[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 162 (2016), Part 4]
[House]
[Pages 5239-5245]
[From the U.S. 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.

[[Page 5240]]

  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 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.

[[Page 5241]]

  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.
  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

[[Page 5242]]

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.
  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 mean 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 in 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

[[Page 5243]]

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 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.

[[Page 5244]]

  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, 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

[[Page 5245]]

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.

                          ____________________