[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 149 (2003), Part 21]
[House]
[Pages 29566-29570]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




MOTION TO INSTRUCT CONFEREES ON H.R. 2660, DEPARTMENTS OF LABOR, HEALTH 
AND HUMAN SERVICES, AND EDUCATION, AND RELATED AGENCIES APPROPRIATIONS 
                               ACT, 2004

  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I offer a motion to 
instruct.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The Clerk will report the motion.
  The Clerk read as follows:

       Mr. Kennedy of Rhode Island moves that the managers on the 
     part of the House at the conference on the disagreeing votes 
     of the two Houses on the bill, H.R. 2660, be instructed to 
     insist on the highest funding levels possible for nutrition 
     programs for our nation's seniors as authorized by the Older 
     Americans Act.

  The SPEAKER pro tempore. Pursuant to clause 7 of rule XXII, the 
gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) and the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Regula) each will control 30 minutes.
  The Chair recognizes the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Today I rise to offer a motion to instruct the House conferees on the 
2004 Labor, HHS and Education appropriations bill to insist on the 
highest level of funding possible for nutrition programs for seniors, 
programs such as Meals on Wheels and congregated meal sites.
  As I rise this evening, I want to thank the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Regula) and the gentleman from Wisconsin (Mr. Obey), who are both 
leaders on the Labor-HHS-Education subcommittee and who both know how 
important these programs are. I want to thank them for their hard work 
year in and year out to protect these programs so vital to our senior 
citizens.
  This week we are debating controversial legislation, as Members have 
just no doubt heard, on the floor about the future of the Medicare 
system and the importance of providing a drug benefit without forcing 
seniors into HMOs. But the importance of that debate will be left to 
another time. Tonight we are in agreement when it comes to the 
importance of senior nutrition programs, and this truly is a bipartisan 
issue.
  I know that most Members of this Chamber have often visited their 
senior centers and know, having spoken to them, how important it is 
that they receive these congregated meals. Tonight, this is an 
opportunity to put our

[[Page 29567]]

money where our mouth is, and it is an actual opportunity to encourage 
our conferees to spend the money on senior nutrition. Even in spite of 
the fact that we have tight budgets, we cannot give senior citizens 
short shrift.
  As I said, Members know about these programs, but I do not know how 
many of them truly appreciate their magnitude and reach. I would 
encourage those colleagues of mine who have not been out on a Meals on 
Wheels visit to go out with a volunteer and visit the people for whom 
these programs help make a difference. Nearly 2 million people receive 
meals through the congregated meal site program and 1 million through 
the Meals on Wheels program. This adds up to a total of 250 million 
actual meals served. That is a compelling statistic that reflects the 
nature of these programs.
  My father, Senator Edward Kennedy, was the author of the legislation 
that made the seniors' nutrition programs part of the Older Americans 
Act. I am proud that my father, Senator Edward Kennedy, was responsible 
for the founding of Meals on Wheels. What he and others of his 
colleagues have recognized over 30 years is that Meals on Wheels is an 
important program not only for the nutrition that it brings but also 
because of the companionship and the neighbor-to-neighbor relationship 
that it fosters. For many seniors, not only at the home is delivered a 
meal but a face with that meal, a person, someone who can offer 
companionship and friendship and know what is going on in the home when 
they arrive and deliver the meal. The value of these meals pays itself 
back in both the importance of good nutrition and also through the 
companionship and care that these meal volunteers provide.
  We talk in Congress about how an ounce of prevention is worth a pound 
of cure. That is nowhere more true than the Meals on Wheels and the 
congregated meal site programs. In the congregated meal site programs, 
seniors get together at the senior centers to join in lunch; but in the 
process of doing that, they are exposed to an array of social services 
that may also be of assistance to them. Unfortunately, as many of us 
know in our Nation, one in 10 seniors lives in poverty. At the same 
time, there is expected to be a 30 percent increase in the number of 
Americans eligible for the Older Americans Act now that the baby boom 
generation is becoming the senior boom generation. Already in my State 
of Rhode Island, 14.5 percent of our population is 65 or older. We need 
to be ready for this population as it retires. We need to be ready for 
them as we take care of the seniors of today.
  Finally, Mr. Speaker, before I turn it over to my colleagues, let me 
say, I have met Edna Bateman in one of my tours on a senior meal site. 
Edna Bateman is from East Providence, Rhode Island, and she knows what 
a difference it has made to her in her life not only to get that hot 
meal but also to have that companionship, that visitor every day that 
she is looking forward to seeing, who she wakes up every morning 
looking forward to talking to, who she unlocks her door and leaves it 
open so that she looks forward to hearing that Meals on Wheels 
volunteer coming to her door.
  That is why I rise tonight to make sure more people like Edna Bateman 
get the services like this Meals on Wheels program. I want to pay 
tribute to her and the many others who receive this program. Tonight I 
know we all rise in support of those folks.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, the gentleman from Rhode Island has described many of 
the values of this program. He is a very valued member of our 
subcommittee. As he well knows, we have done all we could for this 
program within the constraints of the Budget Act. It is a great 
program. I think one of the benefits that probably was not mentioned is 
it gives a lot of people in communities a sense of participation 
because these meals are delivered by volunteers in most cases if not 
all. That means that those in the community who are doing this service 
realize that they are helping the seniors. It gives them an 
understanding, but most importantly, of course, as the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) described, it is very important to the 
beneficiaries of the program.
  As has been mentioned, it is not only the nutrition and that is 
important. Seventy-nine percent of the individuals that are recipients 
have a high nutritional risk and the Meals on Wheels ensures that they 
will get, at least as much as possible, a balanced diet which obviously 
will contribute to their health.
  We were earlier debating some aspects of the Medicare reform bill and 
the prescription drug change. I think that bill does more on preventive 
medicine than has been the case in the past. An item such as requiring 
that those who go on Medicare must first have a medical examination to 
see if they have any problems, that will now be covered by Medicare. I 
think that is a great provision. But part of preventive medicine is 
having a nutritious diet. The Older Americans Act nutrition programs 
serve that purpose. As was mentioned, over 270 million meals to almost 
3 million people that benefit. They benefit in a congregate setting and 
also as individuals in their homes.
  What it does is allow people to stay in their homes for a longer 
period of time. In my discussion with seniors, they want to stay at 
home as long as possible. They do not want to be institutionalized. 
Meals on Wheels affords them that privilege. I wish we could do more. I 
wish the budget numbers that were provided to our subcommittee were 
larger, but we have a lot of challenges in the Labor-H subcommittee. We 
have the challenges of funding the research at the National Institutes 
of Health. We have the challenges of funding the Centers for Disease 
Control; that has a new dimension because of 9/11. We have the 
challenge of providing good education to ensure that no child is left 
behind. We have the challenge in the Labor Department of providing 
services to those that are unemployed so that they can get back into 
employment. We have some tough policy decisions that we have to make.
  We do put a lot of money into the Older Americans Act. I and all of 
us wish it could be more, but we have to balance out the needs of the 
seniors and the Meals on Wheels programs with education, health 
research and so on. But on balance this is good preventive medicine, to 
provide for nutritious meals. It also, as was mentioned, is very 
important for their social well-being. The fact that somebody is going 
to come to their home once a day for 5 days a week, it gives them a 
sense of being a part of the community. Because these people that are 
delivering these Meals on Wheels are volunteers, most of them have some 
time that they can stop and visit a little bit with the clients. I 
think that adds to their well-being and adds to their ability to be 
comfortable in their home setting.
  Another feature of this that we do not fully appreciate is that the 
Meals on Wheels leverages a lot of other sources. It leverages the 
State funds. In the case of the Native Americans, it leverages tribal 
funds. It leverages local funds and Federal moneys and other 
subcommittees of appropriations. These total contributions of matching 
funds more than exceed what we put into the program in our bill. That 
is a very positive thing that we do--leverage these funds.
  I think for this reason I have no objection to this motion to 
instruct. I wish we could do more, but we are limited in the total 
resources that are available as we make the priority choices among many 
very fine programs. We have in constructing this bill held the numbers 
that can be available for the Meals on Wheels, the Older Americans Act 
at the highest level possible within the constraints of the resources 
that are provided to our subcommittee.
  Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, it is my pleasure to yield 
6 minutes to the gentleman from Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) who 
represents Cape Cod and the islands.

[[Page 29568]]



                              {time}  2300

  Mr. DELAHUNT. Mr. Speaker, I would like to thank my colleague from 
New England for his leadership in this very important issue. He 
certainly has inherited a legacy from his father, and those of us from 
Massachusetts are proud not only of our senior Senator but his son, his 
youngest son.
  As cochair of the House Older Americans Caucus, along with, of 
course, the chairman of the committee who has established a reputation 
for compassion and for concern for the elderly in this country, I too 
rise in strong support of this motion because I share their belief that 
Congress must fund senior nutrition programs at the highest levels 
authorized by the Older Americans Act. The conferees should support the 
funding levels set forth in the House conference report.
  First, the health of our seniors depends on full funding of nutrition 
programs. It has been clearly established in study after study that 
poor eating habits can lead to serious medical problems for aging 
adults, including the early onset of chronic diseases that inevitably 
escalate the cost of health care here in this country. Frail and 
homebound adults benefit enormously from the prepared meals supplied by 
organizations such as Meals on Wheels. Indeed, that one meal can 
provide half of their total nutritional requirements for the day. That 
fact is truly significant when one considers that nearly 3 million 
seniors benefitted from nutritional programs and services last year.
  In my home State of Massachusetts, over 50,000 seniors rely on 
congregate and home-delivered meals each year, as well as the 
nutritional screenings and counseling authorized by the legislation. 
Accordingly, the programs that we are talking about deliver, literally, 
on our goal to meet the nutritional needs of older Americans.
  Secondly, our commitment to provide the highest level of funding for 
these activities makes sense economically and produces substantial 
savings to the American taxpayer. Through these investments we are 
saving costs in the long term, as I alluded to earlier, along with the 
references by those who spoke previously. With home meal delivery, 
seniors can live independently for longer periods. Furthermore, studies 
show that these services also prevent costly hospitalizations resulting 
from nutritional deficiencies and social isolation. That translates 
into a substantial savings to the American taxpayer.
  Third, I believe, as others have suggested, that the intangible 
aspects of these programs provide an incredible benefit to our 
communities and enhance a sense of community, not only to those that 
receive directly these benefits, but to those who provide them. For 
some individuals, the volunteer knocking at their door may be the only 
visitor of the day. So in simple human terms, we cannot underestimate 
the value that this single interaction may have for an elderly person, 
many of whom are female, many of whom are widowed, many of whom live 
alone. And it should not go unstated that tragically in this country, 
many of our seniors, a disproportionate share of our seniors when 
compared to the rest of the population, suffer from chronic depression. 
So let me suggest that this is a point where government and 
compassionate conservatism should intercept.
  Finally, I would like to commend all those who volunteer to keep 
these programs running. In my district, many of these individuals are 
themselves active seniors. For all these reasons, I strongly support 
these neighborhood organizations working to strengthen the connection 
between seniors and their communities. So in recognition of their hard 
work, as well as the needs of elderly Americans, I urge the conferees 
to adopt the House language that was crafted by the gentleman from Ohio 
and fund senior nutrition programs at the highest level. And, again, 
let me applaud the great work of the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. 
Kennedy), Massachusetts and Rhode Island's native son.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman from 
Massachusetts (Mr. Delahunt) for his comments.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 4 minutes to the gentlewoman from Nevada (Ms. 
Berkley).
  Ms. BERKLEY. Mr. Speaker, as a cochairman of the Older Americans 
Caucus, I rise tonight in support of the gentleman from Rhode Island's 
(Mr. Kennedy) motion to instruct the conferees of the Labor, Health and 
Human Services, and Education Appropriations bill to provide full 
funding for vital seniors' nutrition programs.
  Over the next 5 years, the number of Americans eligible to take part 
in programs under the Older Americans Act will rise by 25 percent as 
the Baby Boom generation reaches retirement age. As the number of 
seniors in the United States grows, it is vitally important that 
nutrition programs are fully funded.
  In my home State of Nevada, over 20,000 seniors are served millions 
of meals annually at the senior centers, schools, and in their own 
homes. In just the past 5 years, the Meals on Wheels program in 
southern Nevada, which has the Nation's fastest growing seniors 
population, has grown from serving 350 homebound clients to over 1,000 
today.
  As the senior population rapidly grows, the senior services in Las 
Vegas are striving to keep up with the expanding demand. The Meals on 
Wheels program in southern Nevada continues to develop innovative ways 
to handle the growth and widen their service base to more seniors. For 
instance, one driver delivers a week's worth of frozen meals once a 
week to a seniors' home in Las Vegas instead of one hot meal a day.
  For a senior who is disabled or lives alone, a hot meal delivered to 
their home or served in a local senior center is invaluable to their 
well-being and may be the only way that the older Americans are assured 
that they receive the nutrition that they need to stay healthy. This is 
especially true for those seniors living under the poverty level. In 
2002 the national average of seniors living in poverty was 10 percent. 
I am sorry to say that in my district 14.6 percent of the seniors are 
living below the poverty level. For these seniors, assistance in 
getting healthy meals is critical to their health and their well-being.
  Not only are seniors grateful for the comfort of a hot meal, but a 
study of the Elderly Nutrition Program found that senior participants 
have a higher daily intake of key nutrients that seniors who do not 
participate in the nutrition programs have. Funding Meals on Wheels and 
other programs not only ensures adequate nutrition but also provides an 
important link to supportive in-home and community-based services and 
empowers seniors to remain self-sufficient in their own homes. The 
drivers for Meals on Wheels in southern Nevada, all of whom are retired 
seniors themselves, not only provide meals but are a critical link to 
the community for many of the seniors that they serve.
  I want to thank the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) for his 
leadership in offering this motion and the gentleman from Ohio (Mr. 
Regula) for his support. I urge my colleagues to support full funding 
for the Nation's senior nutrition programs as a way to ensure the good 
health and a better quality of life for seniors in Nevada and 
nationwide.
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I reserve the balance of my time.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the 
gentlewoman from California (Mrs. Capps).

                              {time}  2310

  Mrs. CAPPS. Mr. Speaker, I thank my colleague, the gentleman from 
Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) for his leadership on this motion to 
instruct conferees for full funding for senior nutrition programs and 
to note that it is a second generation to take leadership in this area. 
I commend, also, the chairman of the committee, the gentleman from Ohio 
(Mr. Regula), for his leadership in senior issues and the Older 
Americans Act.
  Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of this motion because it is just at 
the bottom of our priorities that we pay attention

[[Page 29569]]

to senior nutrition. Very few images are more upsetting and unsettling 
to any of us to think of our parents and our grandparents, our 
neighbors, and the elderly going without proper nutrition. 
Unfortunately, too many seniors live in poverty in our communities and 
must struggle daily to get the food they need. This is unacceptable and 
that is the reason for the passage of the Older Americans Act and its 
reauthorization.
  And here we are struggling with the fact that our Federal budget and 
our appropriation process in this hallowed body is really a reflection 
of our values as Americans as people, with mothers and fathers, and 
children and neighbors, and a responsibility to care for those who have 
cared for us. That is the way this world runs when it is run according 
to the highest values which we espouse.
  Yes, budgets are tight, but we do make priorities. And I am here to 
agree with my colleague, the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy) 
that our older Americans ought to be a priority. It is such an honor to 
represent a community and communities in my district, as we all do, to 
visit among the people who make this program come to life. We fund the 
Older Americans Act. We fund programs that allow Meals on Wheels to 
exist. And when we see them at work in the communities, these programs 
that are run by volunteers, that leverage our precious few dollars and 
make those dollars stretch, I cannot believe the quality food that is 
prepared on the budgets that we give them, that they get volunteer 
donations, the drivers are so committed, their routes mean so much to 
them, that knock on the door is life-giving to the person who resides 
on the other side. For some it is their single connection to the 
outside world. It is food but it is so much more than food.
  Now, I just implore all of us here in this body to take seriously our 
responsibility to fund this legislation at the proper amount that will 
do justice to our reasons for being here.
  Mr. KENNEDY. Mr. Speaker, I would like to take a second and just 
acknowledge the wonderful comments of my colleague, the gentlewoman 
from California (Mrs. Capps) who so beautifully encapsulated the reason 
we are here tonight speaking on behalf of this knowledge.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield 3 minutes to the gentleman from Oregon (Mr. 
DeFazio).
  Mr. DeFAZIO. Mr. Speaker, I am perhaps the only Member of the House 
of Representatives who has trained in the field of gerontology, run a 
senior citizen program, perhaps someone else has, and actually gone 
with volunteers, delivered meals in homes, supervised volunteers who 
delivered meals in homes, and spent a lot of time at congregate meal 
sites.
  Let me tell my colleagues this: If any motion to instruct should be 
nonpolitical and should receive the unanimous support of this body, 
that should actually be respected by the group negotiating the 
compromise here, it is this one, to provide the highest possible 
levels.
  Now, the President, unfortunately, proposed to actually cut funding 
for Meals on Wheels. Now, he has a lot of ideas about people replacing 
government programs and that. This is essentially a nongovernmental 
program. It depends tremendously upon volunteers and community 
assistance and a lot of locally generated contributions matched with a 
little bit of Federal funds to leaven the mix. And the President's cut 
would have eliminated this program for many.
  A lot of seniors, this is the only person they are going to see in a 
day. They are shut in. The only person they are going to see is the 
person that brings them that hot meal. It helps them stay connected to 
the community. It gives them a little bit of socialization. It allows 
people to know that they are doing okay in their homes. There are not a 
lot of other systems or places to do that. Many of them who I visited 
with on Friday get very nervous and they cry on Mondays when they see 
the people coming again. Over the weekend, they have the frozen meals 
and they had something to eat, but they did not see anybody. They were 
shut in.
  Mr. Speaker, to cut this program as the President has proposed would 
be a tremendous disservice to those who have given so much to our 
country over so many productive years and now just need a little bit of 
help to stay in their homes in their later years, the congregate meal 
sites, to visit those, and the vitality of our senior citizens in later 
years. It is inspiring to me many times when I go and I hear and I see 
as I visit the congregate meal sites. But, again, it is also a 
tremendous socialization experience.
  So this House could do no better than to unanimously adopt this, but 
not only unanimously adopt this. We vote on an awful lot of motions to 
instruct here that are immediately tossed in the trash can by the 
negotiators. I would hope that this would be one motion that is 
respected, where we deliver and where we give back a little bit to our 
seniors who gave so much to us, our grandparents, our great 
grandparents and others. The greatest generation deserves better than a 
cut in the programs that are helping the most fragile and vulnerable of 
them.
  Mr. REGULA. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, just briefly, I think for those that have listened to 
this debate tonight, as a society we can take pride in this program of 
the Older Americans Act. And I might add one that has not been 
discussed yet is the Caregivers Program which is also in our 
subcommittee to help people gain the knowledge of how to provide care 
to their elderly relatives, family, and so on in the home setting. All 
of this adds up to a real effort to allow those who want to stay in 
their homes to do so. And in the House bill, we can increase the amount 
over last year. And we will be very mindful of the thrust of this 
instruction as we negotiate with the other body in a final number.
  But, again, I would say that as Americans we can take pride in what 
we have done, I think in the Older Americans Act, to allow people to 
stay in their home, to allow people to have some social contact with 
the other members of their community, to allow the volunteers who want 
to help others to have this opportunity. So we certainly support the 
motion to instruct. And as a conferee, I will do all that I can to urge 
that we do get the highest possible number within the constraints of 
priorities that we have in the bill and the constraints of the 
allocation that we started with originally.
  Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of my time.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I yield myself such time as 
I may consume.
  Mr. Speaker, I want to thank the chairman of the committee, the 
gentleman from Ohio (Mr. Regula) who is chairman of the Labor Health 
and Human Services and Education Subcommittee of the Committee on 
appropriations on which I serve. I want to join him in saying that I 
think we need to do a lot more within the Older Americans Act, not only 
in the congregate meal site and the Meals on Wheels, but, as you 
pointed out, the support for family members, many of them I know that 
you understand are burning out because they do not have the support 
that they need to care for their loved ones.
  As the chairman has said so well, often the greatest number of 
caregivers in this country are seniors themselves. And they are caring 
for their loved ones, and they need to have all the support they can 
get too. So I thank the chairman for acknowledging that. We need to 
look out for the caregivers, as well, if we care about those that they 
are caring for. I appreciate the fact that he made that observation.
  With that, Mr. Speaker, let me just, once again, say that I rise in 
support of this motion to instruct conferees, to see it to the highest 
possible level when it comes to nutrition programs, Meals on Wheels, 
and congregate meal site programs within the conference report.
  Ms. ROYBAL-ALLARD. Mr. Speaker, I rise in support of the Kennedy 
motion to instruct conferees to the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations 
bill to insist on the highest funding levels for senior nutrition 
programs.
  All of us know that the Labor-HHS-Education Appropriations bill 
contains many of the

[[Page 29570]]

most worthwhile programs administered by the federal government, and 
nutrition programs for seniors are just one example.
  As a new member of this subcommittee, I was impressed by the 
testimony from the Administration on Aging outlining the enormous good 
that these programs accomplish each year. Although Chairman Regula has 
often reminded us of the need to comply with budget restrictions, I 
believe he and the Republican members of the subcommittee know the 
importance of increasing funding for these programs each year in order 
to keep pace with inflation and to make progress in providing meals to 
additional seniors.
  In California, with an estimated population of over 35 million 
people, over 4 million people are 65 years or over. These seniors are 
served over 11 million home-based meals through Older Americans Act 
programs, and another 9 million congregate meals are served.
  These statistics are testament to the enormous leveraging effect that 
federal nutrition programs accomplish. As testimony by the 
Administration on Aging reveals, 44 percent of the cost of a congregate 
meal and 29 percent of the cost of a home-delivered meal comes from 
Older Americans Act funds--the balance comes from state, community and 
private contributions.
  Unfortunately, the demand still exceeds these combined federal and 
local community efforts. The need for these programs is undisputed. In 
fact, testimony from the Administration on Aging reveals that 41 
percent of home-delivered nutrition programs and 9 percent of 
congregate nutrition programs have waiting lists for services. On 
average, local programs had 85 seniors on a home-delivered meals 
waiting list with a wait time of nearly 3 months. On average, local 
programs had 52 seniors on a congregate meals waiting list with a wait 
time of about 2 months.
  As the evidence indicates, I believe it is important that we strive 
to make incremental progress every year to support the goal of adequate 
nutrition for seniors by eliminating the waiting lists and providing 
meals to all seniors who need then.
  The differences between the House and Senate bills with regard to 
senior meals may appear small--about 4 million dollars out of a total 
of over $700 million for senior nutrition services. But we know these 
dollars make an enormous difference in the lives of so many seniors.
  I urge my colleagues to support the Kennedy motion so we can make 
progress again this year.
  Mr. KENNEDY of Rhode Island. Mr. Speaker, I yield back the balance of 
my time.

                              {time}  2320

  The SPEAKER pro tempore (Mr. Bishop of Utah). Without objection, the 
previous question is ordered on the motion to instruct.
  There was no objection.
  The SPEAKER pro tempore. The question is on the motion to instruct 
offered by the gentleman from Rhode Island (Mr. Kennedy).
  The motion to instruct was agreed to.
  A motion to reconsider was laid on the table.

                          ____________________