[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 157 (2011), Part 11]
[Extensions of Remarks]
[Pages 15817-15818]
[From the U.S. 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 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.

[[Page 15818]]



                          ____________________