Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025

Floor Speech

Mr. Speaker, today, we are considering S. 222, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025.

School meals play a critical role in reducing child hunger and providing children with the healthy food they need in this country. Milk offered as part of these meals can deliver essential nutrients that are central to a child's development. That is why it is important that students be provided with the most nutritional options.

Child nutrition standards for school meals, including milk options, are guided by the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, DGAs, which are periodically updated based on recommendations from child nutrition experts and public input.

The latest DGAs, supported by the American Heart Association, the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Public Health Association, the Academy of Nutrition and Dietetics, and over a dozen other public health advocate organizations, agree that fat-free and low-fat milk are the healthiest options for children.

The DGAs must follow the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee's evidence-based recommendations to maintain current limits on saturated fat, sugars, and sodium. Simply put, nutrition standards must be guided by scientists, not politicians and industry lobbyists. If there is a controversy, that should be debated at meetings of the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee, not with a group of politicians.

S. 222, the Whole Milk for Healthy Kids Act of 2025, disregards evidence-based recommendations by removing the statutory requirement that milk options served must align with the DGAs and exempts the saturated fat found in milk from the total regulatory limits on saturated fat in school meals. This would allow schools participating in the National School Lunch Program to serve dietary options, such as whole milk, that do not align with the current science-based recommendations, which protect children's health.

For these reasons, Mr. Speaker, the bill should be defeated.

I do recognize, however, that there are some improvements to existing law in the bill, including better options for students seeking a non- dairy alternative. Schools will now have an easier process to serve nutritionally equivalent, nondairy beverages, such as soy milk, and provide that they may be served in the regular lunch line. Increasing access to plant-based meals and beverages in the lunchroom is a goal everyone should be able to support. However, this is not enough of an improvement, considering the bill's other shortcomings.

Whole milk contains far more saturated fat, cholesterol, and calories than fat-free and low-fat milk. Experts agree that saturated fat from whole milk increases the risk of heart disease, the leading cause of death in this country.

In fact, the majority of Americans consume too much saturated fat. More than 80 percent of the U.S. population exceeds the recommended limit. This bill needlessly inserts politics into what should be a science-based process, to the detriment of our children's health.

The Trump administration has demonstrated time and time again its disregard for public health and evidence-based interventions, and these revisions to the DGAs in this bill will have the same disregard for following the evidence. However, hopefully, future administrations will recommit to science and the decades of nutritional guidance that ensure children will receive the healthiest meals possible.

Mr. Speaker, I am also disappointed by the majority's decision to depart from precedent by moving a limited child nutrition bill outside of a comprehensive child nutrition reauthorization.

More to the point, this is the only piece of legislation that our committee has considered this year that amends laws governing child nutrition programs.

We have considered no bills that improve access to free school meals; no bills to improve the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, the WIC program; no bills to improve options for summer food programs; no bills to improve the Child and Adult Care Food Program, and no bills to address the need for healthy meals after the school day is over.

The majority did, however, choose to advance that big, ugly bill which contains Medicaid and SNAP cuts, which will result in a drastic reduction in the number of students eligible for free school meals.

Mr. Speaker, for these reasons, I oppose the bill, and I reserve the balance of my time.

Mr. Speaker, as earlier noted, S. 222 does make some improvements to the whole milk debate with its inclusion of better options for students seeking nondairy alternatives. The gentleman from Louisiana spoke to those provisions, and that is something that is supported by our Nation's nutritionists, pediatricians, and scientists.

However, I remain disappointed that the bill overall makes school meals less healthy. This bill goes against the dairy industry's stated commitment to ensure that students have access to the healthiest dairy options consistent with the DGAs. The DGAs make clear that fat-free and low-fat milk are the healthiest options for children 2 years and older. Whole milk contains far more saturated fat, cholesterol, and calories than fat-free and low-fat milk.

In a nation where the obesity rate among children is over 16 percent and the children are already facing obesity-related challenges such as type 2 diabetes, high cholesterol, and high blood pressure, we should not ignore the stance of dieticians, nutritionists, pediatricians, and the overall science.

Mr. Speaker, I am committed to ensuring that students have access to the healthiest dairy options in accordance with science-backed guidelines, but S. 222 contradicts that commitment by interfering with the independent process that aligns child nutrition standards with the latest science.

Furthermore, let me just point out that after months of Republican- led political brinksmanship, we are still considering a bill that does nothing meaningful to address childhood obesity, nutrition, or hunger.

The bottom line is that Members of Congress should not inject politics into child nutrition standards at the expense of nutritious school meals that our children need.

For those reasons, I urge my colleagues to oppose S. 222, and I yield back the balance of my time.

BREAK IN TRANSCRIPT

Source