Americans lifted out of poverty
and into the middle class in just the next 10 years.
This bill that we are talking about tonight goes just the opposite
way. Surely, we can all recognize that ensuring healthy meals for
American children is the first step in this ongoing War on Poverty. It
should not be a partisan issue. Feeding hungry kids is a moral
imperative.
So let's put our children first, and let's strengthen our child
nutrition programs rather than cut them. Our children deserve the
security of knowing where their next meal is coming from. That is just
basic. It is a basic American value.
Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Scott for his leadership and thank
him for yielding.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank Ms. Lee for all of her
hard work on the task force.
Mr. Speaker, I yield to the gentleman from California (Mr. Cardenas),
a Member who has been fighting for children as a member of the State
legislature, a member of the Los Angeles City Council, and now is a
Member of Congress.
Mr. CARDENAS. Mr. Speaker, I thank Congressman Scott for working so
hard and tirelessly to fight for those young little voices and those
families that need food in their children's stomachs every single day.
It is a tireless battle; and once again, today, we are trying to make
people aware of the disingenuous, misguided efforts that are in this
bill. I rise today to express concern over harmful provisions included
in the so-called Improving Child Nutrition and Education Act of 2016.
In 2014, more than 17 million American households were at risk of
going without having food, including 3.7 million households with
American children. We should make every effort possible to help
American children access the proper nutrition that is vital to their
growth, development, and success in school and beyond.
The provisions outlined in this bill are doing just the opposite by
tampering with programs that have been working well, such as the
Community Eligibility Provision, the process that ensures that meals
can be served to American children in schools. The provisions in this
bill will cause too many American children, especially low-income
children, to lose access to these vital programs and to have healthier
meals.
The Community Eligibility Provision allows high-poverty school
districts to offer universal school meals to all students. This bill
raises bureaucratic red tape. It will only lead to fewer schools
qualifying for the program and more low-income American children going
hungry every single day.
Why add burdensome paperwork on school districts and each and every
family in them? Instead, Congress should focus on improving and
expanding direct certification, an approach that has been shown to
improve program integrity.
What this bill should be doing is addressing the barriers faced by
eligible families who are currently not even accessing the benefits of
the results of these programs because of the lack of awareness. This
bill will freeze the progress that we have made on reducing the intake
of salts for American children in their food diets. It would allow junk
food to be an acceptable snack, which would undermine our children's
health and their entire future.
We must do more to improve school nutrition, attack undernourishment,
and combat hunger for millions of American children because, otherwise,
we are robbing them of the opportunity to reach their full potential
both physically and academically.
Once again, I want to thank my colleague from the great State of
Virginia for all the wonderful work that he has been doing and for
being so tireless in his effort to make sure that the voices of these
families and these children are heard not only in the Education and the
Workforce Committee, but beyond.
Thank you for bringing the attention of this to the floor. I am glad
to be a partner in this effort.
Mr. SCOTT of Virginia. Mr. Speaker, I thank Mr. Cardenas very much
for his hard work, too.
Mr. Speaker, reauthorization is an opportunity to improve
legislation. Unfortunately, the pending Republican bill reduces
nutrition standards and kicks kids off the school meal programs.
Instead, we should be improving the program and expanding the child
nutrition and the school lunch programs.
I thank my colleagues for saying why this is so important.
I yield back the balance of my time.
____________________