Child Nutrition

Floor Speech

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Ms. MOORE. Mr. Speaker, I thank the gentleman for recognizing me. I am really pleased to join the Ranking Member, Bobby Scott, a mentor of mine and a good friend, Marcia Fudge, and others about the reauthorization of school meals and the WIC program. They are truly champions for ending hunger among children in this country.

And I believe no conversation could occur about hunger without having the indomitable Mr. McGovern with us this evening.

Mr. Speaker, the Child Nutrition Reauthorization is really a critical opportunity for us to talk about the importance of improving access to healthy meals in schools and for maintaining strong nutrition standards.

For too many kids, Mr. Speaker, the only sure meals that they can count on on any given day are provided in school.

Yet, Mr. Speaker, unfortunately, the majority on the other side of the aisle are talking about how to make it harder for children, especially low-income children who are eligible for free and reduced- price meals, breakfast and lunch, to access these programs.

We should be using this reauthorization to address known gaps and to help children connect to these healthy meals. Nearly 10,000 more schools offer school lunch than offer school breakfast programs, and we should be trying to expand school breakfast rather than restricting them.

The Healthy, Hunger-Free Act in the nationwide implementation of the community eligibility program was so insightful. But, yet, we need to do more. Over 162,000 kids in my State qualify for free or reduced meals for lunch, and we need to reach them.

Now, what does the reauthorization that Republicans are bringing before us entail? What does it talk about? It talks about scaling back the successful and proven community eligibility provision which we just implemented nationwide last year and really haven't scaled up to what it could be.

This innovative program actually works. We have proven it. We have metrics that prove that the program increases access and participation for low-income students, and it helps to reduce administrative burdens and costs for school staff.

Now, Mr. Speaker, you have heard my colleagues here talk about obesity. Now, obesity is not just a cosmetic problem. It is a major health problem.

We also last year put new nutrition standards in to ward off obesity. Ninety-seven percent--97 percent--of the schools have successfully met these new standards, and USDA has shown great eagerness to work with those who have not.

Of course, these new requirements require more servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in schools while cutting sodium-saturated fats and trans fats.

Mr. Speaker, I can tell you that, when you introduce these foods to children at a young age, they will start to prefer them and we can really transform their lives.

I want to skip over many of my comments and just add them to the Record because I just want to focus on one little disease that is associated with poor nutrition, and that is diabetes.

The burden to individuals and families is gargantuan. You hear of people losing their limbs because of diabetes. But, Mr. Speaker, I want to talk about the burden to the economy and to the budget by allowing diabetes to run amok.

Diabetes is a budget-busting disease. It is an epidemic that is affecting an increasing number of Americans, including more and more of our youth.

Right now--right now--in 2014, 29 million people in the United States, 9.3 percent of our population, have had diabetes. That is about 1 in 11 people. According to the CDC, by 2050, that number could be as high as 100 million, or 1 in 3 persons.

The time to stop this is now while we are reauthorizing the child nutrition bill. We can help our children develop healthy eating habits. I have seen kids love avocados, love grapes, and love these things that are introduced to them while they are young. Our investment in school lunch and school breakfast pales in comparison to the cost of treating diabetes.

In 2012, diabetes and its related complications accounted for $245 billion in total costs. Now, that is $176 billion in direct medical costs--think Medicaid and Medicare--and lost wages and work. The CDC estimates that the growth in these--if their predictions hold, if we don't do something, just think, this will go from 1 in 11 people having diabetes to 1 in 3. So we are looking at 2050--2050, I don't think I am going to be around in 2050--this is clearly a clarion call to feed our children properly now.

In the school year 2016, we spent $12.5 billion on the school lunch program and $4.3 billion on the school breakfast program. Compare that with the $245 billion that we have spent on diabetes for just 1 year.

With that, I will add the rest of my comments to the Record. I would just say, Mr. Scott and Mr. Speaker, that school breakfast, school lunch, and WIC, it is a doggone good deal when you think about it.

Mr. Speaker, child nutrition reauthorization is a critical time for us to talk about the importance of improving access to healthy foods in schools, and for maintaining strong nutrition standards. For too many kids, the only sure meals they can count on on a given day are the ones provided in school.

Yet, my colleagues on the other side of the aisle are talking about how to make it harder for children, especially low-income children who are eligible for free and reduced price meals, to access these programs.

The draft Republican Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill is an assault on the programs that help to ensure that our children and get the nutrition they need to be active and engaged learners. A growling stomach does not advance educational achievement. They want to roll back programs that have been proven to help eligible children get access to school breakfast and school lunch programs.

It is reportedly titled the ``Improving Child Nutrition and Education Act of 2016'' but it really should be the ``Increasing Child Hunger and Hobbling Education Act.''

We should be using child nutrition reauthorization to address know gaps and help connect more children to healthy meals. Nearly 10,000 more schools offer school lunch than offer a school breakfast program. Participation in school breakfast programs, though improving since the enactment of the Healthy Hunger Free Act and the nationwide implementation of CEP, still lags drastically behind participation in the school lunch program. Only about half of students who eat school lunch nationwide eat a school breakfast. My state of Wisconsin is at the bottom when it comes to the number of schools that participate in school breakfast nationwide. Over 162,000 kids that qualify for Free or Reduced meals are eating lunch, but miss breakfast and Wisconsin loses $22 million federal breakfast reimbursement dollars annually. We need to be discussing how to help the states and schools do better.

Mr. Speaker, we just passed the Every Student Succeeds Act last year reauthorizing federal elementary and secondary education policy. Let me tell you, no child can succeed when they're hungry. Any teacher can tell you that. So can a range of experts who have conducted studies on this issue and found overwhelmingly that hunger does not promote academic achievement.

So what are Republicans talking about doing in this reauthorization:

Scaling back the successful and proven Community Eligiblity Provision (CEP) which just went into effect nationwide last year. This is an innovative program authorized in 2010 that makes it easier for high need schools and school districts to serve free meals to all students by eliminating traditional free/reduced priced applications.

With all the rhetoric about wasteful government spending and duplicative programs, what happens when we have successful and proven federal programs and policies that work like CEP, like SNAP? Republicans want to cut them and roll them back.

This program has been proven--I emphasize that word again--to increase access and participation in the school meals programs for the low-income students while helping to reduce administrative burdens and costs for school staff. School meal programs benefit from the economics of scale. The more kids who participate, the cheaper it is to serve each child. Thousands of schools have adopted CEP and are seeing benefits including the 156 schools in the Milwaukee Public School system. In its first year, MPS reported serving 22% more school breakfasts. School lunches also saw a gain. CEP means fewer kids are going hungry in Milwaukee and nationwide.

Enacting the GOP bill would means that 7,000 schools that now currently participate would be dropped. That is a gigantic step backwards for the health and nutrition of tens of thousands, even hundreds of thousands, of school children who are at key stages of development, physically and academically.

Not to mention the students in thousands of schools currently eligible to participate in CEP but would be kicked off under the Republican bill.

We have put in place new nutrition standards for school meals--97% of schools have successful met these new standards and the USDA has shown great eagerness to work with those that have not to do so. These new requirements require more servings of fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and fat-free and low-fat fluid milk in school meals while cutting sodium, saturated fat and transfats.

Now, some are trying to block the new rules and the savings to our nation both short term and long term for helping kids develop lifelong healthy eating habits.

Let me just talk about the burden to individuals and taxpayers of just one disease: diabetes--a budget busting disease. This is an epidemic affecting an increasing number of Americans, including more and more of our youth.

The number of Americans with diabetes is estimated to drastically in the next three decades. In 2014, 29 million people in the U.S. (9.3 percent) had diabetes (about 1 in 11). According to the CDC, by 2050 that number could be as high as 100 Million Americans (or 1 in 3).

The time to stop this trend is right now when we can help our children develop healthy eating habits that will stay with them for the rest of their lives and a taste for healthy and nutritious foods through the school nutrition programs.

I want to compare our investments in school lunch and breakfast programs and helping to provide nutritious meals that will support lifelong eating habits to young people with what it will cost us to treat diabetes.

Diabetes is an extremely expensive condition for our healthcare system given that it is associated with a number of complicated health effects. In 2012, diabetes and its related complications accounted for $245 billion in total costs, including $176 billion in direct medical costs (think Medicaid and Medicare) and lost work and wages. If the CDC estimates about the growth in cases holds, the cost of just this one disease will grow dramatically over the next three decades. These costs will be picked up by all of us, including through Medicare and Medicaid.

In contrast, in FY 2016, we will spend $12.5 billion on the school lunch program and $4.3 billion on the school breakfast program. Maintaining healthy and nutrition meals and standards and ensuring that all who are eligible can participate in these programs seems like a very wise investment to me.

The GOP proposal would bar schools from including the eligibility requirements for school meals on the school meal applications. Absolutely absurd. What public policy purpose is served by such a requirement other than to make sure people don't know about a benefit to which they are entitled.

I also want to emphasize the need to further strengthen WIC during this reauthorization. WIC works. That's what the research tells us. The program helps improve health and nutrition outcomes for at risk women, infants, and children. WIC breastfeeding rates are rising. We all know the benefits of breastfeeding for both mother and child.

We can make WIC better by increasing the certification period for infants and women, taking steps to ensure that children a better transition by WIC eligible children from the program to the school meals programs Under current law, children that age out of WIC may not be enrolled in school (and participating the school meals programs), risking gains to their health and well-being from having participated in WIC.

How about making WIC work better for our men and women in uniform? Yes, there are members of our military who receive WIC. In fact, I know of efforts in the last year to close a WIC clinic located on a military base in Washington State serving over 700 people including Navy families.

There is room for bipartisanship. The Senate Agriculture Committee reported a bipartisan bill--which while not perfect and I don't support every element--reflects an honest effort to reach across the aisle that is simply nonexistent in this chamber at this point.

And that is a shame. For the children who rely on the school meal programs to meet their nutritional needs. For the schools and school administrators who fight hard every day to put the students under their charge in a position to succeed. For the American taxpayer, who expect us to govern.

I know the will is there on this side of the aisle to work together on things like increasing the breakfast (and lunch for that matter) reimbursement rates. To support grant programs to help increase access to school breakfast which remains woefully undersubscribed compared to the school lunch program. We can provide grants to support innovative and proven models such as Breakfast after the bell and in the Classroom as well as school equipment grants to help offset some of the costs.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source