[House Report 119-142]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office]
119th Congress } { Report
HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES
1st Session } { 119-142
======================================================================
WHOLE MILK FOR HEALTHY KIDS ACT OF 2025
--------------
June 5, 2025.--Committed to the Committee of the Whole House on the
State of the Union and ordered to be printed
--------------
Mr. Walberg, from the Committee on Education and Workforce,
submitted the following
R E P O R T
together with
MINORITY VIEWS
[To accompany H.R. 649]
[Including cost estimate of the Congressional Budget Office]
The Committee on Education and Workforce, to whom was
referred the bill (H.R. 649) to amend the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act to allow schools that participate in
the school lunch program under such Act to serve whole milk,
having considered the same, reports favorably thereon with an
amendment and recommends that the bill as amended do pass.
The amendment is as follows:
Strike all after the enacting clause and insert the
following:
SECTION 1. SHORT TITLE.
This Act may be cited as the ``Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of
2025''.
SEC. 2. ORGANIC OR NON-ORGANIC WHOLE MILK PERMISSIBLE.
Section 9(a)(2) of the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act
(42 U.S.C. 1758(a)(2)) is amended--
(1) by amending subparagraph (A) to read as follows:
``(A) In general.--Lunches served by schools
participating in the school lunch program under this
Act--
``(i) shall offer students a variety of fluid
milk;
``(ii) may offer students flavored and
unflavored organic or non-organic whole,
reduced-fat, low-fat, and fat-free fluid milk
and lactose-free fluid milk; and
``(iii) shall provide a substitute for fluid
milk for students whose disability restricts
their diet, on receipt of a written statement
from a licensed physician, parent, or legal
guardian that identifies the disability that
restricts the student's diet and that specifies
the substitute for fluid milk.''; and
(2) by adding at the end the following:
``(D) Saturated fat.--Milk fat included in any fluid
milk provided under subparagraph (A) shall not be
considered saturated fat for purposes of measuring
compliance with the allowable average saturated fat
content of a meal under section 210.10 of title 7, Code
of Federal Regulations (or successor regulations).
``(E) Prohibition on certain purchases.--The
Secretary shall prohibit schools participating in the
school lunch program under this Act from purchasing or
offering milk produced by a China state-owned
enterprise.
``(F) Limitation on authority.--The Secretary may not
prohibit any school participating in the school lunch
program under this Act from offering students the milk
described in subparagraph (A)(ii).''.
Purpose
To amend the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act
to allow schools that participate in the school lunch program
under such Act to serve whole milk.
Committee Action
117TH CONGRESS
Second Session-- Legislative Action
On July 20, 2022, Representative Bobby Scott (D-VA)
introduced H.R. 8450, Healthy Meals, Healthy Kids Act, with
Representative Suzanne Bonamici (D-OR) as an original
cosponsor. The bill was referred solely to the Committee on
Education and Labor. On July 27, 2022, the Committee considered
H.R. 8450 in legislative session and reported it favorably, as
amended, to the House of Representatives by a recorded vote of
27-20. The Committee considered the following amendments to
H.R. 8450:
1. Representatives Lisa McClain (R-MI) and Russ
Fulcher (R-ID) offered--and withdrew--an amendment to
ensure potatoes remain allowable as a vegetable under
the programs.
2. Representative McClain offered an amendment to
prohibit all new changes from being enacted unless an
independent study is conducted to ensure the program
won't increase inflation or the changes can be
implemented once inflation drops to 2 percent. This
amendment was defeated in a roll call vote of 19-27.
3. Representative Glenn Thompson (R-PA), along with
Representatives Elise Stefanik (R-NY), Fulcher, and
Fred Keller (R-PA), offered an amendment to address
whole milk and chocolate milk in school meals and allow
greater choice of milk in the Women, Infant and
Children (WIC) program. This amendment was defeated by
a voice vote.
4. Representative Stefanik offered an amendment that
would address the infant formula contracting
requirements in WIC by requiring two manufacturers per
state or state consortia. While it received bipartisan
support, the amendment failed by roll call vote of 20-
24.
5. Representatives Bob Good (R-VA) and Mary Miller
(R-IL) offered--and withdrew--an amendment to require
nutrition regulations promulgated under the bill to
make grain-based desserts eligible for reimbursement.
6. Representative Tim Walberg (R-MI) offered an
amendment to ensure food substitutions for religious
needs are allowed. This amendment was adopted.
7. Representatives Miller and Good offered an
amendment to eliminate the change the Democrats made to
the definition of woman and therefore to re-define
pregnant woman, breastfeeding woman, and postpartum
woman as a woman. This amendment was defeated on a
party line vote of 20-25.
8. Representative Glenn Grothman (R-WI) and Diana
Harshbarger (R-TN) offered an amendment to prohibit
enforcement of the May 5, 2022, memo on Title IX
enforcement as it relates to child nutrition programs.
This amendment was defeated by a roll call vote of 20-
25.
9. Representative Harshbarger offered an amendment to
require a feasibility study before issuing new
regulations. This study would determine the cost
increase these potential standards would impose, the
timeline for availability of food meeting these
standards, and the increase to plate waste these
standards might cause. This amendment was also defeated
on a party line vote.
118TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearing
On February 8, 2023, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce held a hearing on ``American Education in Crisis.''
The purpose of the hearing was to examine the state of American
education, including the need to increase transparency and
accountability, to update the education system to better serve
the needs of students and families, and to protect and restore
the rights of parents to have a say in their children's
education, including foods their children are served at school.
Testifying before the Committee was Ms. Virginia Gentles,
Director, Education Freedom Center, Independent Women's Forum,
Arlington, VA; Dr. Monty Sullivan, President, Louisiana
Community and Technical College System, Baton Rouge, LA; Mr.
Scott Pulsipher, President, Western Governors University, Salt
Lake City, UT; and Mr. Jared Polis, Governor, State of
Colorado, Denver, CO.
On May 16, 2023, the Committee on Education and the
Workforce held a hearing on ``Examining the Policies and
Priorities of the U.S. Department of Education.'' The purpose
of the hearing was to review the Fiscal Year 2024 budget
priorities of the U.S. Department of Education and to discuss
the education issues facing America's students, including food
being served at schools. Testifying before the Committee was
The Honorable Miguel Cardona, Secretary, U.S. Department of
Education, Washington, D.C.
Legislative Action
On February 21, 2023, Representative Thompson introduced
the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2023 (H.R. 1147) with
Representatives Kim Schrier (D-WA), Fulcher, Troy Balderson (R-
OH), Mariannette Miller-Meeks (R-IA), David J. Trone (D-MD),
Austin Scott (R-GA), Dan Meuser (R-PA), Doug LaMalfa (R-CA),
Lloyd Smucker (R-PA), Matt Cartwright (D-PA), Jim Banks (R-IN),
Jim Baird (R-IN), Tom Tiffany (R-WI), Josh Gottheimer (D-NJ),
Guy Reschenthaler (R-PA), Scott Perry (R-PA), Mike Simpson (R-
ID), Tom McClintock (R-CA), Tracey Mann (R-KS), Trent Kelly (R-
MS), Mary Miller, Mike Kelly (R-PA), Elissa Slotkin (D-MI),
Bryan Steil (R-WI), Stefanik, Pat Ryan (D-NY), Claudia Tenney
(R-NY), Scott Fitzgerald (R-WI), Andy Barr (R-KY), Dusty
Johnson (R-SD), Paul Tonko (D-NY), Abigail Davis Spanberger (D-
VA), Barry Moore (R-AL), Mike Gallagher (R-WI), Randy Feenstra
(R-IA), John Joyce (R-PA), and Ben Cline (R-VA) as original
cosponsors. On June 6, 2023, the Committee considered H.R. 1147
in legislative session and reported it favorably, as amended,
to the House of Representatives by a recorded vote of 26-13.
The Committee adopted the following amendment to H.R. 1147:
1. Representative Thompson offered an Amendment in
the Nature of a Substitute (ANS) that provides minor
technical changes to help ensure our children's food
service workers have the flexibility they need in
serving students milk at lunch meals.
119TH CONGRESS
First Session--Hearing
On February 5, 2025, the Committee on Education and
Workforce held a hearing on ``The State of American
Education.'' The purpose of the hearing was to examine the
state of American education, including K-12 education,
postsecondary education, and workforce development. During the
hearing, Representative Thompson referenced research that
demonstrates that student health contributes to academic
success, and witness Mrs. Nicole Neily testified that allowing
schools the flexibility to provide students with a whole milk
option would be beneficial for student health. Mrs. Neily
agreed with Representative Thompson's concerns and mentioned
that whole milk is one of her daughter's primary sources of
nutrition during the school day. Testifying before the
Committee were Mrs. Neily, President, Parents Defending
Education, Arlington, VA; Dr. Preston Cooper, Senior Fellow,
American Enterprise Institute, Washington, D.C.; Mrs. Janai
Nelson, President and Director-Counsel, NAACP Legal Defense
Fund, Washington, D.C.; Mr. Johnny C. Taylor, Jr., President
and CEO, Society for Human Resource Management, Alexandria, VA.
Legislative Action
On January 23, 2025, Representative Thompson introduced
H.R. 649, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025, with
Representatives Schrier, Brad Finstad (R-MN), Angie Craig (D-
MN), Jill Tokuda (D-HI), Scott Franklin (R-FL), Meuser, Ron
Estes (R-KS), Chuck Fleischmann (R-TN), Mary Miller, Kat
Cammack (R-FL), Austin Scott, Derrick Van Orden (R-WI), Nick
Langworthy (R-NY), Chellie Pingree (D-ME), Monica De La Cruz
(R-TX), Mike Bost (R-IL), Tracey Mann, Claudia Tenney, John
Joyce, Russ Fulcher, Ronny Jackson (R-TX), Sam Graves (R-MO),
John Moolenaar (R-MI), Scott Fitzgerald, Mark Alford (R-MO),
Don Bacon (R-NE), Jim Costa (D-CA), Jimmy Panetta (D-CA), Dave
Taylor (R-OH), Sanford Bishop (D-GA), Scott Perry, Chris
Deluzio (D-PA), Ryan Mackenzie (R-PA), Jahana Hayes (D-CT), Rob
Bresnahan (R-PA), Mark Pocan (D-WI), Josh Harder (D-CA), Steil,
Reschenthaler, Don Davis (D-NC), Barr, Nikki Budzinski (D-IL),
Ryan, Gabe Vasquez (D-NM), Michelle Fischbach (R-MN), Smucker,
Henry Cuellar (D-TX), Simpson, Jared Golden (D-ME), John Rose
(R-TN), Mark Messmer (R-IN), Earl L. ``Buddy'' Carter (R-GA),
Mike Lawler (R-NY), Mike Kelly, Balderson, David Rouzer (R-NC),
Trent Kelly, Tony Wied (R-WI), Dan Newhouse (R-WA), Ashley
Hinson (R-IA), Barry Moore, Joe Courtney (D-CT), David G.
Valadao (R-CA), Eric Sorensen (D-IL), Mark Harris (R-NC),
Tonko, Jonathan Jackson (D-IL), Brian Fitzpatrick (R-PA), and
Michael Guest (R-MS) as original co-sponsors. The bill was
referred solely to the Committee on Education and Workforce. On
February 12, 2025, the Committee considered H.R. 649 in
legislative session and reported it favorably, as amended, to
the House of Representatives by a recorded vote of 24-10. The
Committee considered the following amendments to H.R. 649:
1. Representative Thompson offered an Amendment in
the Nature of a Substitute (ANS) that provided minor
technical changes to help ensure our children's food
service workers have the flexibility they need in
serving students milk at lunch meals. The amendment was
adopted by voice vote.
Committee Views
INTRODUCTION
For generations, milk has been recognized as one of the
most nutritious options to support a healthy, growing child.
Students, parents, school food service providers, and
nutritionists all agree that milk in school lunches is both
wanted and needed. Until 2010, milk, with its nine essential
nutrients, was easily accessible in school cafeterias and was
readily available across all child nutrition programs. Under
the Obama administration, the first milk restrictions were
levied on school meal programs, which the Biden administration
subsequently perpetuated. In rejection of this bureaucratic
overreach, this bill restores nutritional choices that help our
nation's students thrive and learn.
MILK FACED NEW REGULATIONS WITH THE HEALTHY,
HUNGER-FREE KIDS ACT OF 2010
Restrictions of milk choice began with the Obama-era
Healthy, Hunger-free Kids Act of 2010. While schools have been
required to serve meals consistent with the U.S. Department of
Agriculture's (USDA) Dietary Guidelines for Americans (DGA)
since the 1994 child nutrition reauthorization (P.L. 103-448),
choice and flexibility for school districts and their students
were decimated when the Obama administration decided to wage
war against milk. The Obama-era standards required one specific
food item--milk, and milk alone--to be consistent with the DGA,
unfairly applying standards regulating a meal to an individual
food item. This resulted in barring the inclusion of whole
(3.25 percent) and reduced-fat (2 percent) milk in school
lunches. Consequently, beginning with School Year (SY) 2012-
2013, schools were compelled to serve either fat-free and low-
fat (1 percent) unflavored milk or fat-free flavored milk.
Many schools experienced challenges implementing these
changes and reported issues with student acceptance of food.
Beginning in FY 2015, Congress, through the appropriations
process, enacted provisions that loosened these milk
requirements. In December 2018, USDA published a final rule
(effective starting in SY 2019-2020) permitting school food
authorities to once again offer flavored, low-fat (1 percent)
milk as a part of school meals and requiring unflavored milk to
be offered alongside those offerings. However, this effort to
restore some flexibility was not enough to satiate students and
retain program participation. USDA's own data show a steady
decline in students eating school meals since the enactment of
changes made in the 2010 reauthorization.\1\ This has led to a
pattern of underconsumption of dairy among school students.
According to the 2020 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee
report, between 68 and 76.2 percent of school age males and
between 77.4 and 94.3 percent of school age females fail to
meet recommended levels of dairy consumption.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\https://www.ers.usda.gov/publications/pub-details?pubid=109313.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
RECENT REGULATIONS ARE PERPETUATING THIS HEALTH CONCERN
Biden administration-era regulations only further
discourage students from consuming the recommended levels of
milk and have intensified the health concerns consequent on the
decline of student participation in school meal programs. By
continuing to impose strict top-down dietary regulations for
school meals, these bureaucrats further harm student health and
do little to support the tireless efforts of food service
workers. The April 2024, final rule under the Biden
administration USDA subjects flavored milk to a new added
sugars limit.\2\ Further, the rule's continued exclusion of
whole milk from school meal programs is unsupported by current
research: new evidence-based nutrition recommendations released
in January 2025, and developed by experts from leading health
organizations, including the American Academy of Pediatrics,
follow research that demonstrates full fat dairy is associated
with a neutral or lower risk of heart disease and obesity
rather than being the alarming cause of such health concerns.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\2\https://www.govinfo.gov/content/pkg/FR-2024-04-25/pdf/2024-
08098.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Washington bureaucrats' restrictive meddling in school
nutrition has resulted in distaste for school meals. Limited
milk choices do not satiate students, instead driving them away
from the school lunch program. At a press conference where
then-USDA Secretary Vilsack announced USDA meal regulation
changes, one school district food service coordinator said,
``We fear that new regulations will push the neediest students
away from the programs.''\3\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\3\https:/www.thefencepost.com/news/vilsack-encounters-resistance-
to-school-meal-rule/.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is every reason to include all popular milk options,
from whole milk to reduced-fat milks, in school lunches, since
we know they have the same nutritional benefits. Therefore,
H.R. 649 will expand milk options for school lunches to include
flavored and unflavored whole and reduced-fat milks. While
recent reauthorizations and USDA regulations have hampered
school food authorities with burdensome requirements and
limited options, H.R. 649 allows schools to make choices that
are right for the children they serve every day.
CONCLUSION
Politicization of education must stop. By continuing to
wage war on milk, Washington bureaucrats attempt to dictate yet
another aspect of the school day through administrative
regulations. In opposition to this overreach, the Committee is
taking action to safeguard the rights of parents and students.
H.R. 649 expands milk access and variety in school lunches,
giving parents and school food service providers the simplicity
and flexibility they need to feed students a nutritious
beverage. Instead of continuing to restrict such a nutrient-
dense food, the Committee supports making milk fully available
to students to support their health and education. Much work is
needed to improve child nutrition, and H.R. 649 puts the
nation's students on a healthier path forward.
H.R. 649 Section-by-Section Summary
Section 1. Short title
Names the bill as the ``Whole Milk for Healthy
Kids Act of 2025''.
Section 2.
Amends the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act to:
Offer students a variety of fluid milk
options without restriction by the Dietary Guidelines
for Americans.
Permit schools to serve students
flavored and unflavored whole, reduced-fat, low- fat,
fat-free, and lactose-free fluid milk.
Exempt milk fat from being considered
saturated fat for purposes of compliance.
Require schools to serve a substitute to
fluid milk when a student's disability, as documented
by a parent or legal guardian, restricts his or her
diet.
Prohibit the purchasing or offering of
milk produced by a China state-owned enterprise.
Prohibit the USDA secretary from
rulemaking in opposition to the milk provisions
described.
Explanation of Amendments
The amendments, including the amendment in the nature of a
substitute, are explained in the body of this report.
Application of Law to the Legislative Branch
Section 102(b)(3) of Public Law 104-1 requires a
description of the application of this bill to the legislative
branch. H.R. 649 takes important steps to allow schools that
participate in the school lunch program under such Act to serve
whole milk. H.R. 649 applies solely to the National School
Lunch Program and therefore does not apply to the Legislative
Branch.
Unfunded Mandate Statement
Pursuant to Section 423 of the Congressional Budget and
Impoundment Control Act of 1974, Pub. L. No. 93-344 (as amended
by Section 101(a)(2) of the Unfunded Mandates Reform Act of
1995, Pub. L. No. 104-4), the Committee traditionally adopts as
its own the cost estimate prepared by the Director of the
Congressional Budget Office (CBO) pursuant to section 402 of
the Congressional Budget and Impoundment Control Act of 1974.
Earmark Statement
H.R. 649 does not contain any congressional earmarks,
limited tax benefits, or limited tariff benefits as defined in
clause 9 of House rule XXI.
Roll Call Votes
Clause 3(b) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires the Committee Report to include for
each record vote on a motion to report the measure or matter
and on any amendments offered to the measure or matter the
total number of votes for and against and the names of the
Members voting for and against.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
Statement of General Performance Goals and Objectives
In accordance with clause (3)(c) of rule XIII of the Rules
of the House of Representatives, the goal of H.R. 649 is to
allow schools that participate in the National School Lunch
Program to serve whole milk.
Duplication of Federal Programs
No provision of H.R. 649 establishes or reauthorizes a
program of the Federal Government known to be duplicative of
another Federal program, a program that was included in any
report from the Government Accountability Office to Congress
pursuant to section 21 of Public Law 111-139, or a program
related to a program identified in the most recent Catalog of
Federal Domestic Assistance.
Statement of Oversight Findings and Recommendations
of the Committee
In compliance with clause 3(c)(1) of rule XIII and clause
2(b)(1) of rule X of the Rules of the House of Representatives,
the Committee's oversight findings and recommendations are
reflected in the body of this report.
Required Committee Hearing
In compliance with clause 3(c)(6) of rule XIII the
following hearing held during the 119th Congress was used to
develop or consider H.R. 649: On February 5, 2025, the
Committee on Education and Workforce held a hearing on ``The
State of American Education.''
New Budget Authority and CBO Cost Estimate
With respect to the requirements of clause 3(c)(2) of rule
XIII of the Rules of the House of Representatives and section
308(a) of the Congressional Budget Act of 1974 and with respect
to requirements of clause 3(c)(3) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives and section 402 of the
Congressional Budget Act of 1974, the Committee adopts as its
own the cost estimate for the bill prepared by the Director of
the Congressional Budget Office.
[GRAPHIC(S) NOT AVAILABLE IN TIFF FORMAT]
H.R. 649 would allow schools that participate in the
National School Lunch Program to serve whole, reduced-fat, or
low-fat milk that is flavored or unflavored to students. Under
current law, schools must offer milk that is fat-free or low-
fat and may only offer flavored milk if it is fat-free or low-
fat. The bill would exclude the saturated fat in milk from
calculations of the amount of such fat that is allowed under
the program for an average meal.
The bill also would prohibit participating schools from
purchasing or offering milk produced by China state-owned
enterprises.
CBO expects that enacting the bill would not affect
reimbursement rates or participation in the program, so there
would be no effect on the cost of benefits. CBO estimates that
the administrative costs to update the dietary regulations
would be insignificant; any spending would be subject to the
availability of appropriated funds.
The CBO staff contact for this estimate is Susan Beyer. The
estimate was reviewed by Christina Hawley Anthony, Deputy
Director of Budget Analysis.
Phillip L. Swagel,
Director, Congressional Budget Office.
Committee Cost Estimate
Clause 3(d)(1) of rule XIII of the Rules of the House of
Representatives requires an estimate and a comparison of the
costs that would be incurred in carrying out H.R. 649. However,
clause 3(d)(2)(B) of that Rule provides that this requirement
does not apply when, as with the present report, the Committee
adopts as its own the cost estimate for the bill prepared by
the Director of the Congressional Budget Office.
Changes in Existing Law Made by the Bill, as Reported
In compliance with clause 3(e) of rule XIII of the Rules of
the House of Representatives, changes in existing law made by
the bill, as reported, are shown as follows (existing law
proposed to be omitted is enclosed in black brackets, new
matter is printed in italics, and existing law in which no
change is proposed is shown in roman):
RICHARD B. RUSSELL NATIONAL SCHOOL LUNCH ACT
* * * * * * *
NUTRITIONAL AND OTHER PROGRAM REQUIREMENTS
Sec. 9. (a)(1)(A) Lunches served by schools participating in
the school lunch program under this Act shall meet minimum
nutritional requirements prescribed by the Secretary on the
basis of tested nutritional research, except that the minimum
nutritional requirements--
(i) shall not be construed to prohibit the
substitution of foods to accommodate the medical or
other special dietary needs of individual students; and
(ii) shall, at a minimum, be based on the weekly
average of the nutrient content of school lunches.
(B) The Secretary shall provide technical assistance and
training, including technical assistance and training in the
preparation of lower-fat versions of foods commonly used in the
school lunch program under this Act, to schools participating
in the school lunch program to assist the schools in complying
with the nutritional requirements prescribed by the Secretary
pursuant to subparagraph (A) and in providing appropriate meals
to children with medically certified special dietary needs. The
Secretary shall provide additional technical assistance to
schools that are having difficulty maintaining compliance with
the requirements.
(2) Fluid milk.--
[(A) In general.--Lunches served by schools
participating in the school lunch program under
this Act--
[(i) shall offer students a variety
of fluid milk. Such milk shall be
consistent with the most recent Dietary
Guidelines for Americans published
under section 301 of the National
Nutrition Monitoring and Related
Research Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341);
[(ii) may offer students flavored and
unflavored fluid milk and lactose-free
fluid milk; and
[(iii) shall provide a substitute for
fluid milk for students whose
disability restricts their diet, on
receipt of a written statement from a
licensed physician that identifies the
disability that restricts the student's
diet and that specifies the substitute
for fluid milk.]
(A) In general.--Lunches served by schools
participating in the school lunch program under
this Act--
(i) shall offer students a variety of
fluid milk;
(ii) may offer students flavored and
unflavored organic or non-organic
whole, reduced-fat, low-fat, and fat-
free fluid milk and lactose-free fluid
milk; and
(iii) shall provide a substitute for
fluid milk for students whose
disability restricts their diet, on
receipt of a written statement from a
licensed physician, parent, or legal
guardian that identifies the disability
that restricts the student's diet and
that specifies the substitute for fluid
milk.
(B) Substitutes.--
(i) Standards for substitution.--A
school may substitute for the fluid
milk provided under subparagraph (A), a
nondairy beverage that is nutritionally
equivalent to fluid milk and meets
nutritional standards established by
the Secretary (which shall, among other
requirements to be determined by the
Secretary, include fortification of
calcium, protein, vitamin A, and
vitamin D to levels found in cow's
milk) for students who cannot consume
fluid milk because of a medical or
other special dietary need other than a
disability described in subparagraph
(A)(iii).
(ii) Notice.--The substitutions may
be made if the school notifies the
State agency that the school is
implementing a variation allowed under
this subparagraph, and if the
substitution is requested by written
statement of a medical authority or by
a student's parent or legal guardian
that identifies the medical or other
special dietary need that restricts the
student's diet, except that the school
shall not be required to provide
beverages other than beverages the
school has identified as acceptable
substitutes.
(iii) Excess expenses borne by school
food authority.--Expenses incurred in
providing substitutions under this
subparagraph that are in excess of
expenses covered by reimbursements
under this Act shall be paid by the
school food authority.
(C) Restrictions on sale of milk
prohibited.--A school that participates in the
school lunch program under this Act shall not
directly or indirectly restrict the sale or
marketing of fluid milk products by the school
(or by a person approved by the school) at any
time or any place--
(i) on the school premises; or
(ii) at any school-sponsored event.
(D) Saturated fat.--Milk fat included in any
fluid milk provided under subparagraph (A)
shall not be considered saturated fat for
purposes of measuring compliance with the
allowable average saturated fat content of a
meal under section 210.10 of title 7, Code of
Federal Regulations (or successor regulations).
(E) Prohibition on certain purchases.--The
Secretary shall prohibit schools participating
in the school lunch program under this Act from
purchasing or offering milk produced by a China
state-owned enterprise.
(F) Limitation on authority.--The Secretary
may not prohibit any school participating in
the school lunch program under this Act from
offering students the milk described in
subparagraph (A)(ii).
(3) Students in senior high schools that participate in the
school lunch program under this Act (and, when approved by the
local school district or nonprofit private schools, students in
any other grade level) shall not be required to accept offered
foods they do not intend to consume, and any such failure to
accept offered foods shall not affect the full charge to the
student for a lunch meeting the requirements of this subsection
or the amount of payments made under this Act to any such
school for such lunch.
(4) Provision of information.--
(A) Guidance.--Prior to the beginning of the
school year beginning July 2004, the Secretary
shall issue guidance to States and school food
authorities to increase the consumption of
foods and food ingredients that are recommended
for increased serving consumption in the most
recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans
published under section 301 of the National
Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act
of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341).
(B) Rules.--Not later than 2 years after the
date of enactment of this paragraph, the
Secretary shall promulgate rules, based on the
most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans,
that reflect specific recommendations,
expressed in serving recommendations, for
increased consumption of foods and food
ingredients offered in school nutrition
programs under this Act and the Child Nutrition
Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.).
(C) Procurement and processing of food
service products and commodities.--The
Secretary shall--
(i) identify, develop, and
disseminate to State departments of
agriculture and education, school food
authorities, local educational
agencies, and local processing
entities, model product specifications
and practices for foods offered in
school nutrition programs under this
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.) to ensure that
the foods reflect the most recent
Dietary Guidelines for Americans
published under section 301 of the
National Nutrition Monitoring and
Related Research Act of 1990 (7 U.S.C.
5341);
(ii) not later than 1 year after the
date of enactment of this
subparagraph--
(I) carry out a study to
analyze the quantity and
quality of nutritional
information available to school
food authorities about food
service products and
commodities; and
(II) submit to Congress a
report on the results of the
study that contains such
legislative recommendations as
the Secretary considers
necessary to ensure that school
food authorities have access to
the nutritional information
needed for menu planning and
compliance assessments; and
(iii) to the maximum extent
practicable, in purchasing and
processing commodities for use in
school nutrition programs under this
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), purchase the
widest variety of healthful foods that
reflect the most recent Dietary
Guidelines for Americans.
(5) Water.--Schools participating in the school lunch
program under this Act shall make available to children
free of charge, as nutritionally appropriate, potable
water for consumption in the place where meals are
served during meal service.
(b)(1)(A) Not later than June 1 of each fiscal year, the
Secretary shall prescribe income guidelines for determining
eligibility for free and reduced price lunches during the 12-
month period beginning July 1 of such fiscal year and ending
June 30 of the following fiscal year. The income guidelines for
determining eligibility for free lunches shall be 130 percent
of the applicable family size income levels contained in the
nonfarm income poverty guidelines prescribed by the Office of
Management and Budget, as adjusted annually in accordance with
subparagraph (B). The income guidelines for determining
eligibility for reduced price lunches for any school year shall
be 185 percent of the applicable family size income levels
contained in the nonfarm income poverty guidelines prescribed
by the Office of Management and Budget, as adjusted annually in
accordance with subparagraph (B). The Office of Management and
Budget guidelines shall be revised at annual intervals, or at
any shorter interval deemed feasible and desirable.
(B) The revision required by subparagraph (A) of this
paragraph shall be made by multiplying--
(i) the official poverty line (as defined by the
Office of Management and Budget); by
(ii) the percentage change in the Consumer Price
Index during the annual or other interval immediately
preceding the time at which the adjustment is made.
Revisions under this subparagraph shall be made not more than
30 days after the date on which the consumer price index data
required to compute the adjustment becomes available.
(2)(A) Following the determination by the Secretary under
paragraph (1) of this subsection of the income eligibility
guidelines for each school year, each State educational agency
shall announce the income eligibility guidelines, by family
size, to be used by schools in the State in making
determinations of eligibility for free and reduced price
lunches. Local school authorities shall, each year, publicly
announce the income eligibility guidelines for free and reduced
price lunches on or before the opening of school.
(B) Applications and descriptive material.--
(i) In general.--Applications for free and
reduced price lunches, in such form as the
Secretary may prescribe or approve, and any
descriptive material, shall be distributed to
the parents or guardians of children in
attendance at the school, and shall contain
only the family size income levels for reduced
price meal eligibility with the explanation
that households with incomes less than or equal
to these values would be eligible for free or
reduced price lunches.
(ii) Income eligibility guidelines.--Forms
and descriptive material distributed in
accordance with clause (i) may not contain the
income eligibility guidelines for free lunches.
(iii) Contents of descriptive material.--
(I) In general.--Descriptive material
distributed in accordance with clause
(i) shall contain a notification that--
(aa) participants in the
programs listed in subclause
(II) may be eligible for free
or reduced price meals; and
(bb) documentation may be
requested for verification of
eligibility for free or reduced
price meals.
(II) Programs.--The programs referred
to in subclause (I)(aa) are--
(aa) the special supplemental
nutrition program for women,
infants, and children
established by section 17 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1786);
(bb) the supplemental
nutrition assistance program
established under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011 et seq.);
(cc) the food distribution
program on Indian reservations
established under section 4(b)
of the Food and Nutrition Act
of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b)); and
(dd) a State program funded
under the program of block
grants to States for temporary
assistance for needy families
established under part A of
title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.).
(3) Household applications.--
(A) Definition of household application.--In
this paragraph, the term ``household
application'' means an application for a child
of a household to receive free or reduced price
school lunches under this Act, or free or
reduced price school breakfasts under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.),
for which an eligibility determination is made
other than under paragraph (4) or (5).
(B) Eligibility determination.--
(i) In general.--An eligibility
determination shall be made on the
basis of a complete household
application executed by an adult member
of the household or in accordance with
guidance issued by the Secretary.
(ii) Electronic signatures and
applications.--A household application
may be executed using an electronic
signature if--
(I) the application is
submitted electronically; and
(II) the electronic
application filing system meets
confidentiality standards
established by the Secretary.
(C) Children in household.--
(i) In general.--The household
application shall identify the names of
each child in the household for whom
meal benefits are requested.
(ii) Separate applications.--A State
educational agency or local educational
agency may not request a separate
application for each child in the
household that attends schools under
the same local educational agency.
(D) Verification of sample.--
(i) Definitions.--In this
subparagraph:
(I) Error prone
application.--The term ``error
prone application'' means an
approved household application
that--
(aa) indicates
monthly income that is
within $100, or an
annual income that is
within $1,200, of the
income eligibility
limitation for free or
reduced price meals; or
(bb) in lieu of the
criteria established
under item (aa), meets
criteria established by
the Secretary.
(II) Non-response rate.--The
term ``non-response rate''
means (in accordance with
guidelines established by the
Secretary) the percentage of
approved household applications
for which verification
information has not been
obtained by a local educational
agency after attempted
verification under
subparagraphs (F) and (G).
(ii) Verification of sample.--Each
school year, a local educational agency
shall verify eligibility of the
children in a sample of household
applications approved for the school
year by the local educational agency,
as determined by the Secretary in
accordance with this subsection.
(iii) Sample size.--Except as
otherwise provided in this paragraph,
the sample for a local educational
agency for a school year shall equal
the lesser of--
(I) 3 percent of all
applications approved by the
local educational agency for
the school year, as of October
1 of the school year, selected
from error prone applications;
or
(II) 3,000 error prone
applications approved by the
local educational agency for
the school year, as of October
1 of the school year.
(iv) Alternative sample size.--
(I) In general.--If the
conditions described in
subclause (IV) are met, the
verification sample size for a
local educational agency shall
be the sample size described in
subclause (II) or (III), as
determined by the local
educational agency.
(II) 3,000/3 percent
option.--The sample size
described in this subclause
shall be the lesser of 3,000,
or 3 percent of, applications
selected at random from
applications approved by the
local educational agency for
the school year, as of October
1 of the school year.
(III) 1,000/1 percent plus
option.--
(aa) In general.--The
sample size described
in this subclause shall
be the sum of--
(AA) the
lesser of
1,000, or 1
percent of, all
applications
approved by the
local
educational
agency for the
school year, as
of October 1 of
the school
year, selected
from error
prone
applications;
and
(BB) the
lesser of 500,
or \1/2\ of 1
percent of,
applications
approved by the
local
educational
agency for the
school year, as
of October 1 of
the school
year, that
provide a case
number (in lieu
of income
information)
showing
participation
in a program
described in
item (bb)
selected from
those approved
applications
that provide a
case number (in
lieu of income
information)
verifying the
participation.
(bb) Programs.--The
programs described in
this item are--
(AA) the
supplemental
nutrition
assistance
program
established
under the Food
and Nutrition
Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2011 et
seq.);
(BB) the food
distribution
program on
Indian
reservations
established
under section
4(b) of the
Food and
Nutrition Act
of 2008 (7
U.S.C.
2013(b)); and
(CC) a State
program funded
under the
program of
block grants to
States for
temporary
assistance for
needy families
established
under part A of
title IV of the
Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.)
that the
Secretary
determines
complies with
standards
established by
the Secretary
that ensure
that the
standards under
the State
program are
comparable to
or more
restrictive
than those in
effect on June
1, 1995.
(IV) Conditions.--The
conditions referred to in
subclause (I) shall be met for
a local educational agency for
a school year if--
(aa) the nonresponse
rate for the local
educational agency for
the preceding school
year is less than 20
percent; or
(bb) the local
educational agency has
more than 20,000
children approved by
application by the
local educational
agency as eligible for
free or reduced price
meals for the school
year, as of October 1
of the school year,
and--
(AA) the
nonresponse
rate for the
preceding
school year is
at least 10
percent below
the nonresponse
rate for the
second
preceding
school year; or
(BB) in the
case of the
school year
beginning July
2005, the local
educational
agency attempts
to verify all
approved
household
applications
selected for
verification
through use of
public agency
records from at
least 2 of the
programs or
sources of
information
described in
subparagraph
(F)(i).
(v) Additional selected
applications.--A sample for a local
educational agency for a school year
under clauses (iii) and (iv)(III)(AA)
shall include the number of additional
randomly selected approved household
applications that are required to
comply with the sample size
requirements in those clauses.
(E) Preliminary review.--
(i) Review for accuracy.--
(I) In general.--Prior to
conducting any other
verification activity for
approved household applications
selected for verification, the
local educational agency shall
ensure that the initial
eligibility determination for
each approved household
application is reviewed for
accuracy by an individual other
than the individual making the
initial eligibility
determination, unless otherwise
determined by the Secretary.
(II) Waiver.--The
requirements of subclause (I)
shall be waived for a local
educational agency if the local
educational agency is using a
technology-based solution that
demonstrates a high level of
accuracy, to the satisfaction
of the Secretary, in processing
an initial eligibility
determination in accordance
with the income eligibility
guidelines of the school lunch
program.
(ii) Correct eligibility
determination.--If the review indicates
that the initial eligibility
determination is correct, the local
educational agency shall verify the
approved household application.
(iii) Incorrect eligibility
determination.--If the review indicates
that the initial eligibility
determination is incorrect, the local
educational agency shall (as determined
by the Secretary)--
(I) correct the eligibility
status of the household;
(II) notify the household of
the change;
(III) in any case in which
the review indicates that the
household is not eligible for
free or reduced-price meals,
notify the household of the
reason for the ineligibility
and that the household may
reapply with income
documentation for free or
reduced-price meals; and
(IV) in any case in which the
review indicates that the
household is eligible for free
or reduced-price meals, verify
the approved household
application.
(F) Direct verification.--
(i) In general.--Subject to clauses
(ii) and (iii), to verify eligibility
for free or reduced price meals for
approved household applications
selected for verification, the local
educational agency may (in accordance
with criteria established by the
Secretary) first obtain and use income
and program participation information
from a public agency administering--
(I) the supplemental
nutrition assistance program
established under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011 et seq.);
(II) the food distribution
program on Indian reservations
established under section 4(b)
of the Food and Nutrition Act
of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2013(b));
(III) the temporary
assistance for needy families
program funded under part A of
title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.);
(IV) the State medicaid
program under title XIX of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
1396 et seq.); or
(V) a similar income-tested
program or other source of
information, as determined by
the Secretary.
(ii) Free meals.--Public agency
records that may be obtained and used
under clause (i) to verify eligibility
for free meals for approved household
applications selected for verification
shall include the most recent available
information (other than information
reflecting program participation or
income before the 180-day period ending
on the date of application for free
meals) that is relied on to
administer--
(I) a program or source of
information described in clause
(i) (other than clause
(i)(IV)); or
(II) the State plan for
medical assistance under title
XIX of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) in--
(aa) a State in which
the income eligibility
limit applied under
section 1902(l)(2)(C)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(C)) is not
more than 133 percent
of the official poverty
line described in
section 1902(l)(2)(A)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)); or
(bb) a State that
otherwise identifies
households that have
income that is not more
than 133 percent of the
official poverty line
described in section
1902(l)(2)(A) of that
Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)).
(iii) Reduced price meals.--Public
agency records that may be obtained and
used under clause (i) to verify
eligibility for reduced price meals for
approved household applications
selected for verification shall include
the most recent available information
(other than information reflecting
program participation or income before
the 180-day period ending on the date
of application for reduced price meals)
that is relied on to administer--
(I) a program or source of
information described in clause
(i) (other than clause
(i)(IV)); or
(II) the State plan for
medical assistance under title
XIX of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.) in--
(aa) a State in which
the income eligibility
limit applied under
section 1902(l)(2)(C)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(C)) is not
more than 185 percent
of the official poverty
line described in
section 1902(l)(2)(A)
of that Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)); or
(bb) a State that
otherwise identifies
households that have
income that is not more
than 185 percent of the
official poverty line
described in section
1902(l)(2)(A) of that
Act (42 U.S.C.
1396a(l)(2)(A)).
(iv) Evaluation.--Not later than 3
years after the date of enactment of
this subparagraph, the Secretary shall
complete an evaluation of--
(I) the effectiveness of
direct verification carried out
under this subparagraph in
decreasing the portion of the
verification sample that must
be verified under subparagraph
(G) while ensuring that
adequate verification
information is obtained; and
(II) the feasibility of
direct verification by State
agencies and local educational
agencies.
(v) Expanded use of direct
verification.--If the Secretary
determines that direct verification
significantly decreases the portion of
the verification sample that must be
verified under subparagraph (G), while
ensuring that adequate verification
information is obtained, and can be
conducted by most State agencies and
local educational agencies, the
Secretary may require a State agency or
local educational agency to implement
direct verification through 1 or more
of the programs described in clause
(i), as determined by the Secretary,
unless the State agency or local
educational agency demonstrates (under
criteria established by the Secretary)
that the State agency or local
educational agency lacks the capacity
to conduct, or is unable to implement,
direct verification.
(G) Household verification.--
(i) In general.--If an approved
household application is not verified
through the use of public agency
records, a local educational agency
shall provide to the household written
notice that--
(I) the approved household
application has been selected
for verification; and
(II) the household is
required to submit verification
information to confirm
eligibility for free or reduced
price meals.
(ii) Phone number.--The written
notice in clause (i) shall include a
toll-free phone number that parents and
legal guardians in households selected
for verification can call for
assistance with the verification
process.
(iii) Followup activities.--If a
household does not respond to a
verification request, a local
educational agency shall make at least
1 attempt to obtain the necessary
verification from the household in
accordance with guidelines and
regulations promulgated by the
Secretary.
(iv) Contract authority for school
food authorities.--A local educational
agency may contract (under standards
established by the Secretary) with a
third party to assist the local
educational agency in carrying out
clause (iii).
(H) Verification deadline.--
(i) General deadline.--
(I) In general.--Subject to
subclause (II), not later than
November 15 of each school
year, a local educational
agency shall complete the
verification activities
required for the school year
(including followup
activities).
(II) Extension.--Under
criteria established by the
Secretary, a State may extend
the deadline established under
subclause (I) for a school year
for a local educational agency
to December 15 of the school
year.
(ii) Eligibility changes.--Based on
the verification activities, the local
educational agency shall make
appropriate modifications to the
eligibility determinations made for
household applications in accordance
with criteria established by the
Secretary.
(I) Local conditions.--In the case of a
natural disaster, civil disorder, strike, or
other local condition (as determined by the
Secretary), the Secretary may substitute
alternatives for--
(i) the sample size and sample
selection criteria established under
subparagraph (D); and
(ii) the verification deadline
established under subparagraph (H).
(J) Individual review.--In accordance with
criteria established by the Secretary, the
local educational agency may, on individual
review--
(i) decline to verify no more than 5
percent of approved household
applications selected under
subparagraph (D); and
(ii) replace the approved household
applications with other approved
household applications to be verified.
(K) Feasibility study.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary shall
conduct a study of the feasibility of
using computer technology (including
data mining) to reduce--
(I) overcertification errors
in the school lunch program
under this Act;
(II) waste, fraud, and abuse
in connection with this
paragraph; and
(III) errors, waste, fraud,
and abuse in other nutrition
programs, as determined to be
appropriate by the Secretary.
(ii) Report.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of enactment of this
paragraph, the Secretary shall submit
to the Committee on Education and the
Workforce of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of
the Senate a report describing--
(I) the results of the
feasibility study conducted
under this subsection;
(II) how a computer system
using technology described in
clause (i) could be
implemented;
(III) a plan for
implementation; and
(IV) proposed legislation, if
necessary, to implement the
system.
(4) Direct certification for children in supplemental
nutrition assistance program households.--
(A) In general.--Subject to subparagraph (D),
each State agency shall enter into an agreement
with the State agency conducting eligibility
determinations for the supplemental nutrition
assistance program established under the Food
and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C. 2011 et
seq.).
(B) Procedures.--Subject to paragraph (6),
the agreement shall establish procedures under
which a child who is a member of a household
receiving assistance under the supplemental
nutrition assistance program shall be certified
as eligible for free lunches under this Act and
free breakfasts under the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), without
further application.
(C) Certification.--Subject to paragraph (6),
under the agreement, the local educational
agency conducting eligibility determinations
for a school lunch program under this Act and a
school breakfast program under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.)
shall certify a child who is a member of a
household receiving assistance under the
supplemental nutrition assistance program as
eligible for free lunches under this Act and
free breakfasts under the Child Nutrition Act
of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), without
further application.
(D) Applicability.--This paragraph applies
to--
(i) in the case of the school year
beginning July 2006, a school district
that had an enrollment of 25,000
students or more in the preceding
school year;
(ii) in the case of the school year
beginning July 2007, a school district
that had an enrollment of 10,000
students or more in the preceding
school year; and
(iii) in the case of the school year
beginning July 2008 and each subsequent
school year, each local educational
agency.
(E) Performance awards.--
(i) In general.--Effective for each
of the school years beginning July 1,
2011, July 1, 2012, and July 1, 2013,
the Secretary shall offer performance
awards to States to encourage the
States to ensure that all children
eligible for direct certification under
this paragraph are certified in
accordance with this paragraph.
(ii) Requirements.--For each school
year described in clause (i), the
Secretary shall--
(I) consider State data from
the prior school year,
including estimates contained
in the report required under
section 4301 of the Food,
Conservation, and Energy Act of
2008 (42 U.S.C. 1758a); and
(II) make performance awards
to not more than 15 States that
demonstrate, as determined by
the Secretary--
(aa) outstanding
performance; and
(bb) substantial
improvement.
(iii) Use of funds.--A State agency
that receives a performance award under
clause (i)--
(I) shall treat the funds as
program income; and
(II) may transfer the funds
to school food authorities for
use in carrying out the
program.
(iv) Funding.--
(I) In general.--On October
1, 2011, and each subsequent
October 1 through October 1,
2013, out of any funds in the
Treasury not otherwise
appropriated, the Secretary of
the Treasury shall transfer to
the Secretary--
(aa) $2,000,000 to
carry out clause
(ii)(II)(aa); and
(bb) $2,000,000 to
carry out clause
(ii)(II)(bb).
(II) Receipt and
acceptance.--The Secretary
shall be entitled to receive,
shall accept, and shall use to
carry out this clause the funds
transferred under subclause
(I), without further
appropriation.
(v) Payments not subject to judicial
review.--A determination by the
Secretary whether, and in what amount,
to make a performance award under this
subparagraph shall not be subject to
administrative or judicial review.
(F) Continuous improvement plans.--
(i) Definition of required
percentage.--In this subparagraph, the
term ``required percentage'' means--
(I) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2011, 80
percent;
(II) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2012, 90
percent; and
(III) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2013, and
each school year thereafter, 95
percent.
(ii) Requirements.--Each school year,
the Secretary shall--
(I) identify, using data from
the prior year, including
estimates contained in the
report required under section
4301 of the Food, Conservation,
and Energy Act of 2008 (42
U.S.C. 1758a), States that
directly certify less than the
required percentage of the
total number of children in the
State who are eligible for
direct certification under this
paragraph;
(II) require the States
identified under subclause (I)
to implement a continuous
improvement plan to fully meet
the requirements of this
paragraph, which shall include
a plan to improve direct
certification for the following
school year; and
(III) assist the States
identified under subclause (I)
to develop and implement a
continuous improvement plan in
accordance with subclause (II).
(iii) Failure to meet performance
standard.--
(I) In general.--A State that
is required to develop and
implement a continuous
improvement plan under clause
(ii)(II) shall be required to
submit the continuous
improvement plan to the
Secretary, for the approval of
the Secretary.
(II) Requirements.--At a
minimum, a continuous
improvement plan under
subclause (I) shall include--
(aa) specific
measures that the State
will use to identify
more children who are
eligible for direct
certification,
including improvements
or modifications to
technology, information
systems, or databases;
(bb) a timeline for
the State to implement
those measures; and
(cc) goals for the
State to improve direct
certification results.
(G) Without further application.--
(i) In general.--In this paragraph,
the term ``without further
application'' means that no action is
required by the household of the child.
(ii) Clarification.--A requirement
that a household return a letter
notifying the household of eligibility
for direct certification or eligibility
for free school meals does not meet the
requirements of clause (i).
(5) Discretionary certification.--Subject to
paragraph (6), any local educational agency may certify
any child as eligible for free lunches or breakfasts,
without further application, by directly communicating
with the appropriate State or local agency to obtain
documentation of the status of the child as--
(A) a member of a family that is receiving
assistance under the temporary assistance for
needy families program funded under part A of
title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.) that the Secretary determines
complies with standards established by the
Secretary that ensure that the standards under
the State program are comparable to or more
restrictive than those in effect on June 1,
1995;
(B) a homeless child or youth (defined as 1
of the individuals described in section 725(2)
of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11434a(2));
(C) served by the runaway and homeless youth
grant program established under the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5701 et seq.);
(D) a migratory child (as defined in section
1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399)); or
(E)(i) a foster child whose care and
placement is the responsibility of an agency
that administers a State plan under part B or E
of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or
(ii) a foster child who a court has placed
with a caretaker household.
(6) Use or disclosure of information.--
(A) In general.--The use or disclosure of any
information obtained from an application for
free or reduced price meals, or from a State or
local agency referred to in paragraph (3)(F),
(4), or (5), shall be limited to--
(i) a person directly connected with
the administration or enforcement of
this Act or the Child Nutrition Act of
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.)
(including a regulation promulgated
under either Act);
(ii) a person directly connected with
the administration or enforcement of--
(I) a Federal education
program;
(II) a State health or
education program administered
by the State or local
educational agency (other than
a program carried out under
title XIX or XXI of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et
seq.; 42 U.S.C. 1397aa et
seq.)); or
(III) a Federal, State, or
local means-tested nutrition
program with eligibility
standards comparable to the
school lunch program under this
Act;
(iii)(I) the Comptroller General of
the United States for audit and
examination authorized by any other
provision of law; and
(II) notwithstanding any other
provision of law, a Federal, State, or
local law enforcement official for the
purpose of investigating an alleged
violation of any program covered by
this paragraph or paragraph (3)(F),
(4), or (5);
(iv) a person directly connected with
the administration of the State
medicaid program under title XIX of the
Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396 et
seq.) or the State children's health
insurance program under title XXI of
that Act (42 U.S.C. 1397aa et seq.)
solely for the purposes of--
(I) identifying children
eligible for benefits under,
and enrolling children in,
those programs, except that
this subclause shall apply only
to the extent that the State
and the local educational
agency or school food authority
so elect; and
(II) verifying the
eligibility of children for
programs under this Act or the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42
U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); and
(v) a third party contractor
described in paragraph (3)(G)(iv).
(B) Limitation on information provided.--
Information provided under clause (ii) or (v)
of subparagraph (A) shall be limited to the
income eligibility status of the child for whom
application for free or reduced price meal
benefits is made or for whom eligibility
information is provided under paragraph (3)(F),
(4), or (5), unless the consent of the parent
or guardian of the child for whom application
for benefits was made is obtained.
(C) Criminal penalty.--A person described in
subparagraph (A) who publishes, divulges,
discloses, or makes known in any manner, or to
any extent not authorized by Federal law
(including a regulation), any information
obtained under this subsection shall be fined
not more than $1,000 or imprisoned not more
than 1 year, or both.
(D) Requirements for waiver of
confidentiality.--A State that elects to
exercise the option described in subparagraph
(A)(iv)(I) shall ensure that any local
educational agency or school food authority
acting in accordance with that option--
(i) has a written agreement with 1 or
more State or local agencies
administering health programs for
children under titles XIX and XXI of
the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C. 1396
et seq. and 1397aa et seq.) that
requires the health agencies to use the
information obtained under subparagraph
(A) to seek to enroll children in those
health programs; and
(ii)(I) notifies each household, the
information of which shall be disclosed
under subparagraph (A), that the
information disclosed will be used only
to enroll children in health programs
referred to in subparagraph (A)(iv);
and
(II) provides each parent or guardian
of a child in the household with an
opportunity to elect not to have the
information disclosed.
(E) Use of disclosed information.--A person
to which information is disclosed under
subparagraph (A)(iv)(I) shall use or disclose
the information only as necessary for the
purpose of enrolling children in health
programs referred to in subparagraph (A)(iv).
(7) Free and reduced price policy statement.--
(A) In general.--After the initial
submission, a local educational agency shall
not be required to submit a free and reduced
price policy statement to a State educational
agency under this Act unless there is a
substantive change in the free and reduced
price policy of the local educational agency.
(B) Routine change.--A routine change in the
policy of a local educational agency (such as
an annual adjustment of the income eligibility
guidelines for free and reduced price meals)
shall not be sufficient cause for requiring the
local educational agency to submit a policy
statement.
(8) Communications.--
(A) In general.--Any communication with a
household under this subsection or subsection
(d) shall be in an understandable and uniform
format and, to the maximum extent practicable,
in a language that parents and legal guardians
can understand.
(B) Electronic availability.--In addition to
the distribution of applications and
descriptive material in paper form as provided
for in this paragraph, the applications and
material may be made available electronically
via the Internet.
(9) Eligibility for free and reduced price lunches.--
(A) Free lunches.--Any child who is a member
of a household whose income, at the time the
application is submitted, is at an annual rate
which does not exceed the applicable family
size income level of the income eligibility
guidelines for free lunches, as determined
under paragraph (1), shall be served a free
lunch.
(B) Reduced price lunches.--
(i) In general.--Any child who is a
member of a household whose income, at
the time the application is submitted,
is at an annual rate greater than the
applicable family size income level of
the income eligibility guidelines for
free lunches, as determined under
paragraph (1), but less than or equal
to the applicable family size income
level of the income eligibility
guidelines for reduced price lunches,
as determined under paragraph (1),
shall be served a reduced price lunch.
(ii) Maximum price.--The price
charged for a reduced price lunch shall
not exceed 40 cents.
(C) Duration.--Except as otherwise specified
in paragraph (3)(E), (3)(H)(ii), and section
11(a), eligibility for free or reduced price
meals for any school year shall remain in
effect--
(i) beginning on the date of
eligibility approval for the current
school year; and
(ii) ending on a date during the
subsequent school year determined by
the Secretary.
(10) No physical segregation of or other discrimination
against any child eligible for a free lunch or a reduced price
lunch under this subsection shall be made by the school nor
shall there be any overt identification of any child by special
tokens or tickets, announced or published list of names, or by
other means.
(11) Any child who has a parent or guardian who (A) is
responsible for the principal support of such child and (B) is
unemployed shall be served a free or reduced price lunch,
respectively, during any period (i) in which such child's
parent or guardian continues to be unemployed and (ii) the
income of the child's parents or guardians during such period
of unemployment falls within the income eligibility criteria
for free lunches or reduced price lunches, respectively, based
on the current rate of income of such parents or guardians.
Local educational agencies shall publicly announce that such
children are eligible for free or reduced price lunch, and
shall make determinations with respect to the status of any
parent or guardian of any child under clauses (A) and (B) of
the preceding sentence on the basis of a statement executed in
such form as the Secretary may prescribe by such parent or
guardian. No physical segregation of, or other discrimination
against, any child eligible for a free or reduced price lunch
under this paragraph shall be made by the school nor shall
there be any overt identification of any such child by special
tokens or tickets, announced or published lists of names, or by
any other means.
(12)(A) A child shall be considered automatically eligible
for a free lunch and breakfast under this Act and the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.), respectively,
without further application or eligibility determination, if
the child is--
(i) a member of a household receiving assistance
under the supplemental nutrition assistance program
authorized under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 (7
U.S.C. 2011 et seq.);
(ii) a member of a family (under the State program
funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security
Act (42 U.S.C. 601 et seq.)) that the Secretary
determines complies with standards established by the
Secretary that ensure that the standards under the
State program are comparable to or more restrictive
than those in effect on June 1, 1995;
(iii) enrolled as a participant in a Head Start
program authorized under the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C.
9831 et seq.), on the basis of a determination that the
child meets the eligibility criteria prescribed under
section 645(a)(1)(B) of the Head Start Act (42 U.S.C.
9840(a)(1)(B));
(iv) a homeless child or youth (defined as 1
of the individuals described in section 725(2)
of the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act
(42 U.S.C. 11434a(2)));
(v) served by the runaway and homeless youth
grant program established under the Runaway and
Homeless Youth Act (42 U.S.C. 5701 et seq.);
(vi) a migratory child (as defined in section
1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399)); or
(vii)(I) a foster child whose care and
placement is the responsibility of an agency
that administers a State plan under part B or E
of title IV of the Social Security Act (42
U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or
(II) a foster child who a court has
placed with a caretaker household.
(B) Proof of receipt of supplemental nutrition assistance
program benefits or assistance under the State program funded
under part A of title IV of the Social Security Act (42 U.S.C.
601 et seq.) that the Secretary determines complies with
standards established by the Secretary that ensure that the
standards under the State program are comparable to or more
restrictive than those in effect on June 1, 1995, or of
enrollment or participation in a Head Start program on the
basis described in subparagraph (A)(iii), shall be sufficient
to satisfy any verification requirement imposed under this
subsection.
(13) Exclusion of certain military housing
allowances.--The amount of a basic allowance provided
under section 403 of title 37, United States Code, on
behalf of a member of a uniformed service for housing
that is acquired or constructed under subchapter IV of
chapter 169 of title 10, United States Code, or any
related provision of law, shall not be considered to be
income for the purpose of determining the eligibility
of a child who is a member of the household of the
member of a uniformed service for free or reduced price
lunches under this Act.
(14) Combat pay.--
(A) Definition of combat pay.--In this
paragraph, the term ``combat pay'' means any
additional payment under chapter 5 of title 37,
United States Code, or otherwise designated by
the Secretary to be appropriate for exclusion
under this paragraph, that is received by or
from a member of the United States Armed Forces
deployed to a designated combat zone, if the
additional pay--
(i) is the result of deployment to or
service in a combat zone; and
(ii) was not received immediately
prior to serving in a combat zone.
(B) Exclusion.--Combat pay shall not be
considered to be income for the purpose of
determining the eligibility for free or reduced
price meals of a child who is a member of the
household of a member of the United States
Armed Forces.
(15) Direct certification for children receiving
medicaid benefits.--
(A) Definitions.--In this paragraph:
(i) Eligible child.--The term
``eligible child'' means a child--
(I)(aa) who is eligible for
and receiving medical
assistance under the Medicaid
program; and
(bb) who is a member of a
family with an income as
measured by the Medicaid
program before the application
of any expense, block, or other
income disregard, that does not
exceed 133 percent of the
poverty line (as defined in
section 673(2) of the Community
Services Block Grant Act (42
U.S.C. 9902(2), including any
revision required by such
section)) applicable to a
family of the size used for
purposes of determining
eligibility for the Medicaid
program; or
(II) who is a member of a
household (as that term is
defined in section 245.2 of
title 7, Code of Federal
Regulations (or successor
regulations) with a child
described in subclause (I).
(ii) Medicaid program.--The term
``Medicaid program'' means the program
of medical assistance established under
title XIX of the Social Security Act
(42 U.S.C. 1396 et seq.).
(B) Demonstration project.--
(i) In general.--The Secretary,
acting through the Administrator of the
Food and Nutrition Service and in
cooperation with selected State
agencies, shall conduct a demonstration
project in selected local educational
agencies to determine whether direct
certification of eligible children is
an effective method of certifying
children for free lunches and
breakfasts under section 9(b)(1)(A) of
this Act and section 4(e)(1)(A) of the
Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1773(e)(1)(A)).
(ii) Scope of project.--The Secretary
shall carry out the demonstration
project under this subparagraph--
(I) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2012, in
selected local educational
agencies that collectively
serve 2.5 percent of students
certified for free and reduced
price meals nationwide, based
on the most recent available
data;
(II) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2013, in
selected local educational
agencies that collectively
serve 5 percent of students
certified for free and reduced
price meals nationwide, based
on the most recent available
data; and
(III) for the school year
beginning July 1, 2014, and
each subsequent school year, in
selected local educational
agencies that collectively
serve 10 percent of students
certified for free and reduced
price meals nationwide, based
on the most recent available
data.
(iii) Purposes of the project.--At a
minimum, the purposes of the
demonstration project shall be--
(I) to determine the
potential of direct
certification with the Medicaid
program to reach children who
are eligible for free meals but
not certified to receive the
meals;
(II) to determine the
potential of direct
certification with the Medicaid
program to directly certify
children who are enrolled for
free meals based on a household
application; and
(III) to provide an estimate
of the effect on Federal costs
and on participation in the
school lunch program under this
Act and the school breakfast
program established by section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) of direct
certification with the Medicaid
program.
(iv) Cost estimate.--For each of 2
school years of the demonstration
project, the Secretary shall estimate
the cost of the direct certification of
eligible children for free school meals
through data derived from--
(I) the school meal programs
authorized under this Act and
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966
(42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.);
(II) the Medicaid program;
and
(III) interviews with a
statistically representative
sample of households.
(C) Agreement.--
(i) In general.--Not later than July
1 of the first school year during which
a State agency will participate in the
demonstration project, the State agency
shall enter into an agreement with the
1 or more State agencies conducting
eligibility determinations for the
Medicaid program.
(ii) Without further application.--
Subject to paragraph (6), the agreement
described in subparagraph (D) shall
establish procedures under which an
eligible child shall be certified for
free lunches under this Act and free
breakfasts under section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773),
without further application (as defined
in paragraph (4)(G)).
(D) Certification.--For the school year
beginning on July 1, 2012, and each subsequent
school year, subject to paragraph (6), the
local educational agencies participating in the
demonstration project shall certify an eligible
child as eligible for free lunches under this
Act and free breakfasts under the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et seq.),
without further application (as defined in
paragraph (4)(G)).
(E) Site selection.--
(i) In general.--To be eligible to
participate in the demonstration
project under this subsection, a State
agency shall submit to the Secretary an
application at such time, in such
manner, and containing such information
as the Secretary may require.
(ii) Considerations.--In selecting
States and local educational agencies
for participation in the demonstration
project, the Secretary may take into
consideration such factors as the
Secretary considers to be appropriate,
which may include--
(I) the rate of direct
certification;
(II) the share of individuals
who are eligible for benefits
under the supplemental
nutrition assistance program
established under the Food and
Nutrition Act of 2008 (7 U.S.C.
2011 et seq.) who participate
in the program, as determined
by the Secretary;
(III) the income eligibility
limit for the Medicaid program;
(IV) the feasibility of
matching data between local
educational agencies and the
Medicaid program;
(V) the socioeconomic profile
of the State or local
educational agencies; and
(VI) the willingness of the
State and local educational
agencies to comply with the
requirements of the
demonstration project.
(F) Access to data.--For purposes of
conducting the demonstration project under this
paragraph, the Secretary shall have access to--
(i) educational and other records of
State and local educational and other
agencies and institutions receiving
funding or providing benefits for 1 or
more programs authorized under this Act
or the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42
U.S.C. 1771 et seq.); and
(ii) income and program participation
information from public agencies
administering the Medicaid program.
(G) Report to congress.--
(i) In general.--Not later than
October 1, 2014, the Secretary shall
submit to the Committee on Education
and Labor of the House of
Representatives and the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry of
the Senate, an interim report that
describes the results of the
demonstration project required under
this paragraph.
(ii) Final report.--Not later than
October 1, 2015, the Secretary shall
submit a final report to the committees
described in clause (i).
(H) Funding.--
(i) In general.--On October 1, 2010,
out of any funds in the Treasury not
otherwise appropriated, the Secretary
of the Treasury shall transfer to the
Secretary to carry out subparagraph (G)
$5,000,000, to remain available until
expended.
(ii) Receipt and acceptance.--The
Secretary shall be entitled to receive,
shall accept, and shall use to carry
out subparagraph (G) the funds
transferred under clause (i), without
further appropriation.
(c) School lunch programs under this Act shall be operated on
a nonprofit basis. Commodities purchased under the authority of
section 32 of the Act of August 24, 1935, may be donated by the
Secretary to schools, in accordance with the needs as
determined by local school authorities, for utilization in the
school lunch program under this Act as well as to other schools
carrying out nonprofit school lunch programs and institutions
authorized to receive such commodities. The requirements of
this section relating to the service of meals without cost or
at a reduced cost shall apply to the lunch program of any
school utilizing commodities donated under any provision of
law.
(d)(1) The Secretary shall require as a condition of
eligibility for receipt of free or reduced price lunches that
the member of the household who executes the application
furnish the last 4 digits of the social security account number
of the parent or guardian who is the primary wage earner
responsible for the care of the child for whom the application
is made, or that of another appropriate adult member of the
child's household, as determined by the Secretary.
(2) No member of a household may be provided a free or
reduced price lunch under this Act unless--
(A) appropriate documentation relating to the income
of such household (as prescribed by the Secretary) has
been provided to the appropriate local educational
agency so that the local educational agency may
calculate the total income of such household;
(B) documentation showing that the household is
participating in the supplemental nutrition assistance
program under the Food and Nutrition Act of 2008 has
been provided to the appropriate local educational
agency;
(C) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing that the
family is receiving assistance under the State program
funded under part A of title IV of the Social Security
Act that the Secretary determines complies with
standards established by the Secretary that ensure that
the standards under the State program are comparable to
or more restrictive than those in effect on June 1,
1995;
(D) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing that the
child meets the criteria specified in clauses (iv) or
(v) of subsection (b)(12)(A);
(E) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing the status
of the child as a migratory child (as defined in
section 1309 of the Elementary and Secondary Education
Act of 1965 (20 U.S.C. 6399));
(F)(i) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing the status
of the child as a foster child whose care and placement
is the responsibility of an agency that administers a
State plan under part B or E of title IV of the Social
Security Act (42 U.S.C. 621 et seq.); or
(ii) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing
the status of the child as a foster child who a
court has placed with a caretaker household; or
(G) documentation has been provided to the
appropriate local educational agency showing the status
of the child as an eligible child (as defined in
subsection (b)(15)(A)).
(e) A school or school food authority participating in a
program under this Act may not contract with a food service
company to provide a la carte food service unless the company
agrees to offer free, reduced price, and full-price
reimbursable meals to all eligible children.
(f) Nutritional Requirements.--
(1) In general.--Schools that are participating in
the school lunch program or school breakfast program
shall serve lunches and breakfasts that--
(A) are consistent with the goals of the most
recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans
published under section 301 of the National
Nutrition Monitoring and Related Research Act
of 1990 (7 U.S.C. 5341); and
(B) consider the nutrient needs of children
who may be at risk for inadequate food intake
and food insecurity.
(2) To assist schools in meeting the requirements of this
subsection, the Secretary--
(A) shall--
(i) develop, and provide to schools,
standardized recipes, menu cycles, and food
product specification and preparation
techniques; and
(ii) provide to schools information regarding
nutrient standard menu planning, assisted
nutrient standard menu planning, and food-based
menu systems; and
(B) may provide to schools information regarding
other approaches, as determined by the Secretary.
(3) Use of any reasonable approach.--
(A) In general.--A school food service authority may
use any reasonable approach, within guidelines
established by the Secretary in a timely manner, to
meet the requirements of this subsection, including--
(i) using the school nutrition meal pattern
in effect for the 1994-1995 school year; and
(ii) using any of the approaches described in
paragraph (3).
(B) Nutrient analysis.--The Secretary may not require
a school to conduct or use a nutrient analysis to meet
the requirements of this subsection.
(4) Waiver of requirement for weighted averages for
nutrient analysis.--During the period ending on
September 30, 2010, the Secretary shall not require the
use of weighted averages for nutrient analysis of menu
items and foods offered or served as part of a meal
offered or served under the school lunch program under
this Act or the school breakfast program under section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
(g) Not later than 1 year after the date of enactment of this
subsection, the Secretary shall provide a notification to
Congress that justifies the need for production records
required under section 210.10(b) of title 7, Code of Federal
Regulations, and describes how the Secretary has reduced
paperwork relating to the school lunch and school breakfast
programs.
(h) Food Safety.--
(1) In general.--A school participating in the school
lunch program under this Act or the school breakfast
program under section 4 of the Child Nutrition Act of
1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773) shall--
(A) at least twice during each school year,
obtain a food safety inspection conducted by a
State or local governmental agency responsible
for food safety inspections;
(B) post in a publicly visible location a
report on the most recent inspection conducted
under subparagraph (A); and
(C) on request, provide a copy of the report
to a member of the public.
(2) State and local government inspections.--Nothing
in paragraph (1) prevents any State or local government
from adopting or enforcing any requirement for more
frequent food safety inspections of schools.
(3) Audits and reports by states.--For fiscal year
2024, each State shall annually--
(A) audit food safety inspections of schools
conducted under paragraphs (1) and (2); and
(B) submit to the Secretary a report of the
results of the audit.
(4) Audit by the secretary.--For fiscal year 2024,
the Secretary shall annually audit State reports of
food safety inspections of schools submitted under
paragraph (3).
(5) School food safety program.--
(A) In general.--Each school food authority
shall implement a school food safety program,
in the preparation and service of each meal
served to children, that complies with any
hazard analysis and critical control point
system established by the Secretary.
(B) Applicability.--Subparagraph (A) shall
apply to any facility or part of a facility in
which food is stored, prepared, or served for
the purposes of the school nutrition programs
under this Act or section 4 of the Child
Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773).
(i) Single Permanent Agreement Between State Agency and
School Food Authority; Common Claims Form.--
(1) In general.--If a single State agency administers
any combination of the school lunch program under this
Act, the school breakfast program under section 4 of
the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1773), the
summer food service program for children under section
13 of this Act, or the child and adult care food
program under section 17 of this Act, the agency
shall--
(A) require each school food authority to
submit to the State agency a single agreement
with respect to the operation by the authority
of the programs administered by the State
agency; and
(B) use a common claims form with respect to
meals and supplements served under the programs
administered by the State agency.
(2) Additional requirement.--The agreement described
in paragraph (1)(A) shall be a permanent agreement that
may be amended as necessary.
(j) Purchases of Locally Produced Foods.--The Secretary
shall--
(1) encourage institutions receiving funds under this
Act and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771
et seq.) to purchase unprocessed agricultural products,
both locally grown and locally raised, to the maximum
extent practicable and appropriate;
(2) advise institutions participating in a program
described in paragraph (1) of the policy described in
that paragraph and paragraph (3) and post information
concerning the policy on the website maintained by the
Secretary; and
(3) allow institutions receiving funds under this Act
and the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C. 1771 et
seq.), including the Department of Defense Fresh Fruit
and Vegetable Program, to use a geographic preference
for the procurement of unprocessed agricultural
products, both locally grown and locally raised.
(k) Information on the School Nutrition Environment.--
(1) In general.--The Secretary shall--
(A) establish requirements for local
educational agencies participating in the
school lunch program under this Act and the
school breakfast program established by section
4 of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1773) to report information about the school
nutrition environment, for all schools under
the jurisdiction of the local educational
agencies, to the Secretary and to the public in
the State on a periodic basis; and
(B) provide training and technical assistance
to States and local educational agencies on the
assessment and reporting of the school
nutrition environment, including the use of any
assessment materials developed by the
Secretary.
(2) Requirements.--In establishing the requirements
for reporting on the school nutrition environment under
paragraph (1), the Secretary shall--
(A) include information pertaining to food
safety inspections, local wellness policies,
meal program participation, the nutritional
quality of program meals, and other information
as determined by the Secretary; and
(B) ensure that information is made available
to the public by local educational agencies in
an accessible, easily understood manner in
accordance with guidelines established by the
Secretary.
(3) Authorization of appropriations.--There are
authorized to be appropriated to carry out this
subsection such sums as are necessary for each of
fiscal years 2011 through 2015.
(l) Food Donation Program.--
(1) In general.--Each school and local educational
agency participating in the school lunch program under
this Act may donate any food not consumed under such
program to eligible local food banks or charitable
organizations.
(2) Guidance.--
(A) In general.--Not later than 180 days
after the date of the enactment of this
subsection, the Secretary shall develop and
publish guidance to schools and local
educational agencies participating in the
school lunch program under this Act to assist
such schools and local educational agencies in
donating food under this subsection.
(B) Updates.--The Secretary shall update such
guidance as necessary.
(3) Liability.--Any school or local educational
agency making donations pursuant to this subsection
shall be exempt from civil and criminal liability to
the extent provided under the Bill Emerson Good
Samaritan Food Donation Act (42 U.S.C. 1791).
(4) Definition.--In this subsection, the term
``eligible local food banks or charitable
organizations'' means any food bank or charitable
organization which is exempt from tax under section
501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code of 1986 (26
U.S.C. 501(c)(3)).
* * * * * * *
MINORITY VIEWS
INTRODUCTION
H.R. 649, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025,
removes the requirement that milk served in the National School
Lunch Program (NSLP) be consistent with the Dietary Guidelines
for Americans (DGAs), a federally established, evidence-based,
comprehensive set of recommendations on nutrition. In making
nutrition policy, it is important to maintain the unbiased
process to ensure that children receive the most nutritious
meals possible, free from political interests and interference.
H.R. 649 sets a precedent of Congress legislating the foods and
beverages served in schools, even if such legislation would
contradict evidence-based recommendations. Further, H.R. 649
runs contrary to the Committee's longstanding bipartisan
practice of not considering standalone child nutrition
legislation outside of a full reauthorization that
comprehensively invests in and improves federal child nutrition
programs.
CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS ARE VITAL PROGRAMS
THAT SHOULD BE PROTECTED
Federal child nutrition programs such as NSLP provide many
school-aged children with up to half of their daily
calories.\1\ Collectively, these programs ensure nutrition
security for our nation's infants and children during a
critical period of growth and development and provide
nutritious meals and snacks in a variety of settings, such as
schools, child care centers, and summer camps. These programs
are authorized in two federal statutes: the Richard B. Russell
National School Lunch Act\2\ and the Child Nutrition Act of
1966.\3\ The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act was
first signed into law by President Truman in 1946 to bolster
national security threatened by rampant malnutrition among
military recruits.\4\ School meals have been associated with
increased focus in the classroom, improved educational
outcomes, and reduced food insecurity\5\ and are especially
impactful for children from low-income and food insecure
families.\6\ According to the most recent census survey data,
nearly 18 percent of households with children under 18 years
old struggled with food insecurity in 2023.\7\ This data is
troubling considering that Republicans are reportedly
entertaining significant cuts to child nutrition programs
through the budget reconciliation process\8\--a measure that
will be used to extend tax cuts to benefit corporations and the
wealthy.\9\ For over 75 years, child nutrition programs have
been instrumental in overall health and school readiness, which
is why it is imperative that these programs be protected.\10\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\1\Lindsey Miller et al., Rapid Health Impact Assessment on Changes
to School Nutrition Standards to Align with 2020-2025 Dietary
Guidelines for Americans, 2 (2023), https://healthyeatingresearch.org/
wp-content/uploads/2023/02/HER-Health-Impact-Asessment-FIN.pdf.
\2\The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, Pub. L. No.
79-396, 60 Stat. (1946) (codified in scattered sections of 7 U.S.C.).
\3\Child Nutrition Act of 1966, Pub. L. No. 89-642, 80 Stat. (1966)
(codified in scattered sections of 7 U.S.C.).
\4\History of School Lunch, Illinois School Nutrition Association,
https://www.ilsna.net/
resources/schoolnutrition/historyschoollunch (last visited Feb. 19,
2025).
\5\The Importance of School Meals, No Kid Hungry, https://
state.nokidhungry.org/new-york/wp-content/uploads/sites/16/2020/08/
Importance-of-School-Meals.pdf (last visited Feb. 19, 2025).
\6\Food Research & Action Center, School Meals are Essential for
Student Health and Learning (May 2021), https://frac.org/wp-content/
uploads/School-Meals-are-Essential-Health-and-Learning.
pdf.
\7\U.S. Dep't of Agric. Econ. Rsch. Serv., Food Security in the
U.S.--Key Statistics & Graphics (Jan. 8, 2025), https://
www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-nutrition-assistance/food-security-in-the-
us/key-statistics-graphics.
\8\Reconciliation Options, POLITICO, https://www.politico.com/f/
?id=00000194-74a8-d40a-ab9e-7fbc70940000 (last visited Feb. 19, 2025).
\9\Deborah Weinstein, House Budget Proposal Hurts Millions of
People to Pay for Still More Breaks for the Rich, COALITION ON HUMAN
NEEDS (Feb. 17, 2025), https://www.chn.org/voices/house-budget-
proposal-hurts-millions-of-people/.
\10\U.S. Dep't of Agric. Econ. Rsch. Serv., Child Nutrition
Programs (Feb. 11, 2025), https://www.ers.usda.gov/topics/food-
nutrition-assistance/child-nutrition-programs.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CHILD NUTRITION PROGRAMS SUPPORT
CHILDREN'S HEALTH AND DEVELOPMENT
Research has shown that nutrition plays a key role in the
health and academic outcomes of children,\11\ making it vital
that school meals are as nutritious as possible. Strong
nutrition standards for foods and beverages provided through
federal child nutrition programs are especially important for
improving health equity. Black, Hispanic, and American Indian
and Alaska Native communities are often disproportionally
impacted by food insecurity and these communities often face
diet-related chronic diseases at a disproportionate rate.\12\
Additionally, participation rates in NSLP are higher among
Hispanic and non-Hispanic Black students compared to non-
Hispanic white students and among students from lower income
households compared to those from higher income households.\13\
Strong nutrition standards also have a demonstrated positive
health impact on children: the previous update to the school
meal patterns, more than a decade ago, led to increased
consumption of fruits, vegetables, and whole grain-rich foods,
and reduced consumption of saturated fat and sodium.\14\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\11\ See, e.g., Howard Taras, Nutrition and Student Performance at
School, 75 J. of Sch. Health 199, 199-213 (2005); Debbie MacLellan et
al., Food Intake and Academic Performance Among Adolescents, 69 Can. J.
of Dietetic Prac. & Rsch. 141 (2008).
\12\ Matthew P. Rabbitt et al., Household Food Security in the
United States in 2023, 20 (U.S.D.A. ERS 2024), https://ers.usda.gov/
sites/default/files/_laserfiche/publications/109896/ERR-
337.pdf?v=20266; Valarie Blue Bird Jernigan et al., Food Insecurity
among American Indians and Alaska Natives: A National Profile Using the
Current Population Survey--Food Security Supplement, 12 J. Hunger Env't
Nutrition 1 (2017), https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/
PMC5422031/pdf/nihms827391.pdf; Richard V. Reeves & Faith Smith, Black
and Hispanic Americans at Higher Risk of Hypertension, Diabetes,
Obesity: Time to Fix Our Broken Food System, The Brookings Inst. (Aug.
7, 2020), https://www.brookings.edu/articles/black-and-hispanic-
americans-at-higher-risk-of-hypertension-diabetes-obesity-time-to-fix-
our-broken-food-system/.
\13\ Mary Kay Fox et al., School Nutrition and Meal Cost Study
Final Report Volume 4: Student Participation, Satisfaction, Plate
Waste, and Dietary Intakes, 10-11 (2019), https://www.
mathematica.org/publications/school-nutrition-and-meal-cost-study-
final-report-volume-4-student -participation-satisfaction-plate.
\14\ Janelle Chaves, Changes to US school meal program helped
reduce BMI in children and teens, study says, CNN (Feb. 13, 2023 11:26
AM), https://www.cnn.com/2023/02/13/health/school-meals-bmi-study-
wellness/index.html; Aruna Chandran et al., Changes in Body Mass Index
among School-Aged Youths Following Implementation of the Healthy,
Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, 177 JAMA Pediatrics 401 (2023), https://
doi.org/10.1001/jamapediatrics.2022.5828; Zachary Goldstein, School
meals get an upgrade: What to expect going forward, Center for Science
in the Public Interest (Apr. 24, 2024), https://www.cspinet.org/cspi-
news/school-meals-get-upgrade-what-expect-going-forward.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Milk Can Provide Important Nutrition for Children
Milk is an important source of protein and contains
carbohydrates and fats.\15\ Along with macronutrients important
for children's growth and development, milk is also a source of
calcium and is fortified to provide vitamin D.\16\ The most
recent DGAs, for 2020-2025, state that healthy dietary patterns
include fat-free and low-fat (1%) milk, yogurt, and cheese for
children two years and older.\17\ The Dietary Guidelines
Advisory Committee's 2025 Scientific Report's findings
supported maintaining the existing recommendations for fat-free
and low-fat (1%) milk.\18\ Recognizing the nutritional benefits
that milk can provide, regulation requires that unflavored milk
be offered at each school meal service.\19\ While the meal
program actively promotes milk consumption, researchers have
found that national dairy fluid milk consumption declines with
age; this decline is part of a longer-term decline that has
been occurring since 1975, when the U.S. Department of
Agriculture (USDA) began tracking annual consumption of milk,
cheese, and other dairy products.\20\ Additionally, milk
consumption can vary across racial and ethnic groups as Boston
Children's Hospital found that 80 percent of all African
Americans and Native Americans and over 90 percent of Asian
Americans are unable to process lactose.\21\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\15\Paula C. Pereira, Milk nutritional composition and its role in
human health, 30 Nutrition 619 (2014).
\16\U.S. Dep't of Agric. & U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs.,
Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 2020-2025 60 (9th ed. 2020), https://
www.dietaryguidelines.gov/sites/default/files/2020-12/
Dietary_Guidelines_for_Americans_2020-2025.pdf.
\17\Id. at 88. The DGAs recommend: 2-2\1/2\ cups or the equivalent
per day of dairy for children ages 2 through 8 (based on caloric intake
of 1,000-2,000 calories per day); and 3 cups or the equivalent per day
of dairy for children ages 9 through 18 (based on caloric intake of
1,400-3,200 calories per day). Also, beverages that are calorie-free--
especially water--or that contribute beneficial nutrients, such as fat-
free and low-fat milk and 100% juice, should be the primary beverages
consumed.
\18\U.S. Dep't of Agric. & U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs.,
Scientific Report of the 2025 Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, 5,
https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/2025-advisory-
committee-report (last visited Feb. 19, 2025).
\19\7 C.F.R. Sec. 210.10(c).
\20\Dave Natzke, Growth Industry: Dairy Product Consumption
Measures Up, Ag Proud (Oct. 26, 2022), https://www.agproud.com/
articles/56206-growth-industry-dairy-product-consumption-measures-up.
\21\Boston Child.'s Hosp., Lactose Intolerance, https://
www.childrenshospital.org/conditions/
lactose-intolerance (last visited Feb. 19, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
CURRENT STATUTORY AND REGULATORY FRAMEWORK OF
NUTRITION STANDARDS RELIES ON SCIENCE
Nutritional requirements are not outlined in statute, and
current law requires the USDA Secretary to provide ``minimum
nutritional requirements'' founded on ``tested nutritional
research.''\22\ Current law also requires school meals to be
``consistent with the goals'' of the latest dietary
guidelines.\23\ Every five years, the DGAs are formed through
an advisory committee of experts appointed to review scientific
evidence on nutrition and health and consider public comments
in the establishment of the DGAs.\24\ Since the 1980s, the DGAs
have provided nutritional and dietary information for the
general public and for federal food, nutrition, and health
programs guided by the most current scientific and medical
knowledge.\25\ USDA establishes detailed nutritional
requirements for school meal programs through regulations on a
periodic basis consistent with the most recent DGAs.\26\
Specific nutrition standards for foods and beverages served in
the NSLP are not written in statute to specifically allow for
adaptations in line with the latest science and expert
recommendations. The framework also ensures that standards are
developed apolitically and are largely independent of the
legislative branch.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\22\ Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1758(a)(1)(A).
\23\ Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act, 42 U.S.C.
Sec. 1758(f).
\24\ U.S. Dep't of Agric. & U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs.,
Dietary Guidelines for Americans: Who's Involved in Updating the
Dietary Guidelines, https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/about-dietary-
guidelines/process (last visited Feb. 19, 2025).
\25\ U.S. Dep't of Agric. & U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs.,
Dietary Guidelines for Americans, https://www.dietaryguidelines.gov/
about-dietary-guidelines/process (last visited Feb. 19, 2025); U.S.
Dep't of Agric. & U.S. Dep't of Health & Hum. Servs., Dietary
Guidelines for Americans: Monitoring and Related Research Act, https://
www.dietaryguidelines.gov/about-dietary-guidelines/process/monitoring-
act (last visited Feb. 19, 2025).
\26\ 7 C.F.R. Sec. 210.10; 7 C.F.R. Sec. 220.8.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Whole milk and reduced-fat (2%) milk (flavored or
unflavored) have not been permitted in school meals for over a
decade. In 2012, updated regulations requiring school food
authorities (SFAs) to offer unflavored low-fat (1%) and
flavored fat-free milk were issued under the Obama
Administration pursuant to the bipartisan Healthy, Hunger-Free
Kids Act of 2010.\27\ Congressional and administrative actions
resulted in low-fat (1%) flavored milk being available
beginning in School Year (SY) 2017-2018.\28\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\27\Healthy, Hunger-Free Kids Act of 2010, Pub. L. No. 296, 124
Stat. 3183-3266 (2010).
\28\A 2017 interim final rule from the Trump Administration, as
well as the 2018 final rule, allowed SFAs to offer flavored low-fat
milk; however, a U.S. District Court vacated the 2018 final rule,
returning standards to the 2012 final rule. Ctr. for Sci. in the Pub.
Interest, v. Perdue, 438 F. Supp. 3d 546 (D. Md. 2020). Since the 2012
final rule did not allow schools to offer low-fat flavored milk,
Congress reinstated the allowance to offer low-fat flavored milk
through a Fiscal Year (FY) 2021 appropriations rider. Subsequently, a
2022 final transitional rule allowed schools to offer low-fat flavored
milk with further rulemaking expected for subsequent years. In March
2024, the Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 included a provision
requiring the upcoming final rule to allow schools to serve 1% flavored
milk. Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2021, Pub. L. No. 116-260,
Sec. 789, 134 Stat. 1182, 1231 (2020); Child Nutrition Programs:
Transitional Standards for Milk, Whole Grains, and Sodium, 87 Fed. Reg.
6984 (Feb. 7, 2022) (codified at 7 C.F.R. pt. 210, 215, 220, and 226);
Consolidated Appropriations Act, 2024 Pub. L. No. 118-42,
Sec. Sec. 769, 770 (2024).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Biden Administration worked to improve the health and
nutrition of students by promulgating regulations to align
school meal standards with the goals of the latest DGAs. On
April 25, 2024, USDA published the Child Nutrition Programs:
Meal Patterns Consistent with the 2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines
for Americans final rule.\29\ Under the final rule, flavored
non-fat and low-fat milk (1%) are subject to new added sugar
limits of no more than 10 grams of added sugar per 8 fluid
ounces for flavored milk served in elementary schools and no
more than 15 grams of added sugar per 12 fluid ounces for
flavored milk served in middle and high schools, effective SY
2025-2026.\30\ Additionally, the final rule requires schools to
limit added sugars to less than 10 percent of total calories
per week in the school breakfast and lunch programs starting in
SY 2027-2028.\31\ This guidance was based on research showing
added sugars can increase risk factors associated with
cardiovascular disease.\32\ With milk being the leading source
of added sugars in school meal programs, this Biden-era
guidance is a step toward addressing the health concerns
related to the consumption of added sugars.\33\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\29\Child Nutrition Programs: Meal Patterns Consistent With the
2020-2025 Dietary Guidelines for Americans, 89 Fed. Reg. 31962 (Apr.
25, 2024) (codified at 7 C.F.R. pt. 210, 215, 220, 225, and 226).
\30\Id. at 31977, 31984.
\31\Id. at 31977.
\32\Miriam B. Vos et al., Added Sugars and Cardiovascular Disease
Risk in Children: A Scientific Statement from the American Heart
Association, 135 Circulation 1017 (2017); P.J. Moynihan & S.A.M. Kelly,
Effect on caries of restricting sugars intake: systematic review to
inform WHO guidelines, 93 J. Dental Rsch. 8 (2014), https://
www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3872848/.
\33\Child Nutrition Programs, supra note 29, at 32101-32102.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 649 MOVES AWAY FROM UNBIASED,
SCIENCE-BASED RECOMMENDATIONS
H.R. 649 amends the Richard B. Russell National School
Lunch Act to allow for flavored and unflavored whole, reduced-
fat (2%), low-fat (1%), and fat-free fluid milk as well as
lactose-free fluid milk to be offered as part of a reimbursable
meal in schools through the NSLP. As described above,
currently, schools participating in the NSLP are allowed to
offer unflavored or flavored low-fat milk (1%) and/or fat-free
milk.
H.R. 649 makes milk available in schools regardless of fat
or added sugar content, eroding the Biden Administration's
final rule updating nutrition standards to align with the most
recent DGAs. Further, the bill excludes milk fat from
classification as saturated fat for the purpose of measuring
compliance with the allowable school nutrition saturated fat
standards. Current regulations limit average saturated fat
content of meals offered over a five-day school week to less
than 10 percent of total calories, and the saturated fat of
whole and 2% milk exceeds that limit.\34\ The bill also makes a
few smaller changes that are unobjectionable. H.R. 649 requires
a written statement from a licensed physician, parent, or legal
guardian identifying the student's disability for fluid milk
substitution; the bill also prohibits schools participating in
the school lunch program from purchasing or offering milk
produced by China state-owned enterprises.\35\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\34\7 C.F.R. Sec. 210.10.
\35\Prior data suggest that nearly all school food authorities
(SFAs) purchase milk from domestic producers, according to the most
recent Buy American reporting data. See, Nick Beyler et al., Child
Nutrition Program Operations Study (CN-OPS-II): SY 2017-2018 35 (2022),
https://fns-prod.azureedge.us/sites/default/files/resource-files/CNOPS-
II-SY2017-18.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The bill is opposed by over 30 organizations including the
National WIC Association, the American Public Health
Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the Center for
Science in the Public Interest, the Physicians Committee for
Responsible Medicine, the National Association of Pediatric
Nurse Practitioners, and the American Heart Association.\36\
These organizations make it clear that ``[s]ingling out milk--
in this case, whole and reduced-fat milk--to be exempt from the
recommendations of the Dietary Guidelines is a slippery slope
for allowing special interests to carve out exemptions in
school meal program rules.''\37\
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\36\Letter from members of the National Alliance for Nutrition and
Activity to Sens. Boozman and Klobuchar & Reps. Walberg & Scott
opposing S.222/H.R. 649, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025
(Feb. 11, 2025), https://mcusercontent.com/56c53970e9e8f3069990102a6/
files/44e18e61-06b8-15b5-4554-4fac197e566e/
Sign_On_Letter_Oppose_the_Whole_Milk_for_Healthy_
Kids_Act_2025.pdf (``Passing S.222/H.R. 649 would be a departure from
the long-standing tradition of establishing food and nutrition
standards for federal child nutrition programs based upon the findings
of independent reviewers and the scientific community.''); Letter from
nutrition, environmental, and racial equity organizations to Reps.
Walberg & Scott opposing H.R. 649, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act
of 2025 (Feb. 12, 2025), https://house.app.box.com/s/
56ojn8udfdwc2aol0dobkvnvdqfgptwe/file/1775738910018; Letter from the
Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine to Reps. Walberg & Scott
Opposing H.R. 649, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025 (Feb.
10, 2025), https://house.app.box.com/s/56ojn8udfdwc2aol0dobkvnv
dqfgptwe/file/1775731206399.
\37\Letter from members of the National Alliance for Nutrition and
Activity to Sens. Boozman and Klobuchar & Reps. Walberg & Scott
opposing S.222/H.R. 649, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025
(Feb. 11, 2025), https://mcusercontent.com/56c53970e9e8f3069990102a6/
files/44e18e61-06b8-15b5-4554-4fac197e566e/
Sign_On_Letter_Oppose_the_Whole_Milk_for_Healthy_
Kids_Act_2025.pdf.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
H.R. 649 COULD NEGATIVELY IMPACT CHILDREN'S HEALTH
H.R. 649 fails to acknowledge that milk is a top source of
saturated fat in American diets.\38\ The American Heart
Association consistently agrees that saturated fat raises
``bad'' cholesterol, a known risk factor for heart disease.\39\
Additionally, according to the National Health and Nutritional
Examination Survey, one in five children and adolescents ages 6
to 19 have ``at least one abnormal cholesterol measure.''\40\
The DGAs, along with the American Heart Association\41\ and the
American Academy of Pediatrics,\42\ recommend switching to low-
fat (1%) and fat-free milk for children two years old and
older. Additionally, fat-free and low-fat (1%) milk both
provide slightly more nutrients than whole milk and reduced fat
milk (2%), but with lower fat, saturated fat, cholesterol, and
calories.\43\ The American Heart Association,\44\ the American
College of Cardiology,\45\ and the World Health
Organization\46\ are all in agreement that replacing saturated
fats with unsaturated fats reduces the risk of heart disease in
both children and adults.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\38\Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine, Health Concerns
About Dairy, https://www.pcrm.org/good-nutrition/nutrition-information/
health-concerns-about-dairy (last visited on Feb. 19, 2025).
\39\Am. Heart Ass'n, Saturated Fat (Aug. 23, 2024), https://
www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-smart/fats/
saturated-fats#::text=Should%20I%20eat%20them%20or,higher%
20risk%20for%20heart%20disease.
\40\Duong Nguyen et al., Abnormal Cholesterol Among Children and
Adolescents in the United States, 2011-2014, Nat'l Ctr. for Health
Stats. Data Brief (Dec. 2015), https://www.cdc.gov/nchs/data/
databriefs/DB228.pdf.
\41\Am. Heart Ass'n, Dietary Recommendations for Healthy Children
(Sep. 24, 2024), https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-
eating/eat-smart/nutrition-basics/dietary-recommenda tions-for-healthy-
children.
\42\Anthony Porto & Rachel Drake, Cow's Milk Alternatives: Parent
FAQs (June 2, 2022), https://www.healthychildren.org/English/healthy-
living/nutrition/Pages/milk-allergy-foods-and-
ingredients-to-avoid.aspx.
\43\Am. Heart Ass'n, Dairy Products--Milk, Yogurt, and Cheese (Dec.
20, 2023), https://www.heart.org/en/healthy-living/healthy-eating/eat-
smart/nutrition-basics/dairy-products-milk-yogurt-and-cheese.
\44\Frank M. Sacks, et al., Dietary Fats and Cardiovascular
Disease: A Presidential Advisory From the American Heart Association,
136 Circulation 1 (July 18, 2017), https://www.ahajournals.org/doi/pdf/
10.1161/CIR.0000000000000510.
\45\Am. Coll. of Cardiology, Unsaturated Fats, High-Quality Carbs
Lower Risk of Heart Disease (Sept. 28, 2015), https://www.acc.org/
About-ACC/Press-Releases/2015/09/28/13/58/Unsaturated
-Fats-High-Quality-Carbs-Lower-Risk-of-Heart-
Disease#::text=A%20study%20published%20
today%20in,the%20risk%20of%20heart%20disease.
\46\World Health Org. Healthy Diet (Apr. 29, 2020), https://
www.who.int/news-room/fact-sheets/detail/healthy-diet; World Health
Org., Saturated fatty acid and trans-fatty acid intake for adults and
children: WHO guideline, ix (July 17, 2023), https://www.who.int/
publications/i/item/9789240073630.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
The Committee is also very concerned by the hyper-
politicization of public health and the Trump Administration's
actions that have taken aim at public health research and other
science-based processes.\47\ Troublingly, Project 2025 calls
for the Administration to work with Congress to repeal or at
the very minimum significantly reform the DGAs,\48\ citing
unsubstantiated claims regarding the politicization of a
process that has long been considered evidence-based and
apolitical. Committee Democrats will work tirelessly to protect
the DGA process and to ensure that science guides the nation's
public health response.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
\47\Anil Oza, Trump Administration's Abrupt Cancellation of
Scientific Meetings Prompts Confusion, Concern, STAT (Jan. 22, 2025),
https://www.statnews.com/2025/01/22/trump-
administrations-cancels-scientific-meetings-abruptly/.
\48\Full Text of Project 2025 Mandate for Leadership, Internet
Archive, https://archive.org/stream/2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL/
2025_MandateForLeadership_FULL_djvu.txt (last visited Feb. 17, 2025).
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
DEMOCRATIC AMENDMENTS OFFERED DURING MARKUP OF H.R. 649
Committee Democrats did not offer any amendments during the
markup of H.R. 649.
CONCLUSION
Nutrition standards for school meal programs are best left
to evidence-based recommendations from nutrition and public
health experts. Instead of taking a comprehensive approach to
improving federal child nutrition programs, H.R. 649 dismisses
the apolitical and evidence-based nutrition science that we
depend on to improve the health of school-aged children across
the country. Federal child nutrition programs have provided
children and families with vital nutrition support for decades,
and any proposed cuts to these programs or erosion of meal
standards undermines the original intent of federal statute.
For the reasons stated above, a majority of Committee Democrats
opposed H.R. 649 when the Committee on Education and Workforce
considered it on February 12, 2025. We urge the House of
Representatives to do the same.
Robert C. ``Bobby'' Scott,
Ranking Member.
Frederica S. Wilson,
Suzanne Bonamici,
Mark Takano,
Alma S. Adams,
Mark DeSaulnier,
Lucy McBath,
Summer L. Lee,
Members of Congress.
[all]