U.S. GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE

WASHINGTON : 

For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office

Internet: bookstore.gpo.gov Phone: toll free (866) 512–1800; DC area (202) 512–1800

Fax: (202) 512–2104 Mail: Stop IDCC, Washington, DC 20402–0001

36–264 2007

REVIEW THE FEDERAL FOOD STAMP PROGRAM 

AND ITS IMPACT ON CHILDREN’S HEALTH 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS, 

OVERSIGHT, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY 

OF THE

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES 

ONE HUNDRED TENTH CONGRESS 

FIRST SESSION 

MARCH 13, 2007 

Serial No. 110–05 

( 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Agriculture 

agriculture.house.gov 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE 

COLLIN C. PETERSON, Minnesota, Chairman 

TIM HOLDEN, Pennsylvania, 

Vice Chairman 

MIKE MCINTYRE, North Carolina 

BOB ETHERIDGE, North Carolina 

LEONARD L. BOSWELL, Iowa 

JOE BACA, California 

DENNIS A. CARDOZA, California 

DAVID SCOTT, Georgia 

JIM MARSHALL, Georgia 

STEPHANIE HERSETH, South Dakota 

HENRY CUELLAR, Texas 

JIM COSTA, California 

JOHN T. SALAZAR, Colorado 

BRAD ELLSWORTH, Indiana 

NANCY E. BOYDA, Kansas 

ZACHARY T. SPACE, Ohio 

TIMOTHY J. WALZ, Minnesota 

KIRSTEN E. GILLIBRAND, New York 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

JOHN BARROW, Georgia 

NICK LAMPSON, Texas 

JOE DONNELLY, Indiana 

TIM MAHONEY, Florida 

BOB GOODLATTE, Virginia, 

Ranking Minority Member 

TERRY EVERETT, Alabama 

FRANK D. LUCAS, Oklahoma 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

ROBIN HAYES, North Carolina 

TIMOTHY V. JOHNSON, Illinois 

SAM GRAVES, Missouri 

JO BONNER, Alabama 

MIKE ROGERS, Alabama 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

MARILYN N. MUSGRAVE, Colorado 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

JOHN R. ‘‘RANDY’’ KUHL, JR., New York 

VIRGINIA FOXX, North Carolina 

K. MICHAEL CONAWAY, Texas 

JEFF FORTENBERRY, Nebraska 

JEAN SCHMIDT, Ohio 

ADRIAN SMITH, Nebraska 

KEVIN MCCARTHY, California 

TIM WALBERG, Michigan 

PROFESSIONAL STAFF

ROBERT L. LAREW, Chief of Staff 

ANDREW W. BAKER, Chief Counsel 

WILLIAM E. O’CONNER, JR., Minority Staff Director 

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS, OVERSIGHT, NUTRITION, AND

FORESTRY

JOE BACA, California, Chairman 

EARL POMEROY, North Dakota 

LINCOLN DAVIS, Tennessee 

NICK LAMPSON, Texas 

STEVE KAGEN, Wisconsin 

NANCY E. BOYDA, Kansas 

JO BONNER, Alabama, 

Ranking Minority Member 

JERRY MORAN, Kansas 

STEVE KING, Iowa 

RANDY NEUGEBAUER, Texas 

CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., Louisiana 

LISA SHELTON, Subcommittee Staff Director 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Baca, Hon. Joe, a Representative in Congress from the State of California, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 1 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 47 

Pomeroy, Hon. Earl, a Representative in Congress from the State of North 

Dakota, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 5 

Davis, Hon. Lincoln, a Representative in Congress from the State of Tennessee, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 6 

Lampson, Hon. Nick, a Representative in Congress from the State of Texas, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 7 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50 

Kagen, Hon. Steve, a Representative in Congress from the State of Wisconsin, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 8 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 50 

Boyda, Hon. Nancy, a Representative in Congress from the State of Kansas, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 8 

Peterson, Hon. Collin C., a Representative in Congress from the State of 

Minnesota, 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 49 

Bonner, Hon. Jo, a Representative in Congress from the State of Alabama, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 2 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 48 

Moran, Hon. Jerry, a Representative in Congress from the State of Kansas, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 5 

King, Hon. Steve, a Representative in Congress from the State of Iowa, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 6 

Boustany, Hon. Charles W., Jr., a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Louisiana, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 7 

Goodlatte, Hon. Bob, a Representative in Congress from the State of Virginia, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 4 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 49 

Schmidt, Hon. Jean, a Representative in Congress from the State of Ohio, 

opening statement ............................................................................................ 9 

WITNESSES 

Montanez-Johner, Hon. Nancy, Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition, and Consumer Services, U.S. Department of Agriculture, accompanied by Hon. Kate 

Coler, Deputy Under Secretary, Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, and Hon. Clarence Carter, Deputy Administrator, Food Stamp Program, U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 10 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 87 

Weill, James, D., President, Food Research and Action Center, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 26 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 90 

Chilton, Mariana, PhD., MPH, Principal Investigator, The Philadelphia Grow 

Project at St. Christopher’s Hospital for Children, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 28 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 114 

Murguia, Janet, President and CEO, National Council of La Raza, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 30 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 129 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
Page

IV 

Massey, Rene, Director, Baldwin County Department of Human Resources, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 32 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 136 

Brunk, Gary, Executive Director, Kansas Action for Children, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 34 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 138 

Wade, Kim McCoy, J.D., Executive Director, California Association of Food 

Banks, 

oral statement ................................................................................................... 36 

prepared statement .......................................................................................... 140 

SUBMITTED MATERIAL 

Emerson, Hon. Jo Ann, Member of Congress from the State of Missouri 

and the Honorable James P. McGovern, Member of Congress from the 

State of Massachusetts, submitted statement ................................................... 50 

Chilton, Dr. Mariana, PhD, MPH, Drexel University School of Public Health, 

Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, submitted statement ............................................ 71 

Bhatia, Eduardo, Executive Director, Puerto Rico Federal Affairs Administration on behalf of the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, submitted statement .... 75 

American Dietetic Association, Chicago, Illinois, submitted statement .............. 79 

Society for Nutrition Education, Indianapolis, Indiana, submitted statement .. 82 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
(1) 

HEARING TO REVIEW THE FEDERAL FOOD 

STAMP PROGRAM AND ITS IMPACT ON 

CHILDREN’S HEALTH 

TUESDAY, MARCH 13, 2007 

HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON DEPARTMENT OPERATIONS, 

OVERSIGHT, NUTRITION AND FORESTRY, 

COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, 

Washington, DC. 

The Subcommittee met, pursuant to call, at 10 a.m., in room 

1302 of the Longworth House Office Building, Hon. Joe Baca 

(Chairman of the Subcommittee) presiding. 

Members present: Representatives Baca, Pomeroy, Davis, 

Lampson, Kagen, Boyda, Bonner, Moran, King, Boustany, and 

Goodlatte (ex officio). 

Staff present: Christy Birdsong, Rob Larew, John Riley, Sharon 

Rusnak, Lisa Shelton, April Slayton, Debbie Smith, Stephanie 

Myers, and Jamie Weyer. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JOE BACA, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA 

Mr. BACA. I would like to call the hearing on the Department of 

Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry to order at this 

point. I would like to welcome each and every one of you to our 

first hearing. I would like to first of all start off by making an 

opening statement and call on my minority ranking member to 

make the opening statement, and then I will just ask the members 

present just to make brief remarks, since they are here. First of all, 

I would like to welcome you to the first hearing of the Subcommittee on Department of Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and 

Forestry for the 110th Congress. I look forward to a busy and productive session. 

As we look at the Farm Bill, all of us know that we have huge 

responsibility to the American families and farmers, but none of us 

have obligations as important as the reauthorization of the Food 

Stamp Program. The food stamps are one of our country’s greatest 

safety net programs and it helps to feed 26 million legal residents, 

most of which are children, senior citizens, disabled and those living in poverty. And we know that it impacts 36 million people in 

the United States, and that is 11 million people that are going hungry in the United States overall. 

For over 70 years, our government has taken on the moral responsibility to feed those who cannot feed themselves and this year 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
2 

marks the 30th anniversary of the passage of the 1977 Food Stamp 

Act and it is appropriate that we mark this anniversary with the 

reauthorization of the Farm Bill. We must work to ensure that our 

country’s long tradition of combating poverty, hunger and disease 

through a strong nutrition title and Food Stamp Program. Over the 

years, the Food Stamp Program has changed and grown with the 

needs of our society. Many people misunderstand how Food Stamp 

works and how effective the program is. To help correct its mistakes and views, today’s hearing will focus specifically on how the 

Food Stamp supports the childhood health and nutrition. 

This topic is near to my heart, as I represent the 43rd Congressional District, where Hispanics are twice as likely to suffer from 

diabetes and the rate amongst groups is one of six children that is 

affected by diabetes. Studies have shown that one in four Hispanics, the ages of six to eleven, is obese, so when you look at the 

average rate, that is one of six children, other than Hispanics, have 

obesity. Neither of these statistics are acceptable and they need our 

attention now and I think all of us are very much concerned, not 

only here but nationwide, of the effects it has on all of us and it 

is a concern, not only for us. But as citizens of the wealthiest country in the world, I believe that we have moral obligation, as a public servant, to provide good nutritious food to all of our people. But 

even if you don’t agree with my philosophy, there is a strong economic argument to be made. 

The World Bank estimates that 12 percent of our Nation’s 

healthcare spending is related to obesity. Twelve percent of Nation’s healthcare that is spent is related to obesity. That equals $90 

billion each year, $90 billion. My fellow Members of Congress 

might be interested to also know that almost half of that amount 

is being paid with Federal dollars through Medicare and Medicaid. 

Good nutrition isn’t just a feel-good issue, it affects our budget, our 

economy, our educational system and the health of our Nation. 

Before we hear from our distinguished witnesses, I want to 

thank the members of this subcommittee. I deeply appreciate your 

heartfelt interest in the children’s health and nutrition. Each of 

you who attended our organizational meeting last Monday expressed your concerns about this issue and I look forward to working with each of you to make the Food Stamp Program a pro-nutrition, pro-healthy lifestyle program that is responsible to the needs 

of our kids and working families. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Now I call on Ranking Member Bonner to make his 

opening statements. And if there is no objection, we would like to 

have Ms. Schmidt join the subcommittee today. Is there any objection to having Ms. Schmidt? Hearing no objection, we will have Ms. 

Schmidt sit at the table. Ranking member, Mr. Bonner. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JO BONNER, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF ALABAMA 

Mr. BONNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and good morning. Let 

me begin by thanking today’s witnesses who have agreed to come 

to testify before the committee regarding the Federal Food Stamp 

Program and its impact on children’s health. I am pleased that we 

were able to hear that we will be able to hear from such a distinVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00006 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
3 

guished group of individuals and we all appreciate your willingness 

to testify. I am especially pleased that one of my own constituents, 

Mrs. Rene Massey, will appear before us during the second panel 

and offer her expertise as Director of the Department of Human 

Resources in Baldwin County, Alabama. 

The Federal Food Stamp Program, as the chairman indicated, 

was established over 40 years ago and has played an important 

role in food security for low-income households throughout the 

United States. A great number of individuals and families in our 

country depend on these benefits. In fact, according to the most recent data available, over 45,000 households in Alabama’s 1st Congressional District are currently receiving Food Stamp benefits. 

That is almost 18 percent of the total households in my district and 

I am sure many of our colleagues would have similar numbers. 

The purpose of today’s hearing obviously is to review how this 

program impacts the health of our children. It could not come at 

a better time, given the obesity crisis that our Nation is facing. The 

Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cites two surveys, one 

from 1976 to 1980 and the other from 2003 to 2004, to illustrate 

the prevalence of overweight children. Between those two timeframes, the prevalence of overweight children, ages two to five, increased from five to over 13 percent, for those aged six to eleven, 

the prevalence increased from six and one-half percent to 18.8 percent, and for those 12 to 19 years of age, the prevalence increased 

from five percent to 17.4 percent. It is absolutely imperative that 

we do what we can to help curb this epidemic. Educating our children with regard to what is healthy versus what is not healthy is 

one of the things that we can do to help in this effort. Like many 

young boys growing up, I know I didn’t always like to hear from 

my mom about the importance of eating your broccoli, but that is 

exactly the type of education that we need in order to be successful. 

And as now, today, the father of two young children, I know how 

hard that challenge can be. However, we must work to educate, in 

addition to providing our children the types of nutritious foods that 

they need in their daily diets. 

USDA, in the summary of the 2007 Farm Bill proposals, cites 

that children under 18 years of age generally consume 50 percent 

or less of the recommended levels of fruit and vegetables. The summary goes on to say that providing increased fruit and vegetable 

options in the Food Assistance Programs can help increase consumption as well as improve the quality of many American diets. 

I agree with this assessment and know that we need to work to improve the nutrition aspect of the Food Stamp Program as we move 

forward in the 2007 Farm Bill process. 

Our subcommittee’s first hearing of the 110th Congress will no 

doubt provide some valuable insight as we address this important 

topic. I look forward to hearing from USDA and the various individuals from around the country who will testify today to share 

some of their knowledge and experience in the field. So once again, 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for the time this morning to provide an 

opening statement and I know that our colleagues on our side look 

forward to working with you and the other members of our subcommittee on this and many other important topics of interest. 

Thank you. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
4 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. At this time, we would like to 

ask Mr. Goodlatte if he would like to make a statement. 

STATEMENT OF HON. BOB GOODLATTE, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF VIRGINIA 

Mr. GOODLATTE. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much for holding 

this hearing and I will submit a written statement for the record, 

but I do want to note that this is a very important part of the Farm 

Bill. More than 60 percent of the mandatory spending that is done 

by this committee goes for nutrition programs and I think it is very 

important that these programs operate effectively to provide nutritious food to those who are most in need. We ought to look at it 

from the standpoint of making sure that the programs are preserved and continue, but also from the standpoint that they operate 

effectively. The Food Stamp Program in particular has had a long 

and checkered history, going through periods of time where it was 

very much the subject of a lot of fraud and scandal. There is still 

a great deal of waste and fraud in the Food Stamp Program and 

we should always work to make sure that we are rooting out those 

things and improving the program. 

I had the opportunity to chair this subcommittee for over six 

years and during that time, we introduced measures to require 

that. For example, people who were dead, whose nutritional needs 

may be overrated, were checked against, for example, the Social Security rolls to make sure that they were continuing to draw food 

stamps after their demise. We do the same thing, we put in requirements that prisoners, who are getting three squares a day in 

the slammer, not be also drawing food stamps, and each year 

many, many millions of dollars were being paid to people who were 

in prison and we required that the prison rolls be checked against 

the food stamp rolls by the States. These have improved the situation significantly. 

In addition, we need to make sure that the people who are qualifying as food stamp redeemers are indeed grocery stores selling 

food stamps, because there have been a lot of problems with that 

over the years. The Electronic Benefits Transfer Program, the EBT 

cards, which have not only helped to reduce fraud, but also to restore some dignity to the people who participate in the Food Stamp 

Program, have helped in that regard, but they are also subject to 

fraud and abuse. So making absolutely sure that this program 

works well is very important. 

Mr. Chairman, as you may know, I am a very strong supporter 

of the Food Bank Program and the Federal government support for 

that, which is a tiny, tiny fraction of what we spend on food 

stamps. It is estimated that this year we will spend about $33 billion on food stamps, less than $190 million on the TEFAP, The 

Emergency Food Assistance Program, for food banks. Food banks 

are wonderful grassroots operations that I think get far more out 

of a dollar than any other food program. Hundreds of volunteer organizations, civic groups, church organizations and so on, will work 

with each food bank and there are hundreds of food banks around 

the country and most of them affiliated with the America’s Second 

Harvest food program. These systems reach people and not only 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
5 

bring them a box of food to help them get through the week or the 

month, but also help them with other things. It is community helping community and neighbors helping neighbors. When somebody 

brings that box of food, they are not just bringing a box of food. 

They may be finding out whether somebody in the family needs a 

ride to work, somebody needs a ride to the doctor, somebody needs 

help finding a job, somebody needs help tutoring in the school, and 

it is a wonderful program and I would hope that we will be able 

to not only continue to support it through The Emergency Food Assistance Program, but find ways to increase that support. 

Mr. Chairman, I thank you very much for the opportunity and 

I look forward to the witnesses’ testimony. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Goodlatte. All members 

will, if you can, you know, submit for the record your statement 

and hopefully that will give ample time to the witnesses to testify, 

but I will allow you to make a short, just a brief introduction of 

yourself and a short statement and we will alternate back and 

forth and I will start with Mr. Pomeroy. 

STATEMENT OF HON. EARL POMEROY, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF NORTH DAKOTA 

Mr. POMEROY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have been on the Agriculture Committee for several sessions, six I think. This is my 

seventh. I mean, I have never been able to serve on this subcommittee, so I am delighted to be on this subcommittee. And I 

think, as we look at the work in front of us, relative to the nutrition title, we ought to evaluate carefully, as Ranking Member 

Goodlatte has suggested, whether there is more fraud and waste 

that can be identified and rooted out. We certainly ought to applaud and support the efforts made involving the nonprofit sector 

to respond to hunger in our communities. But there is an undeniable fact that we are going to have to come squarely to grips with 

it. The food insecurity figures are appalling. We have got more people either hungry, or one meal away from being hungry, than is acceptable for a Nation of our size and wealth. And this isn’t a pass 

the hat at the basketball game. Let us get some money and buy 

some people hot dogs. We have got to get real serious about a national strategy to deal with food insecurity and that is going to 

mean a leadership role by this subcommittee, developing the best 

nutrition title we can in the upcoming Farm Bill. There is no shirking the Federal government’s responsibility here. We have got too 

many people hungry or on the brink of being hungry and qualify, 

therefore, as food insecure under the data and we need to respond 

to it. Thank you. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Mr. Moran. 

STATEMENT OF HON. JERRY MORAN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Thank you for 

scheduling this hearing, you and Mr. Bonner. I appreciate the opportunity to listen and learn from the witnesses today, both from 

USDA and from our second panel. I particularly want to point out 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
6 

that we have two Kansans who are going to be providing us with 

information and I appreciate Mr. Brunk being here on behalf of the 

Kansas Association for Children. Excuse my words. And Janet 

Murguia, the President of National Council of La Raza. And I appreciate particularly Mr. Brunk’s testimony, pointing out the long 

history that Kansans have in trying to meet the needs of those who 

face hunger each and every day, both in our own country and 

around the world. So I look forward to hearing the testimony and 

I thank you for conducting the hearing. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Mr. Davis. 

STATEMENT OF HON. LINCOLN DAVIS, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TENNESSEE 

Mr. DAVIS. Well, I appreciate the opportunity to make a few comments and I will make those very brief, but thank you, Mr. Chairman and the ranking member, for having this hearing today and 

those who will testify. As I look in this room, I think the majority 

of us and probably every one of us are food secure and perhaps 

have never known the pangs of hunger. I think it is important, as 

we go through the process of the hearings and as we do the Farm 

Bill, that we realize there are those in many rural areas and in 

urban areas of our country that they still feel the pangs of hunger. 

And it is important that, as a country that has the moral fiber that 

we have, that we fulfill that commitment to the moral standards 

that we have established for ourselves. I look forward to the hearings. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Mr. King. 

STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE KING, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF IOWA 

Mr. KING. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate you holding 

the hearing today and I appreciate the witnesses and I look forward to their testimony. I will have to step out in just a few minutes, which I regret. I wanted to express something here from a bit 

of a constitutional perspective and I would ask us to keep this in 

mind as we make these deliberations, and remember also that FDR 

was the person that defeated Iowan Herbert Hoover, so I have to 

be a little more critical, perhaps, of FDR. But he established the 

four freedoms and two were constitutional and two were not. Those 

four freedoms were freedom of speech, freedom to worship, those 

were both constitutional freedoms, and the other two were the freedom from want and freedom from fear. Those are extra constitutional rights established by FDR and sometimes put into the 

mindset of Americans as if they are constitutional. 

And now I hear another phrase called food insecurity and it occurs to me that we have gone from constitutional rights to FDR’s 

manufactured rights about freedom from want and freedom from 

fear, and now we are talking about freedom from fear of want. 

That is quite a progression to do here in about, oh, 70 or 80 years 

and it is just curious to me how the body politic and how our language is so carefully crafted to establish the perception of a right 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
7 

and then we flow along with it, without looking back into our constitutional underpinnings. 

That said, I do think we need to take a look across this country 

and see how we can help those who are in need and I don’t take 

the stand that we have a constitutional duty to do that, but I think 

we have a humanitarian interest in this and I am certainly going 

to be part of that humanitarian interest to take a good look at 

those in need and see what we can do with those food stamps. And 

I thought it was important for us and instructive to look at it also 

from a constitutional perspective. 

Thank you. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Mr. Lampson. 

STATEMENT OF HON. NICK LAMPSON, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF TEXAS 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, and I do appreciate the 

hearing and all of the witnesses who will be joining us today, and 

I will submit my statement for the record. I would mention that, 

unbelievably to me, about 1⁄4 of all the children in my State of 

Texas rely on food stamps and that the value of the Food Stamp 

Program has been dwindling significantly over time, making too 

often people to rely on charities to provide or to subsidize their food 

stamp allotment, which creates a significant problem, particularly 

when you face something like what happened in Texas and along 

the Gulf Coast last year with storms like Katrina and Rita. We still 

have some 80,000 people in Houston alone who are struggling. We 

were caught more or less flat-footed, I think, and unprepared and 

so I would ask and hope that we will hear some comments. I implore you to use this disaster as a catalyst to reform the food aid 

plans for our future crisis situations. And again, I will submit my 

remarks for the record, Mr. Chairman. Thank you very much for 

the hearing. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Mr. Boustany. 

STATEMENT OF HON. CHARLES W. BOUSTANY, JR., A REPRESENTATIVE IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF LOUISIANA 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am pleased to join 

you and Ranking Member Bonner on the subcommittee and I look 

forward to hearing the witnesses. A couple points. I am glad to see 

the emphasis on childhood obesity because, as a cardiac surgeon, 

I saw the ravages of a lifetime of obesity and this is a critically important area and it is an area that we need to make some gains 

in to reduce childhood obesity, because I think, clearly, dietary habits are established early on in life and the consequences are dire 

as a result and so this is something we need to focus on. 

My colleague from Texas mentioned the two hurricanes. My district was hit by Hurricane Rita but also had many, many people 

who evacuated from the New Orleans area into my district as a result of Katrina, so we sort of had a double hit in my congressional 

district and the TEFAP program very important. The food bank 

has served our State well and I look forward to seeing how we can 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
8 

improve these programs and I am very eager to hear the witnesses. 

Thank you. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Mr. Kagen. 

STATEMENT OF HON. STEVE KAGEN, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN 

Mr. KEGAN. Thank you, Chairman Baca, and I am very happy to 

be here with my fellow colleagues and even if it is a cardiovascular 

surgeon, who I hope I get to work with just in a political sense and 

not a medical sense. I am very pleased to be here today and work 

with people everywhere who believe that good government can 

make a real difference in people’s lives. The Food Stamp Program 

rose from a very humble beginning to become one of the greatest 

programs we have in our government to administer. It has been a 

very successful program. And as we have seen on a grand scale in 

response to what my colleague Nick had referred to, Hurricane 

Katrina, it has made a significant difference in keeping people not 

just well fed, but alive. This program exists really solely to assist 

those who are in need, and as a physician, I deeply understand the 

value of preventative medicine and this program illustrates this 

tenet perfectly. I agree with my colleagues that obesity is not just 

a problem in children, it is also a problem for all of us here in Congress, so I am going to help put Congress on a diet while I am here. 

I look forward to working with everyone and I hope to be a leader 

on this committee, along with my colleagues on both sides of the 

aisle, to make this program more effective and more efficient in 

every way. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Gentlewoman Boyda. 

STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY E. BOYDA, A REPRESENTATIVE 

IN CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF KANSAS 

Ms. BOYDA. Thank you so much, Chairman Baca, and thanks for 

calling this. It is such an important issue right now in my State 

as well as, I am sure, in every State. The number of children who 

are in poverty just keeps escalating every year. I think we should 

be alarmed by that. I applaud the Food Stamp Program. I will support the Food Stamp Program. But let me just tell you a story that 

I heard the other day that I thought was remarkable. It was questioning why I voted to raise the minimum wage and said why don’t 

we just send more food stamps to people or more aid? And while 

I applaud food stamps, the fact is that we need to have jobs that 

keep families independent and keep families working hard in that 

sense of self-sufficiency and hope that is there, and I think we need 

to look at the entire economic package as we look at this and food 

stamps play an extremely key role in making sure that we do not 

have hungry children and families. But I think we need to step 

back and say why are the number of people who are needing food 

stamps rising so drastically, and what can we do as a Nation to 

stop that trend? 

Let me just say that I am happy to be one of two women, with 

my colleague Jean Schmidt. I think it is kind of interesting, Jean, 

that we are the only women on this subcommittee which basically 

deals with children’s nutrition. So I am very happy that our voices 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
9 

will be heard on this, as well as I know that all of you guys care 

about this as well, too. But a deep, deep concern about our families 

and how nutrition is going. Again, too, I am so happy to have Gary 

Brunk here from Topeka, Kansas, who works for and is the Executive Director of the Kansas Action for Children Network and has 

been in my face very often, telling me about why this is so important, and I am just thrilled that you are a playing a key role and 

advocating for our children and for our families in this regard. So 

thank you very much and I look forward to working with my colleagues on this important issue. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Gentlewoman Schmidt, would you like to 

make a comment? 

STATEMENT OF HON. JEAN SCHMIDT, A REPRESENTATIVE IN 

CONGRESS FROM THE STATE OF OHIO 

Ms. SCHMIDT. Thank you so much. I will be brief since I am technically not a member of this subcommittee, but a member of the 

full committee. 

Mr. BACA. We realize that. 

Ms. SCHMIDT. I am really here today to listen to what the Food 

Stamp Program has as far as nutrition, corrective nutritional opportunities for our working poor and most especially our children. 

One of my concerns with the Food Stamp Program is that we give 

an amount of stamps for an individual to purchase food for their 

families and on tight incomes, when you go to the grocery store and 

you look at an apple that is maybe 80 or 90 cents per apple and 

you look at a box of Little Debbie’s that are 99 cents, it is a lot 

easier to buy the Little Debbie’s, because it fills up the tummy a 

whole lot more quickly, but nutritionally, it is not very, very sound. 

I am trying to work out some sort of an idea that would give these 

working poor families the opportunity to have the apple and to be 

able to afford the apple or the banana or the pear or fruits and 

vegetables that are so important to our dietary supplement, and I 

haven’t worked out the details yet, but that is why I am here 

today, sir, to listen to what is going on and hopefully be able to address it in the future. Thank you so much. 

[The information appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. We would like to welcome our 

first panel and I would like to first start by introducing them. The 

Honorable Nancy Montanez-Johner, who is the Under Secretary for 

Food, Nutrition and Consumer Service of the United States Department of Agriculture in Washington, DC, will be accompanied by 

Honorable Kate Coler, Deputy Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition 

and Consumer Service of the United States Department of Ag, and 

then the Honorable Clarence Carter, the Deputy Administrator for 

Food and Service Program, USDA, Washington, DC. And at this 

time, I would like to have the Under Secretary, Nancy. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
10 

STATEMENT OF HON. NANCY MONTANEZ-JOHNER, UNDER 

SECRETARY FOR FOOD, NUTRITION AND CONSUMER SERVICES, UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE, ACCOMPANIED BY HON. KATE COLER, DEPUTY UNDER SECRETARY FOR FOOD, NUTRITION AND CONSUMER SERVICES, 

UNITED STATES DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE; AND HON. 

CLARENCE CARTER, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR FOR FOOD 

STAMP PROGRAM, USDA 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Thank you and good morning. The Food 

and Nutrition Service’s mission is to increase food security and reduce hunger, in partnership with cooperating organizations, by providing children and low-income individuals with access to food, a 

healthful diet and nutrition education, in a manner that supports 

American agriculture and inspires public confidence. Together, our 

15 assistance programs serve one in five Americans and form our 

Nation’s first line of defense against hunger. 

The Department of Agriculture commits about 60 percent of its 

annual budget to these programs. While the Food Stamp Program 

is the Nation’s primary nutrition assistance program, you may be 

familiar with some of our other programs, such as the National 

School Lunch Program, the Breakfast Program, the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children, commonly called WIC. More than 30 million school children participate 

in the School Lunch Program and nearly 10 million participate in 

the School Breakfast Program, and more than eight million participate in the WIC Program. Just over 26 million low-income individuals participate in the Food Stamp Program every month and 

about half of those are children. In 2004, 60 percent of those who 

were eligible to participate in the program did so. This compares 

with 53 percent in 2001 and in the past four years, 6.6 million 

more low-income children and families have entered the program. 

Families participating in the Food Stamp Program spend more on 

food and participating in the program increases the availability of 

food nutrients in the home. 

We aggressively promote food stamp participation among those 

who are eligible. These efforts include a national media campaign 

that uses radio advertising in areas with low participation rates, 

and public service announcements that can be used by local food 

stamp offices and community and faith-based outreach providers. 

Partnerships are key to achieving our goals and we maintain 

strong, active relationships nationwide. This includes State government, local food stamp offices, anti-hunger organizations, food 

banks, faith and community-based organizations and food retailers. 

We provide a variety of outreach tools to our partners to increase 

participation. We also tailor our efforts to reach certain eligibility 

populations. For example, we have launched a three-year local community outreach campaign to reach eligible Spanish-speaking 

Americans and we are targeting other underserved populations, 

such as the elderly. We are committed to increasing access to food 

and to providing nutrition education to program participants. Overweight and obesity are critical issues for every part of our population and addressing these problems early life is critical. Our food 

stamp nutrition education efforts support this. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
11 

The Food Stamp Program is an important, often times a critical 

benefit to low-income households, not only to provide food, but also 

to provide the nutrition education that can form lifelong behaviors. 

Each year, we award grants to States and faith and communitybased organizations to educate eligible participants about the nutrition benefits of the Food Stamp Program. Mr. Chairman, we 

wish to expand the nutrition education efforts that accompany the 

delivery of our nutrition assistance programs. We recently announced the 2007 Farm Bill proposals that increase access to the 

Food Stamp Program and expand nutrition education efforts by investing $100 million in grants to address the rising rates of obesity. 

The proposed Farm Bill includes new mandatory funding to pur- chase $500 million in fruits and vegetables over 10 years for the 

School Meals Program. It also asks for $2.75 billion over the next 

10 years to purchase fruits and vegetables for our other nutrition 

assistance programs. Lastly, Mr. Chairman, we feel it is important 

to note that the President is very committed to these programs. 

The Administration is requesting a record high of $59 billion in its 

2008 budget to continue our nutrition assistance to America. This 

represents more than a 70 percent increase since 2001. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for your interest in the Food Stamp 

Program and our efforts to provide nutritious food to all of those 

who are eligible to participate, as well as our efforts to combat the 

significant problem of overweight and obesity in America. We are 

happy to be here and we are grateful and we are happy to answer 

any questions that you have. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Montanez-Johner appears at the 

conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Next, we have Kate Coler. 

Okay. Then what we will do, then, is each of the members will be 

recognized, based on the time that they arrived and that is how we 

will ask them to ask questions. You will have five minutes on the 

total time. We will begin with myself asking the question, then the 

minority leader will ask the next question, and I will start with 

myself. According to Under Secretary Johner, according to your figures, it states that you are able to connect eligible people to the 

Food Stamp Program with a variety of degrees of success. The average State service is about 50 percent of the working families, but 

the range is from as low as 34 percent in California to as high as 

78 percent in Tennessee. What is it that States are doing to ensure 

that better services are done, which is question one, and what is 

the USDA doing to promote better practices? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. And again, 

the participation rates are very important to us and it is a critical 

issue and that is one of the things that we are doing to partner 

more closely with the States to promote that because, obviously, as 

you just stated, some States are doing better than others and that 

is why we are looking at our level. We are looking at outreach 

strategies, especially, to the underserved populations. We are focusing on all Americans, but especially Hispanics and the elderly, because those numbers are very low. And I am going to let Clarence 

talk a little bit more in some detail, but I just wanted to let you 

know of some of the things that we have in place. We have an outreach strategist who is trying to coordinate or attempting to coordiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00015 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
12 

nate. There are a lot of good things that are happening across the 

Nation and we are trying to coordinate that and have better coordination efforts here at headquarters, so that we can look at what 

works and then maybe do we invest in that and expand that across 

the Nation? So this way, that there are some standards, some consistencies within our outreach efforts. 

But I am going to let—and also the media—I know. I kind of get 

excited about this. The media campaign is also another piece. Last 

year alone, we had almost 1700 events to promote the Food Stamp 

Program and the other programs. We also have an 800 number 

that we have here that people can call to get information that 

would be more specific to their States. We also have a prescreening 

where people can get on and find out if they could possibly be eligible for food stamps, because I believe one of the biggest myths that 

is out there is that people don’t believe that they are eligible for 

food stamps or they don’t know about it. So Clarence, do you have 

anything else you want to add? 

Mr. CARTER. Good morning, Mr. Chairman and committee members. Just a little illumination on some of the things that we do 

from an outreach perspective. We have an outreach coalition where 

we bring together partners from all across the Nation to look at 

best practices and how we might be able to support States’ efforts 

in increasing outreach activities. We also have a set of outreach 

grants. We have just put out another million dollars this year in 

grants to local community agencies that focus on particular parts 

of our constituency to try to increase access to the Food Stamp Program. And as the Under Secretary just mentioned, our 3-year national media campaign it is a very, if you would, targeted approach 

to attempt to spread the message to every potential eligible individual that this most necessary assistance is there for them to take 

advantage of, if that is what they choose to do so. 

Mr. BACA. Have you been able to measure why? You know, you 

indicated that some States are doing better than others. Have you 

been able to measure why some States are doing better in their 

outreach versus some of the other States in what kind of programs 

that they have that have been effective? 

Mr. CARTER. Yes, sir, Mr. Chairman. We do something that we 

also call a program access review and we go into local agencies and 

we look at how those local agencies are complying with standards 

and some of things that they have been doing to begin to identify 

best practices. So we do have some sense of what does work and 

what doesn’t work and we try to share those best practices. But we 

do have some very intimate understanding of what goes on in local 

agencies. 

Mr. BACA. Because the comparison would be different because of 

when you look at California with 37 million people compared to 

some of the other States that are a lot smaller, so it is a lot easier 

in terms of the promotion and the outreach. And California has one 

of the worse participation rates in the country, particularly among 

working families. Why do you think that the poor working families 

in California do not participate in this program? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. I think I am going to lead you to the 

modernization piece, because that is where I think this is an exciting move. We really do support and encourage States to move toVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00016 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
13 

wards streamlining and modernizing and that is, I have seen a couple of sites and one in particular is an employer that I have seen. 

Working families, they have working hours, so it is hard for them 

to get to the office and a lot of your offices are open from 8:00 to 

5:00. There are more States, I guess, participating in this now as 

we continue to move forward. But they are expanding their office 

hours. They are using online applications. They are doing the data 

imaging piece, where they can actually scan their documents that 

they need. And they have 24/7 call centers that they would be able 

to call in their information and find out about the status. So we 

are really encouraging that to happen in our States. And again, 

Florida has a pretty good model that I have been at and it was just 

awesome, because you can go any time of the night. They have over 

2700 sites, where it could be your local church, your school, your 

library, where you can go in an do an online application. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you. You know, I support the name 

change of Food Stamp Program. Please tell the members how you 

feel the name change would be beneficial. 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. The Food Stamp Program no longer accurately portrays the mission of the program. We don’t use food 

stamps anymore and as one congressman mentioned, we have EBT 

cards and those are electronic benefit cards and they work very 

well. And so the mission is more about the Food Assistance Program along with food nutrition and education. So we would like to 

change the name so that it really does portray the mission. And 

also, there is a stigma attached to that and we believe that is why 

some of our elderly population, they do not want to participate in 

this, because they see this as a welfare program. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you. One final question. Besides the 

need for higher benefits, what can we in Congress do to more effectively address the child hunger in America? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. I think that, with the Farm Bill proposals, I think we have made some things more accessible or easy 

for the families to access, excluding the retirements, excluding the 

approved IRS savings account, also the deduction on child care and 

excluding military combat pay, which would make it easier for families to access the programs. So I think the proposals that we have 

in the Farm Bill would be very helpful. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you. Mr. Bonner. 

Mr. BONNER. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Under Secretary, one of the points that I made in my opening statement is 

the need for better childhood nutritional education in order to promote a healthier lifestyle. Many of our colleagues have said similar 

things. I was pleased to see, as a part of the 2007 Farm Bill proposal, that recommendations within the Food Stamp Program are 

there to support healthy and nutritious lifestyles. Based on these 

recommendations in the USDA’s Farm Bill proposal, could you 

elaborate a little further about how we can continue to improve the 

nutrition education effort for our children in this country? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. I will start off with the $10 million, the 

grants, the $100 million grants that I was talking about for the 

obesity. We are very excited about that, with that proposal, because 

that would encourage, again, community and faith-based, other 

States, to come up with ways, innovative ways, how can combat 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
14 

that? But with the other Farm Bill proposals, we have the fruit. 

Obviously, the dietary guidelines, the 2005 dietary guidelines, recommend consumption of fruits, vegetables and whole grains, and 

that is probably all Americans, that we need to do a better job with 

that. I can tell you that the nutrition education in the school system, it is getting better and I can let Kate talk a little bit in more 

details on this. But I can tell you, personally, I have visited many 

schools and it was very rewarding and satisfying to see young kids, 

I mean, we are talking little kindergarteners on up, and they understand what kind of fruits and vegetables make you grow and 

what makes you glow. I mean, they understand about the colors. 

You know, My Pyramid is also a very useful tool that they use in 

the school system and also our nutrition education guidelines are 

for mothers and children. So again, it focuses on the family. So 

Kate, do you have anything? 

Ms. COLER. The only thing I would add is that the Food Stamp 

Program has nutrition education as a component of the program 

and it is an allowable expense for States to have under their administrative costs. There is a 50/50 match and we have worked 

with all States to develop nutrition education plans specifically 

geared for the Food Stamp Program. But also, we have had an effort to have the food stamp nutrition education plans coordinate 

with other nutrition education activities in the States. We call 

them SNAPs, or State Nutrition Action Plans, where the WIC Program coordinates with the school program that coordinates with 

the Food Stamp Program and other programs that are funded 

through HHS. So we are all working off of some consistent messages, based on the dietary guidelines, to get some consistency and 

key messages out. We have seen funding for this grow. It is dependent upon the States’ dedication to it. It is a 50/50 match, so 

we reimburse the States. But for fiscal year 2007, Federal expenditures in this are about $275 million. And so building that consistency of message and making sure that is available to food stamp 

recipients is very important. 

Mr. BONNER. Shifting gears, by all accounts, the welfare reform 

legislation that passed in the mid 1990s, it has been hailed as a 

significant success. The Republicans claim it a success when we 

were in the majority. President Clinton claimed it as a success 

when he was in office. And the statistics show that it did help reduce the welfare rolls by as much as 60 percent over the last decade. What impacts specifically can the Department share with us 

in terms of people enrolling for food stamps as a correlation to the 

reduced dependency on welfare? 

Mr. CARTER. Congressman Bonner, one of the things that we 

have seen is a shift in the characteristics of the food stamp population. If you look at that population pre-welfare reform, it was 

about 21 percent of all individuals on the Food Stamp Program had 

some sort of earned incomes. They were working. That has increased to almost 29 percent and we see this as a work support 

program. What happens is, as individuals go to work, then you 

have a Food Stamp Program that allows them to help support their 

ability to work. So we have seen some important changes in the 

characteristics of the Food Stamp Program that allow this to be 

support for working families. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
15 

Ms. COLER. In the Farm Bill proposals, that is why we have the 

proposals to exclude the retirement accounts from your assets, because that really does target working families. More people are on 

the Food Stamp Program actually rely on a paycheck than rely on 

cash welfare and that is underserved populations as well. Many 

people have this perception that if they have a job, they are just 

automatically not eligible for the Food Stamp Program. We are targeting those low-income people, working very closely with community organizations to get that message out. But the average duration on the Food Stamp Program is less than a year. It is about 

eight months and the asset limits right now do sort of add an extra 

burden on families. They would have to deplete those accounts in 

order to qualify and that is why the President’s proposal wants to 

exclude this. 

Mr. BONNER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you, Mr. Bonner. Mr. Lampson. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, in 

your testimony, you talked about how Food Stamp Program integrity has been improving and that States are issuing benefits with 

greater accuracy. My State of Texas has been testing ways to modernize the enrollment process for food stamps through better use 

of technology and by allowing families to apply over the phone and 

on the Internet. While I support making the Food Stamp Program 

more efficient and more accessible, Texas has experienced some 

very serious problems related to the effort. Their so-called 

privatized effort has led to serious problems. Thousands of families 

face delays in getting their benefits during a pilot of this new system last year and the error rates have gone up noticeably and I am 

assuming the same thing is happening in some other States as 

well. What oversight will USDA exercise in Texas and other States 

to ensure that changes to the enrollment process for food stamps 

are thoroughly tested and do not jeopardize program access or program integrity? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Thank you, Congressman. That is an 

important issue for us and I will go ahead and turn this over to 

Clarence, but I would like to say a few things. The food stamp and 

the error and fraud are high profile issues for FNS and also for the 

Department. Again, this is a strong performance in the area that 

is important for us as the President management agenda and we 

are very happy and proud of the fact that our payment accuracy 

rate right now is 94.2 percent, which demonstrates a lot work between the States and the Federal government. But I understand 

your concerns in Texas and that is something that we are monitoring and Clarence has been very involved in that, so I am going 

to go ahead and let him answer the details. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. CARTER. Congressman Lampson, I would begin by saying 

that I think that the Food, Nutrition and Consumer Service exercised its oversight role, with regard to Texas, very diligently. We 

worked with Texas every step of the way to understand what it 

was that they were about to do. We even decided to withhold funding, to only allow funding to be incremental so that we could test 

their model. When we began to work with Texas, when we talked 

about the notion of a pilot, they rejected that. They wanted to go 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
16 

full ahead, but we said, ‘‘no, you have to pilot this.’’ And then, as 

we monitored the pilot and explained that we were not seeing the 

kinds of results and were not prepared to release any additional 

dollars, then Texas began to retrench. So I think that we actually 

are monitoring an oversight in a very diligent way there. 

The other thing I would suggest is that, in Texas, I think the 

problem, if you would, was there really was an attempt to do too 

much too soon with a new eligibility system, a new process and 

also closing a significant number of offices. There were just much 

too many processes that were crunched into one application. And 

so we think that, quite frankly, the State is moving smartly to attempt to correct the problem and we understand that there has already been one, if you will, reduction in the privatization contract, 

the contract they had with the vendor, and there are others in discussion. So we think that we exercised our oversight properly and 

we will do this with every other State. 

Mr. LAMPSON. Thank you very much. I yield the balance of my 

time, Mr. Chairman, to Mr. Pomeroy. 

Mr. BACA. Mr. Pomeroy. 

Mr. POMEROY. I thank the gentleman for yielding. I have a commitment and I have to leave this hearing, but I wanted to get this 

question in. It involves the disturbing coincidence of a couple of 

events, first, the increased number of those reporting to be food insecure, now north of 35 million in this country, and the President’s 

proposal to eliminate categorical eligibility. Now this would kick 

out of the program 329,000 people nationally, nearly 1500 in North 

Dakota, and the director of North Dakota food stamps has characterized this move as devastating. Do you support the move to kick 

out categorically eligible individuals that are presently eligible for 

food stamps, and what is the rationale? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Congressman, what we do is, what we 

want to look at, again, at those who have the greatest need. Those 

that are currently, the categorical eligibility are for those who are 

receiving TANF of non-cash benefits. And so we are looking at, if 

they meet the eligibility guidelines, they can still apply for food 

stamps. At this point, we have folks out there who are not receiving, again, the cash TANF benefits. They are getting food stamps 

and they get on the program because they might have a brochure 

that has been funded by TANF funds. And so, again, trying to go 

back with how do you serve those of the greatest need—— 

Mr. POMEROY. You know, you have just been talking. Excuse me, 

the time is so short. You have just been talking about enrollment 

failures and I would say a program that has half the people in it 

that are eligible raises serious questions about the ultimate effectiveness of enrollments. And so now you have got a program that 

brings in these people that are otherwise getting some kind of 

TANF benefit, reflecting their low income and you want to kick 

them off the program and put them through some bureaucratic 

hoops to get on it. Now, how in the world is this responsive at all 

to increasing the participation in the Food Stamp Program? In 

North Dakota, only 51 percent who are eligible receive benefits and 

we are above the national average. 

Mr. CARTER. Mr. Pomeroy, as the Under Secretary was saying, 

individuals who receive TANF cash benefits, receive SSI, they are 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
17 

disabled, they are still continued to be categorically eligible. What 

this proposal got it doing was individuals who end up being made 

eligible for the Food Stamp Program because they are tangentially 

related to the TANF, and what the attempt was here was to make 

sure that these very limited resources are going to those people 

who are the most in need. 

Mr. POMEROY. Following up on that, what is the, and I trust that 

the time is running, so it will kick me out when we are done, so 

these people that are the tangential edge of eligibility, what are 

they making? 

Ms. COLER. I would say you have to sit back and look at categorical eligibility and how it started. It was to simplify for States and 

for those States that had more generous TANF benefits that exceeded the food stamp eligibility requirement, generally about 130 

percent of poverty, they could automatically be eligible. We want 

to scale that back to just those that are receiving TANF cash. So 

if your State—— 

Mr. POMEROY. Now, what if a State had a slightly different, for 

example, motor vehicle valuation, now, would that kick them out? 

Ms. COLER. That should not. If they are receiving a TANF cash 

benefit in your State, even if it exceeds the food stamp eligibility, 

that individual would still be categorically eligible for food stamps. 

However, if they aren’t getting the cash benefit, if it is some other 

service, they are still able to apply for the Food Stamp Program. 

Mr. POMEROY. What are these other TANF services? 

Ms. COLER. One that was brought to our attention were receiving 

child reproductive information from a TANF fund, so they were 

TANF-funded pamphlets. 

Mr. POMEROY. Is that the one? We have got 390,000 individuals. 

Do you think most of them are brochure recipients? 

Ms. COLER. I would say at least half would be, I think, and it 

is depending on the State. 

Mr. POMEROY. The position of the Department of Agriculture is 

that about half of these categorically eligible individuals that will 

no longer be eligible, their only TANF benefit is receiving brochures? That is the position of the Administration? 

Ms. COLER. Well, I will have to submit a more detailed description. It varies on the States. 

Mr. POMEROY. Well, you said that was the position. 

Ms. COLER. No, I said that was the—— 

Mr. POMEROY. Now I will issue a formal request to the Under 

Secretary. I want breakouts. You have 390,000 people here. The 

last time this came up was last year. The staff person for the Ag 

Committee putting this proposal forward had no idea what the ultimate impact would be. I want information. Who are these people? 

How are they connected? What is their income? And I would like 

it in writing and I think it would be very important to the consideration of this program. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I yield back. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Pomeroy. Mr. Boustany. 

Charles. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I have just kind of a 

general question, but I want to make a comment first. After getting 

elected to Congress, I started going around to many of the various 

agencies in my district, whether it was dealing with housing, workVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00021 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
18 

force development, nutrition, to try to understand what was happening on the ground and one of the things I was amazed by was 

just the diverse array of services at local, State and then, you 

know, of course Federal programs. And after the two hurricanes hit 

our State, I noticed that we had a problem with coordination of all 

these efforts and of course, it became a very acute problem and 

what we did in my hometown of Lafayette was that we put together a group, sort of an advisory council, to kind of coordinate all 

of these efforts. And I guess the question I have for you, and you 

mentioned your outreach program and the things you do with the 

eligibility. Are you looking at opportunities to coordinate various 

services at the local level? 

Mr. CARTER. We always, within the Food Stamp Program, look 

for opportunities to be able to leverage the Food Stamp Program 

along with other important human services. I would say, and this 

is my own editorial comment, is that we do have a real challenge, 

in that all of the programs that we operate, the local, State and 

Federal programs, all end up existing in their silos and it does become a real challenge to take a comprehensive look at an individual or a community and bring all of those services together. But 

we make the Food Stamp Program have some flexibilities built into 

it, which allow for it to be able to work in conjunction with some 

other programs, but it is an overall design problem of our safety 

net, if you would. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. I appreciate your answer, because I have spoken 

to heads of many of the local agencies and encourage them to find 

a way to coordinate, because I think it can leverage what they are 

doing much more effectively. And do you think there is a Federal 

role to direct local agencies to form some sort of anti-poverty councils, for want of a better description? 

Mr. CARTER. I think the Federal role really can be in looking to, 

through waivers that sort, be able to relax some rules to allow for 

it to happen, because very, very often the rules of one program will 

conflict with the rules of another so it doesn’t allow for that sort 

of coordination and where we can use waiver authority to be able 

to relax some rules to allow for that, it would allow for more of that 

kind of coordination. 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you. I appreciate your answer and that is 

all I have. I yield back. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Mr. Kagen. 

Mr. KAGEN. Thank you. Madam Under Secretary, you have mentioned in your written testimony that you would be remiss if you 

didn’t mention the other programs that you administer, such as the 

WIC Program, so maybe I would appreciate you enlightening me as 

to why you have 185 percent of the Federal poverty level for the 

WIC Program and 130 percent to qualify for food stamps. 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. I am going to go ahead and pass that on 

to Kate Coler. She has more details. 

Ms. COLER. Those eligibility requirements are established by 

Congress, by statute, and food stamps was determined that, generally, 130 percent of poverty and where the Women, Infant and 

Children, because it does target a more vulnerable population, Congress determined that at 185 percent. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
19 

Mr. KAGEN. My next question has to do with boots on the 

ground. Do you have enough staff to administer this program? If 

you have an enrollment that is so woefully poor, I mean, if I was 

a cardiovascular surgeon and 51 percent of my people were surviving, I would not give you a passing grade. What is the problem 

in terms of enrolling those who are in need? Is it like Iraq? Do you 

not have enough boots on the ground? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Congressman, we just had our appropriation hearings last week, last Thursday, and we are requesting 

$3 million in our budget to increase some of the staff. But some of 

the staff will probably go, where we would like to see them go is 

more in the investigative piece for the fraud and the trafficking. 

And then the other is some quality control and then, obviously, to 

work and partner and provide technical assistance to the States. 

Mr. CARTER. And if I could just add? Our boots on the ground, 

if you would, is also our State partners, because the States administer the Food Stamp Program on our behalf and so it is joined-atthe-hip partnership and what we attempt to do is to support that 

partnership by, again, sharing best practices, looking where one 

State is doing something which is of real value and benefit and attempting to share those with others. So yes, we certainly could use 

the kinds of additional resources that are outlined in our budget, 

but we see the States as being invaluable partners in the administration of the program. 

Mr. KAGEN. Thank you. I yield back. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Mr. Goodlatte. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Madam Secretary, 

welcome. Welcome to all of you. We appreciate your testimony here 

today. I would like to start with a very general question. How do 

you determine if a household is food insecure? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. That is a good question. Do you want to 

go ahead? We will let Kate answer that. 

Ms. COLER. Well, our job really is to enroll people and to make 

sure that they have access to the Food Stamp Program under the 

eligibility criteria that Congress established that each State then 

implement. As far as the measure of food insecurity, that is a study 

that the USDA does through the Economic Research Service and 

they do household—— 

Mr. GOODLATTE. But certainly there must be a definition of food 

insecurity that is the basis of the survey. 

Ms. COLER. The survey asks a variety of questions and then they 

extrapolate the data from that. Our concern is no matter—— 

Mr. GOODLATTE. But when you say a certain percentage of the 

population are food insecure, you must be using a certain portion 

of that data to arrive at the percentage of the population that you 

arrive that meet that criteria. 

Ms. COLER. Certainly the researchers do explain how they come 

to their conclusions and that the food insecurity overall, nationally, 

we have seen a slight dip. What we focus on is reaching those that 

are eligible according to the income guidelines. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. In other words, you are saying by whatever definition you are pursuing, the number of people who are deemed to 

be food insecure has dipped a little bit? 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
20 

Ms. COLER. We have seen it. In this last report that the Department issued, there was a very slight decline. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. I wonder if you might provide to the chairman 

and to the members of the committee what that definition of food 

insecurity is so that we can understand the basis for the figures. 

And I take it that it is not, that percentage does not indicate the 

percentage of people in the country who are hungry, who have hunger. 

Ms. COLER. No, I actually have the report here and I am happy 

to submit that. That does have the definition and they are very 

careful in how they are defining food security or insecurity and to 

the different degrees. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. And it relates to whether or not somebody 

knows they can stretch their budget based upon their income and 

other sources of support through a period of time, rather than that 

people in the family are actually going hungry? 

Ms. COLER. This study does look at economic questions more 

than physical condition questions. But again, from our agency’s 

perspective, Food, Nutrition and Consumer Services, we are looking to make sure that people who are eligible for our program have 

access to it, because this is really a very strong tool to combat hunger or food insecurity. It is very important for low-income families 

to know about this program and to utilize it should they be eligible. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. Well, let me ask you about those eligibility requirements. I believe Mr. Weill, in his written testimony, states 

that we need to expand the eligibility to certain able-bodied adults 

who do not meet the work requirements. Would you explain the 

ability that the State agencies already have to make exceptions on 

a case-by-case basis? 

Mr. CARTER. An able-bodied individual is able to receive, that is, 

an able-bodied individual without dependents, (ABAWDS), is able 

to receive three months worth of food stamps in a three year period. The State has a 15-percent exemption that they are able to 

enact each year, that they could increase that, the number of or 

percentage of ABAWDS, if you would. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. And I understand that that is 15 percent of the 

State’s entire food stamp caseload can be able-bodied adults without dependents. 

Mr. CARTER. That is correct. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. So even without the three month benefit, which 

goes to every able-bodied adult without dependents, the State has 

a lot of room to meet the needs of a lot of people, in spite of the 

fact that the Congress was obviously, when we changed our rules, 

very concerned that people who are able-bodied be required to work 

in order to receive food stamps. Notwithstanding that, they can 

provide people with, in that circumstance, a lot of food stamps, because they can comprise up 15 percent of the entire pool of people 

in that State receiving food stamps. Am I correct? 

Mr. CARTER. Yes, the States do have some flexibility in that regard. 

Ms. COLER. They are based on geography. It has to do with the 

economic conditions within certain pockets of the State, but the 

State can ask for a waiver based on the geographic situation, more 

so than the individual circumstances. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
21 

Mr. GOODLATTE. Let me follow up on Mr. Pomeroy’s question as 

well. He noted that current law allows certain individuals, not otherwise eligible for food stamp benefits, to receive them through categorical eligibility. I think that is what he was referring to when 

he said certain people receiving just a pamphlet. For example, certain States allow a person who is eligible to receive TANF in-kind 

services, that might be the pamphlet, such as job training, to receive food stamp benefits. But some households receiving food 

stamp benefits despite the fact that the household does not meet 

the conventional food stamp eligibility requirements, would it be 

more cost-effective to limit categorical eligibility to people who receive cash benefits from TANF and concentrate the available food 

stamp funds in the segments of the population who demonstrate 

that they need them the most? 

Ms. COLER. That is exactly what is in our proposal, to limit it 

to just the cash benefits. So if the State has a more generous TANF 

cash benefit above the 130 percent of the food stamp eligibility, 

that individual would be categorically eligible for food stamps. It is 

just those that are receiving services only that we are trying to—— 

Mr. GOODLATTE. And we are not talking about people under the 

WIC Program who can be in a much higher eligibility criteria because the percentage of poverty is much—— 

Ms. COLER. WIC and food stamps do not have an automatic eligibility. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. People who have a higher income level are able 

to qualify for WIC. We are only talking about the women with infants and children are in a different category than this and here, 

when we are talking about a person who might only receive a pamphlet, the reason may well be that we have an interest in their nutritional needs, but they are well above the income level set by the 

Congress and that particular State has chosen, notwithstanding 

that, to give them food stamp benefits even though they do not 

have that eligibility. That, I think, is a right of any State to choose 

to do so. But should they do so in circumstances where the Federal 

government, where this Congress, with our tight budgets, are paying for that? I think not and I agree with the position of the Administration. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Mr. Davis. 

Mr. DAVIS. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much, and for those 

who are witnessing today. A little bit earlier in the comments, we 

had someone that talked about constitutional rights and freedom 

and liberty and freedom of speech. In that First Amendment that 

was added, there are actually 12 that was authorized in 1787, one 

of them said freedom of speech and then right under it, it said freedom of religion. It pretty much speaks for one of the most important things we have, when you talk about the Constitution, is to 

be able to vote. Until 1920, ma’am, a lot folks in this room couldn’t 

have voted. So when we talk about what the constitutional responsibilities of all of us are, we need to maybe look at our Constitution, that some folks on this committee would assume that everything is constitutional. 

But freedom of religion, it says someplace in that book that I 

read, I was hungry and you feed me, and the nations that do that, 

I will bless them. I think we have been blessed in this Nation for 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
22 

a reason. Many of us have agreed from our hearts and through our 

faith, that it is important that those who are poor and those who 

are described in that book that I read, that when you reach out to 

those, it is one of the most blessed things you can do. And I think 

the Food Stamp Program has been a major part of why this Nation 

has been blessed the way that it has. There is nothing constitutional that requires it. It is in that First Amendment that says 

freedom of religion that gives us the responsibility to be sure that 

we act as a Nation. No other nation in the world has done what 

we have done. No other nation of the world has a safety net nor 

provides, for those who live in this country as we have provided, 

no other nation of the world achieves that. 

Four questions. The percent of working families on food stamps; 

how many military families are on food stamps; the percent of eligibility today that are able to obtain food assistance; and the purchasing power of the Food Stamp Program, has it increased or decreased? And the reason I ask those four, and if I need to repeat 

those, I will do that, I have no doubt that the farm program that 

we have is the best bargain that the American consumer has in 

any area of Federal spending. It has kept food safe, it has kept food 

abundant and it has kept food available to many families, those 

who can purchase and those who are able to purchase with food 

stamp assistance. Do you want them one at a time? The percent 

of working families today on food stamps. 

Ms. COLER. A significant change from what we have seen since 

the 1996 welfare reform. We will have to get you information on 

the exact numbers. We have got a food stamp population of about 

26 million. The working poor is really a population we are trying 

to target. Percentage-wise, we are only reaching about 30 percent 

of those working poor that are eligible for the program. 

Mr. DAVIS. So about 70 percent are not being reached? 

Ms. COLER. Of the working families that are eligible for the program. 

Mr. DAVIS. Military. 

Ms. COLER. They have been underserved. 

Mr. DAVIS. How many military families do we have? 

Ms. COLER. We would have to get that information to submit. 

Mr. DAVIS. Would you get that for me? 

Ms. COLER. And we will. 

Mr. DAVIS. Okay. And the purchasing power, has that receded in 

comparison to where it was five years ago, 10 years ago, or when 

the program really started? 

Mr. CARTER. I am not quite sure, Congressman, if I understand 

the question. If I am—— 

Ms. COLER. If I could just throw in. The purchasing power, I 

mean, it is that we see the percentage of the household for food is 

relatively consistent and I think, actually lower than it has been 

in years for the Nation as a whole. One of the figures we do know 

specifically about the Food Stamp Program is, not only the purchasing power and the economic benefit to the household that is 

participating, but every $5 in food stamp benefits yields about $9.2 

in local economic activity. And one of the approaches we have been 

taking in trying to improve participation in this program—— 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
23 

Mr. DAVIS. What I am talking about, purchasing power, an example. In 1961, that was a day that I could buy a gallon of gas for 

25 cents, that was four gallons for a dollar. In comparison, what 

does a dollar buy today? 

Ms. COLER. Overall, for the Nation as a whole, you can buy more 

food for your dollar than you could before, I think, and we will submit that USDA does some research on just overall, and I know that 

the Farm Bureau celebrates the day that all of your income goes 

for food, I think, in early April or in late March and it seems to 

get a little earlier each year. 

Mr. DAVIS. Thanks. I appreciate it. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Davis. Before we dismiss 

this panel, I have one final question and hopefully, you know, you 

can be brief in answering this. All children who participate in the 

Food Stamp Program are automatically eligible for free school 

meals. There is a new requirement on the States and schools to 

auto-enroll these children to avoid duplicative paperwork for parents to save schools from spending unnecessary time for processing 

applications for these children. But according to your figures, only 

60 percent of the children on food stamps are auto-enrolled in these 

free school meals. Why aren’t we doing a better job in connecting 

the hungry children to school meals, and what steps has the 

United States is taking to get the number up to 100 percent? Especially as we look at the No Child Left Behind, it impacts a lot of 

the learning and behavior patterns and the testing that goes on, 

because a lot of these children that are going to school are going 

hungry and yet a lot of the requirements in the testing, and it is 

very difficult to pass the tests when you are going to school on an 

empty stomach. And yet teachers are asked that these students 

have got to perform at a certain level and yet we haven’t done 

enough to make sure that the children are receiving the nutritional 

programs that they need. 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. That is a very good question, Mr. Chairman, and I am going to go ahead and pass that on to Kate, because, again, she has worked very intensively about this and this 

is an important issue for FNS, the good, healthy, nutritious meals 

in the school systems, because, again, I have seen on my visits out 

to the school, it is very important for kids to get a good start. But 

again, I have seen a lot of schools where the Breakfast Program is 

growing and they are very much in support of that, with the Fresh 

Fruit and Vegetable Program and again, trying to incorporate their 

lunch that kids can actually eat so that they will be able to learn 

and grow healthy. 

Mr. BACA. Yes, but it is more than just a lunch. Remember that 

lunch, they are taking the tests already and lunch is after and they 

are taking the tests in between. So what happens to that child 

when their stomach is growling? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. The schools that I have visited, Mr. 

Chairman, the Fresh Fruit and Snack Program is in the afternoon. 

It is between lunch and recess and the end of school for that, I am 

sure, because that is a time when they are hungry. But I will go 

ahead and let Kate maybe give you some more details. 

Mr. BACA. All right. Thank you. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
24 

Ms. COLER. Just your question about making sure that the children are participating in both is so important and it is an easy population to try to target and really help enroll in the program. The 

Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act passed in 2004 did mandate 

direct certification for children from the Food Stamp Program into 

the National School Lunch Program and it requires information 

sharing between the State agencies that administer both, and so 

we have seen a lot of progress in making sure that children who 

participate in the Food Stamp Program are receiving a free meal 

at lunch. I think we are also looking at innovative ways to do more 

to have data information coming from the schools to help do some 

outreach to families that may be eligible for the Food Stamp Program. So that is just one area that the collaboration has yielded 

some great results. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. I know that we are just about done with 

our panel, but we will ask Mr. Moran for a comment. 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you for doing that. I apologize 

for being absent. I think every Kansan, and maybe you all can say 

that about your own districts, but every Kansan is in Washington, 

D.C. today. Madam Secretary, you and I had a brief conversation 

before the hearing commenced and I just would like to express my 

appreciation to you for your willingness to meet with me. We had 

a conversation on the phone several months ago, but we continue 

to have WIC issue in Kansas in which we are losing, potentially 

losing our WIC stores because of a proposed final rule at USDA 

that bases the price paid upon a formula that includes large providers that the small stores can’t compete with. And so I just want 

to express my desire to work with you to see if, one more time, 

maybe we can find a solution. And despite your certainty that 

USDA can’t solve this problem, I am going to convince you that you 

can. 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Yes, I will be looking forward to our 

meeting. 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you very much. 

Mr. BACA. Charles, a quick comment? 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Yes. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I appreciate the 

opportunity to ask one last question. The question is about the administrative cost of the program and I know it is a very complex 

question beyond the scope of this hearing. But I would ask that you 

provide the subcommittee with your assessment of the administrative cost of this program and any suggestions that you may have 

that we can take that would make the program more efficient. 

Thank you. 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. I would be happy to do that. 

Mr. BACA. Mr. Goodlatte, a final? 

Mr. BOUSTANY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I will just have one 

question. As I indicated in my opening statement, I am a very 

strong supporter of the Emergency Food Assistance Program and 

the vital help it provides to food banks, because much of the food 

they receive is very generous donations from individuals, from grocery stores, from food processing companies, but that is basically at 

the choice of the people who donate the food, whereas the Commodity Program helps the food back round out what they provide 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
25 

to a family and make sure that it is a balanced diet, a balanced 

selection of food products. So lots of the vegetables and fruits and 

meats and so on come out of that program, and I wonder if you 

could give us your assessment of how well you think the Emergency Food Assistance Program is working? 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. Well, I can give you my piece and if 

Kate and Clarence wants to join in at any time, that would be fine. 

But I do think that the food bank, they do a great job and I know 

that we continue to build our partnership with them. And in fact, 

I was in Chicago, Illinois, Zion, where there is a Food Stamp Express pilot project and it was fantastic. It was in a church food 

bank and they had this pilot set up where there was two volunteers actually doing prescreening eligibility for participants there 

for food stamps. When they left there they had a link card, so within 72 hours they can actually call the local State office and they 

could have one to two months of food stamps for food. So then they 

can go back to their local office and then apply, you know, the way 

they normally would. But at least it got them through the next couple of months. They knew that they were eligible and it is a great 

pilot project. So I am looking forward for the evaluation, but our 

food banks, we have a very good relationship with them. They are 

very strong and they do play a vital role. 

Mr. CARTER. The other thing I would say, Congressman, is I 

think that it is important component of an overall feeding apparatus, if you would, and so you couldn’t just have a Food Stamp 

Program by itself. There does need to be a complement to it. You 

know, we saw, when we had the weather-related disasters, how 

that congregate feeding was actually the first thing we could do. 

Quite frankly, in some places the Food Stamp Program couldn’t 

work, at least in places in Louisiana, because there was no infrastructure to be able to purchase the food. So it is a component of 

an overall nutrition apparatus. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. That is a very good point. It is a very good 

point. I had the opportunity to bring this committee to New Orleans and other parts of Louisiana to Congressman Boustany’s district, as a matter of fact, following Hurricane Katrina and we visited the Second Harvest food bank in New Orleans, which distributes to many of the parishes in the surrounding area and they had, 

in the month immediately after the hurricane, increased their distribution of food about sevenfold over their normal distribution and 

that came also from help from other food banks around the country 

who sent food that sometimes they didn’t really have to spare. So 

making sure that this TEFAP program, which then is needed to replenish not only New Orleans, but other food banks that sent food 

to them from around the country, making sure it stays strong I 

think is a high priority. 

Ms. MONTANEZ-JOHNER. We do have in our Farm Bill proposal 

to add $2.75 billion in the fruits and vegetables, so that would be 

going to the food banks. 

Mr. GOODLATTE. Yes. Thank you very much. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Goodlatte. I would like to 

thank the panelists for being here, but before I do, I would like to 

have Mr. Moran make one final comment. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
26 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. It is my understanding 

that Deputy Under Secretary Kate Coler’s tenure at the Department of Agriculture is coming to an end and I just want to take 

this moment that I assume may be your last opportunity to appear 

before our committee and thank you for your service to the public 

and your commitment to seeing that people don’t go hungry in the 

United States and around the world. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. With that, I would like to 

thank the panelists and like to invite the second panelists, Dr. 

James Weill, President of Food Research and Action Center; and 

Mariana Chilton, Ph.D., Principal Investigator from Philadelphia 

GROW Project from St. Christopher’s Hospital for Children; Janet 

Murguia, President and CEO, National Council of La Raza; and 

Rene Massey, Director of Baldwin County Department of Human 

Resource; and Gary Brunk, Executive Director from Kansas Action 

for Children; and Kim McCoy Wade, Executive Director from the 

California Association of Food Banks, from Sacramento. I would 

just like to mention that the television cameras from Univision will 

be taping during the subcommittee second panel today. We will 

begin with the first panelist. Mr. Weill, would you please begin 

when you are ready. 

STATEMENT OF JAMES D. WEILL, PRESIDENT, FOOD 

RESEARCH AND ACTION CENTER 

Mr. WEILL. Good morning, Chairman Baca and members of the 

subcommittee. I thank you for the opportunity to testify today. The 

Food Research and Action Center has been working since 1970 to 

end hunger in this country, and the Food Stamp Program is the 

Nation’s most important public program working towards that end. 

A little while back the TV show 60 Minutes interviewed a mother 

on a line of 896 people waiting outside a food bank in rural Ohio. 

She told the reporter that when she bought milk for her baby, she 

would cut it with an equal part of water to make the milk last 

longer. When asked what her dream in life was, this mother said 

that it was to feed her baby milk which is undiluted. A better Food 

Stamp Program can help fulfill her dream, and this Nation not 

only can afford to fulfill that dream, it can’t afford not to. The price 

to children’s health, learning and eventual productivity is too high 

if we fail to do that. 

Food stamps, of course, reach not just children but their parents, 

their grandparents and other seniors and working an unemployed 

adults. Eighty-three percent of beneficiaries are children, their 

families, seniors and disabled persons. There are also more than 

600,000 veterans in households receiving food stamps. Food stamps 

support people, not only in hard economic times, but in emergencies of all types. And several people have mentioned today the 

important response of the Food Stamp Program after Katrina and 

the other hurricanes of 2005. And the program is extraordinarily 

important, not just to hungry children in cities, but in suburbs and 

rural areas as well. A University of New Hampshire study showed 

that non-metropolitan areas contained 22 percent of the U.S. population, but 31 percent of food stamp beneficiaries. 

Let me turn now to the program’s specific impact on children’s 

nutrition and health. First, food stamps increase household food 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
27 

spending and therefore increase basic nutrients in the home’s food 

supply. As the Under Secretary mentioned, USDA has found that 

food stamps raise scores on the Healthy Eating Index, a measure 

which is based on the dietary guidelines. The higher the level of 

food stamps the family receives, the larger the positive effect on the 

index. Food stamps also have been shown to have a positive effect 

on preschool children’s intake of iron, Vitamin A and other nutrients, and an improvement reading and math for children from kindergarten to third grade. 

Separate from the boost in nutrients, the basic building blocks 

that food stamps provide, children also benefit when food stamps 

help make their households food secure, the phrase the USDA and 

the Census Bureau used for households with adequate resources to 

obtain a healthy diet on a regular basis. When children live in 

households that are food insecure, they are more likely to become 

sick or hospitalized, to be irritable in the classroom and to be absent from school. Food stamps help cure food insecurity. Food 

stamps also can prevent childhood obesity, which, as the chairman 

and several members of the subcommittee have indicated this 

morning, is a growing concern. One of the studies, for example, 

shows that school-aged food insecure girls are less likely to be overweight if they participate in the Food Stamp Program. Food stamps 

can play a protective role against obesity for children, but that role 

may well be diminished by the inadequacy of the benefit amount, 

and that inadequacy brings me to the final subject I want to mention briefly. 

As important and effective as the Food Stamp Program is, it 

needs to be improved in significant ways to further reduce childhood hunger and food insecurity, to combat obesity and to support 

nutrition, health and education. The first priority is making benefit 

allotments more adequate. It is now the norm rather than the exception for families to run out of food stamp help days, often 10 

days, before the end of the month. The average benefit, which is 

roughly a dollar per person per meal, just is not enough to purchase a healthy diet. And the minimum benefit of $10, which has 

been unchanged since 1977, when it had three times as much purchasing power, has to be adjusted. More adequate benefits backed 

by better nutrition education, as the Under Secretary discussed, 

will combat obesity as well as hunger. 

Second, reforms are needed so the program can reach additional 

needy people. It is essential and long over due to revise resource 

limits that have been stuck for most households at a maximum of 

$2,000 for more than three decades. We also urge you to cover key 

groups of needy people totally barred by arbitrary program rules, 

particularly legal immigrant parents and other adults, and unemployed able-bodied adults who face a three month and three year 

time limit on benefits. 

Third, we hope that the subcommittee will work to improve access to the program by already eligible but unserved families, the 

40 percent that have been mentioned who are eligible now but not 

getting benefits, through streamlining, eliminating unnecessary red 

tape and supporting out reach efforts. In some ways, this will help 

relieve the shortage of boots on the ground that Representative 

Kagen referenced. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
28 

I want to close with a metaphor that I am borrowing from the 

doctors of the Children’s Sentinel Nutrition Assessment Program, 

or C–SNAP. So I may be stealing from Dr. Chilton’s presentation 

and if so, I apologize. But it is worth saying twice, in any event. 

They say that food stamps are like a childhood vaccine against 

malnutrition, hunger and food insecurity, a miracle drug that reduces infant mortality and child hospitalization and increases 

school achievement. But because benefits are so inadequate, we are 

giving children what they call a sub-therapeutic dose of this miracle drug, enough to make them somewhat better, and that is incredibly important and we appreciate Congress’ role in doing that, 

but less than the children need to cure the disease, and we are giving this miracle drug to fewer than 60 percent of the people who 

need it. So we urge you to work to reach more children and adults 

with fuller doses of this miracle drug as you reauthorize the program. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Weill appears at the conclusion 

of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Weill. Dr. Chilton. 

STATEMENT OF MARIANA CHILTON, PH.D., MPH, PRINCIPAL 

INVESTIGATOR, THE PHILADELPHIA GROW PROJECT AT ST. 

CHRISTOPHER’S HOSPITAL FOR CHILDREN 

Ms. CHILTON. Muy buenos dı ́as, Chairman Baca and distinguished committee members. It is an honor to be invited to speak 

to you today about the importance of child nutrition and child 

health as you begin your hard work of reviewing the Food Stamp 

Program. I am a public health researcher from Pennsylvania, 

where agriculture is the Number One industry. It is where we take 

pride in our farms, our dairies and food production and at the same 

time, where we always remember our youngest children at risk for 

hunger. I am here today to speak on behalf of more than 23,000 

infants and toddlers and their families across the United States 

who show up to emergency rooms and ambulatory care clinics with 

health crises whose roots stretch far beyond the clinic walls. 

I can speak about these babies because I am one of several pediatric and public health researchers from the Children’s Sentinel 

Nutrition Assessment Program, the study we call C–SNAP. C– 

SNAP is a multi-site research study that, since 1998, has been the 

most current and largest dataset in the Nation, about the food security, health and development of very young children living in 

poverty. We have held in our hands each one of these 23,000 children in Minnesota, Pennsylvania, Maryland, Arkansas, Massachusetts, California and Washington, D.C. We have measured their 

height, taken their weight and interviewed their parents and 

grandmothers about their participation in food stamps, WIC, subsidized housing and child care programs. We ask each of these children’s parents about all of the policies that begin right here on the 

Hill. In this way, our C–SNAP study shows evidence of how Federal policies manifest in the bodies and brains of babies. 

I want to tell you Alexander’s story. His mother brought him into 

the emergency room at St. Christopher’s Hospital for Children in 

Philadelphia last week. He is a 6-month-old baby who came in with 

pneumonia. When we interviewed his mother, Marilyn, she told us 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
29 

that they did not have enough money to buy food. She said that 

they told her that her husband makes too much money. His wage 

of $14 an hour puts their family of four just over the limit for their 

household size to receive food stamps. She also described how she 

could not pay her heating bill, so her house was cold. In the meantime, she says, due to Alexander’s pneumonia, baby Alexander has 

lost weight and they do not have enough money for food to make 

it to the end of March. My physician colleagues would not be surprised that a hungry baby would catch pneumonia, because good 

immune function depends on good nutrition. Furthermore, good nutrition is the brain’s building blocks. Alexander’s food insecurity, 

weight loss and illness place him at risk for long-term developmental problems. 

If we look at the USDA food security report that is released 

every year, it has been consistently reported that the surest way 

for a family to be at risk for food insecurity is to have a very young 

child under the age of six. On C–SNAP, we monitor the most vulnerable group of these young children, those who are in the rapid 

growth phase from birth to three years old. The C–SNAP study has 

found that food insecurity is related to higher developmental risk. 

Nutrition provides the building blocks to build new brain. Everything from cognitive development, fine and gross motor skills, to 

educational obtainment and psychosocial disorders are linked to a 

child’s nutritional status. The brain’s building blocks for all of 

these skills are laid down in those first three years of life. If a child 

does not have the proper nutrition during this critical period, long 

before they cross the threshold of a school, their ability to pay attention and learn may be permanently altered, starting the child 

on a downward spiral for life. 

The C–SNAP study has also found that children in food insecure 

households are 90 percent more likely to be in poor health and 30 

percent more likely to have a history of being hospitalized. The average cost of a hospitalization for a pediatric illness costs about 

$11,000. This same amount of money could provide enough food 

stamps for a family of four for several years. As you can see, these 

negative health impacts on a child’s development translate into dollars subsequently spent by the public sector to address issues that 

could have been prevented, expenditures that could have been 

avoided, if we practiced the prevention that we know works, by assuring adequate food and nutrition. 

There is some good, powerful medicine for this problem, but doctors, pediatricians, teachers and nutritionists cannot prescribe this 

medicine; however, you can. You can prescribe this good medicine 

through protecting and enhancing the Food Stamp Program. Our 

research shows that children whose family receives food stamps 

were 26 percent less likely to be food insecure. Our research has 

also shown that food stamps buffer young children from health 

problems in food insecure households. Other researchers have 

found that if a child, starting at birth, is enrolled in the Food 

Stamp Program, then the Medicaid payments for this child’s anemia and malnutrition are likely to decrease as compared to children who did not receive food stamps from birth. Food stamps is 

a good medicine, but the dose is not enough. When America’s families get food stamps, the dose is what my pediatrician colleagues 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
30 

would call sub-therapeutic, but it has already stated before me, so 

I will continue on. 

You might remember that the Thrifty Food Plan is the USDA’s 

theoretical estimate of what it would cost to purchase a grocery 

basket that provides a minimally adequate diet. This serves as the 

basis on which food stamp allotments are calculated. The government’s lowest cost meal plan, the Thrifty Food Plan, does not reflect current scientific thinking about nutrition and health. If a 

family of four, like Marilyn’s, tried to purchase the most economically reasonable version of the Surgeon General’s most recent dietary recommendations, their cost would exceed the maximum possible food stamp allotment by nearly $2,000 a year. This is an impossible expense for families who are constantly trading off how to 

have money to get to work, pay for child care, keep a roof over 

their heads, or keep the house warm while trying to provide 

healthy meals. Therefore, on the basis of our medical research and 

that of others, my colleagues and I make the following recommendations: food stamp benefits should be based on a food plan 

that reflects what it actually costs to buy a health diet for all members of the family. 

To continue, our C–SNAP sites in Los Angeles, California and 

Minneapolis, Minnesota, pick up many immigrants, including many 

young Latino children. Latino children who are in food insecure 

homes are two times more likely to be at developmental risk than 

Latino children in food secure households. Our data showed that 

Latinos have very high rates of food insecurity, especially our newest American citizens born to immigrant parents. But food stamps 

protect these children, as citizen children of immigrant parents are 

32 percent less likely to be in poor health if their parents receive 

food stamps. They make a profound difference. This is extremely 

problematic, however, that new Americans are not given or don’t 

have the access to food stamps and are food insecure because they 

are the fastest growing child population in America, which brings 

us to our final recommendation, restore food stamp eligibility to all 

income eligible legal immigrants and increase outreach to these 

populations. 

When you consider the reauthorization of the Farm Bill, this is 

your opportunity to make history by ensuring a strong nutrition 

title that will make children’s bodies strong, their health excellent, 

their minds ready to learn and all of them ready to achieve to their 

fullest potential. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Chilton appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. The red light indicates that it 

is almost time due and if you can, stick within that period of time. 

I know the subject matter is so important and that is why I let you 

go on. At this point, may I have Mrs. Murguia? Janet? 

STATEMENT OF JANET MURGUIA, PRESIDENT AND CEO, 

NATIONAL COUNCIL OF LA RAZA 

Ms. MURGUIA. Thank you. Thank you. Hello, my name is Janet 

Murguia and I am President and CEO of the National Council of 

La Raza. NCLR is a private nonprofit, nonpartisan organization established in 1968 to reduce poverty and discrimination and imVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00034 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
31 

prove opportunities for the Nation’s Hispanics. As the largest national Hispanic civil rights and advocacy organization in the United 

States, NCLR serves all Hispanic nationality groups, in all regions 

of the country, through a network of nearly 300 affiliated community-based organizations. I want to thank the Subcommittee on Nutrition for inviting me to speak about the impact of the Food Stamp 

Program on Latino families and children. I also extend particular 

thanks to our chair here today, Chair Baca, for his efforts to ensure 

that Latino families can fully participate in the Food Stamp Program. In 2002, your work on the Farm Bill ensured that many 

more legal immigrants, especially children, could access this important program and I thank you for your leadership. I also want to 

commend the two Kansas representatives. As a home State Kansas 

girl, I appreciate your interest in being here today. 

You know, at NCLR, I take great pride in the fact that we had 

a very excellent report that was put out late last year, earlier this 

year, in an area around food insecurity and Latinos. It is called Sin 

Provecho and I commend it to the committee and I am going to 

highlight some of the points from this, I think, groundbreaking report. There are more than 42 million Latinos in the United States 

contributing to almost every facet of American life, as you all know, 

bolstering the workforce, serving in the military and helping to 

strengthen the Nation’s economy. However, food security is hard to 

achieve. More than one in five Latinos live at or below the poverty 

line, and nearly 1⁄4 of Latino households with children are poor. 

Why is improving Latino food security so important? Children who 

are food secure have higher school performance and are likely to 

be in better health. You have heard from our panelists and I am 

sure you will hear more about that. 

But a study of young Latino children found that their parents 

were twice as likely to note developmental concerns if they were 

food insecure. Currently, 17.9 percent of Latinos are food insecure, 

which is more than twice the rate for non-Hispanic white households; about 8.2 percent. Latino households with children have 

even higher rates of food insecurity; 21.6 percent of Latino households with children experience food insecurity, compared to 11.8 

percent of white households with children. The Food Stamp Program shows great potential for helping Latinos achieve food security with improved nutrition. After the implementation of partial 

immigrant restorations to food stamps in 2002, there was a surge 

in Latino food security by four percent, even as the numbers of 

poor in the Latino community were growing. With increased food 

security, the negative consequences of food insecurity are diminished, which can range from intense headaches to long-lasting cognitive deficits to growth abnormalities and decreased ability to 

fight illness and disease. Latino families and children do not have 

equal opportunity to take advantage of the Food Stamp Program. 

Only 52 percent of Latinos are participating. Why? There are 

major legal restrictions placed on legal immigrant families. Despite 

the 2002 food stamp restorations, there are still a number of complex laws that restrict between 250,000 and 300,000 lawfully residing immigrants from the rolls of food stamps. As a result, participation is abysmally low, with only four in 10 eligible non-citizens participating. These barriers also affect children in these households, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
32 

many of whom are citizens. Only half of eligible citizen children in 

households headed by non-citizen parents are participating in the 

Food Stamp Program, compared to eight in ten eligible citizen children in citizen-headed households. 

Latinos have difficulties navigating the food stamp system. Administrative barriers and lack of available translated materials 

make it difficult for families to apply for food stamps. Further, in 

households with non-citizens, complex eligibility rules and fear of 

immigration reporting all compound this confusion. Improving the 

Food Stamp Program for Latinos is essential. We have a great opportunity to improve food security in America by building a stronger Food Stamp Program. As the nutrition title of the Farm Bill is 

considered, it is essential to do the following to improve the food 

security for Latino families and children: it should be a top priority 

to restore benefits to all legal immigrants and we want to reinforce 

that of the other panelists, as they have said before, and we must 

ensure that Latino community is engaged in outreach and enrollment activities. The Farm Bill should include provisions which 

allow culturally and linguistic appropriate outreach and enrollment 

services to be carried out by community-based organizations. We 

heard earlier today, the USDA was talking about involving the 

States more. Well, they need to do even more than that. They need 

to drill down and involve the actual communities who serve these 

Latino families. At NCLR, we have a network of 300 communitybased organizations and there are several other national organizations that could invoke their ties to those communities to make 

sure that we have that culturally and linguistic and appropriate 

services to those families. 

I just want to thank you for this opportunity to testify and commend you for your leadership in looking at this very important 

issue. Thank you very much. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Murguia appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much for your testimony. We next 

have Ms. Massey. 

STATEMENT OF RENE MASSEY, DIRECTOR, BALDWIN COUNTY 

DEPARTMENT OF HUMAN RESOURCES 

Mr. MASSEY. Thank you, Mr. Baca. Mother Theresa, in her essential wisdom, wrote, I once picked up a small girl who was wandering the streets lost. Hunger was written all over her face. Who 

knows how long it had been she had eaten anything. I offered her 

a piece of bread. The little one started eating, crumb by crumb, and 

I told her, eat, eat the bread. Aren’t you hungry? She looked at me 

and said, I am just afraid that when I run out of bread, I will still 

be hungry. We know Mother Theresa touched the lives of millions 

of children in India, here in the United States, and all around the 

world. Her story about the hungry little girl could be about a child 

in Calcutta, but sadly enough, it also could easily be about a child 

in Alabama. More specifically, a child in southwest Alabama, 

where I work and oversee the administration of the States Food 

Stamp Program to the citizens of Baldwin County. 

Baldwin County is the largest county geographically in Alabama, 

and is the second fastest growing in population. Our county is loVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00036 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
33 

cated on the Gulf of Mexico and is the largest county for tourist 

industry and potential jobs in this industry in the State. Many 

families and children benefit from the States Food Stamp Program 

in Baldwin County. However, about six months ago, in studying 

the growth of our population and from feedback from our State officials, we realized there was an unserved number of citizens who we 

were failing to reach with the benefits of the program. We began 

an outreach to better serve our citizens by working with our agency 

partners, the schools and our local staff and other programs, et 

cetera, to be sure applications were made available in various 

agencies and that people were assisted in completing the applications. In just a few short months, we were able to increase the 

county’s participation by an extra 10 percent. We have continued 

to work toward our goals of reducing hunger and providing better 

nutrition for children and their families by these means and other 

ideas we continue to explore. There is much that needs to be done 

to further simplify the program in order to encourage more families 

with children to access the benefits. 

From my 28 years of social work in Alabama, I can come before 

you today and testify that the Food Stamp Program has been a 

godsend to many hungry children in our State. It is the largest 

benefit program in the Department of Human Resources. The program is designed to supplement the basic food needs of low-income 

households and our working poor. It also increases the family’s food 

buying power and improves nutrition and health of many adults 

and children. We are all aware of the emphasis that is placed on 

healthy eating and a healthy lifestyle. It is very important that our 

low-income families have access to programs that supplement their 

ability to make wise choices for their family and put food on their 

table. Currently our State has nearly 514,000 people receiving benefits, and of this number, over 278,000 are children, making them 

the largest population receiving food stamps in Alabama. 

It is said repeatedly that our children all across our Nation are 

our greatest resource. We have worked very hard in Alabama to 

make the needs of children a priority, as evidenced by the many 

improvements in our child welfare programs over the past two decades. We realize the value of the Food Stamp Program as it helps 

to contribute to family stability. The ability of a family to feed their 

children and provide proper nutrition to them, keeps many families 

off the child welfare and neglect rolls, thereby strengthening our 

families in Alabama. 

The 2002 Farm Bill brought about significant positive changes 

that improved and simplified the delivery of the Food Stamp Program to our citizens. However, there continue to be areas that need 

further strengthening. Federal funding for the Food Stamp Program must keep pace with the daily-increasing needs and the everincreasing costs of providing a healthful diet for our families and 

our children. Also, funding for companion programs for education 

and nutrition should be increased. Including nutrition education as 

a viable program thrust has aided our families in Alabama tremendously by educating them on how to select healthy foods for themselves and their children. We applaud programs such as Teen Nutrition, Program Nutrition Education, Eat Smart, Play Hard, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
34 

School Breakfast Program, and many others, as they support the 

goal of providing better nutrition for our children. 

Many of you will recall the hurricane of 1979, Hurricane Frederick. I began my career seven weeks after Frederick hit the Alabama Gulf Coast. While I was assigned to the child welfare program, I will never forget observing the greatest need of our citizens 

in rural southwest Alabama at that time: the need for food. Sure, 

there were sheltering issues, job issues, financial issues, but the 

first and greatest need was the need for food. Almost 30 years 

later, that basic need has not changed for our families and their 

children. 

Chairman Baca, Congressman Bonner, and members of this committee, thank you for this opportunity to share with you my 

thoughts on the Food Stamp Program and its impact on our children in Alabama. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Massey appears at the conclusion of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. To introduce our next witness 

is the gentlewoman from Kansas. 

Ms. BOYDA. I am so pleased to have our executive director of the 

Kansas Action for Children Network. I always put that network 

word in there. They are a great advocacy group that comes together 

really to discuss polices in the State of Kansas that affect so many 

of our children and this is clearly one that is a big issue. So Mr. 

Brunk, I certainly appreciate your remarks. Thank you for being 

here. 

STATEMENT OF GARY BRUNK, EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR, KANSAS 

ACTION FOR CHILDREN 

Mr. BRUNK. Thank you, Representative Boyda. Thank you, 

Chairman Baca. I especially appreciate the fact that both of the 

Members from Kansas are on this committee. Representative 

Moran and Representative Boyda are here. Representative Moran 

earlier referred to this grand Kansas tradition of Wheat State political leaders who have fought hunger by strengthening the Food 

Stamp Program. Both of you are part of this tradition and I look 

to both of you to continue that tradition. Senator Dole, of course, 

one of the architects of the Food Stamp Act of 1977, which we are 

celebrating the 30th anniversary this year, Representative 

Sebelius, Representative Glickman, Representative Roberts and 

now Senator Roberts, all played a key role and I was pleased to notice that Representative Roberts is with us in that picture back 

there, sort of silently guarding over this session. 

Let me dispense with some of my written comments, because I 

don’t want to repeat things that others more knowledgeable than 

I have already said about the relationship between nutrition and 

child well-being. But let me just a point about the relationship in 

Kansas between economic security and hunger. I don’t want to bore 

you with too many figures, but child poverty in Kansas increased 

from a little bit under 12 percent in 2000 to a little bit over 141⁄2

percent in 2004. Twenty percent additional children in Kansas belong to families whose income is below 200 percent of the Federal 

poverty level, arguably, families that struggle economically. Of 

those children in Kansas, the percentage of them who live in famiVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00038 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
35 

lies where one of the parents, one or more parents are not working 

more than 25 weeks per year grew from 81⁄2 percent in 2002 to a 

little bit over 10 percent in 2006, the year that we have the most 

latest figures available. This, I think, adds to the picture of economic income stagnation for many, many families in Kansas who, 

in the face of that income stagnation, still struggle with rising 

housing costs, rising healthcare costs, rising child care costs. 

It is no surprise, then, that food stamp participation in Kansas 

over that same period of years increased substantially, from 

116,000 families in 2000 to 183,000 families in 2006, an increase 

of 57 percent. When I talk to my friends, that is the data. On the 

anecdotal side, when I talk to my friends at the Catholic Charities 

Food Pantry in Wichita, they tell me that, in 2001, they served 

6500 clients. In 2005, they served 10,500 clients, a substantial increase. And these are families that are coming once a month to get 

a supply of food that maybe will give them food for two or three 

days. One-half of the recipients of food stamps in Kansas are kids 

and you have already heard that hungry kids are less healthy, 

more likely to be hospitalized, less prepared to succeed in school, 

more likely to have behavioral and emotional problems, less likely 

to be successful adults. 

So I come to you with a sense of urgency about the importance 

of the Food Stamp Program for the health and wellbeing of children and I am going to ask you to strengthen the nutrition title 

of the Farm Bill in four ways that I think could really make a difference. First, I encourage you to improve food stamp benefit levels 

which, in Kansas, amounts to 95 cents per person per meal. I don’t 

know how many people think that for 95 cents, a child can be well 

fed. Not only is the level insufficient, and this is a point that I really want to stress, but as a result of cuts enacted in 1996, the purchasing power of most households food stamp benefits is eroding in 

value each year. In 2008, food stamp benefits for a typical working 

parent with two children will be about $37 a month lower than 

they would have been without the 1996 across-the-board benefit 

cuts. To restore those benefits at that level would require a standard deduction change from the current $134 a month to $188 a 

month and then to annually adjust those for inflation. And then 

families would be able to keep up with the same level of benefits 

that they enjoyed before 1996. 

Secondly, only about two out of every three of those who are eligible for food stamps in Kansas are getting them. I hope your committee will look at streamlining enrollment and eligibility so State 

agencies can serve more eligible households. Third, I endorse the 

President’s proposal to allow working families with high child care 

costs to deduct the full cost of that care when determining the food 

stamp benefit level. That would help literally tens of thousands of 

families in Kansas. And finally, I urge you to expand access to 

legal immigrants in poor households that have modest savings. 

Serving those children and their families is really critical to a comprehensive solution to child poverty in Kansas. Stopping the erosion of benefits, simplifying enrollment, making adjustments for 

child care costs, and expanding access would move us closer to the 

goal of eliminating hunger in America. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
36 

That tradition in Kansas of working to stop hunger through the 

Food Stamp Program is a bipartisan tradition. Senator Dole 

reached out to Senator McGovern to really forge the Food Stamp 

Act of 1977. So my challenge to my representatives from Kansas 

is to continue that food stamp tradition of bipartisan work and it 

is also my challenge to the whole committee. Thank you for attention. 

[The prepared statement of Mr. Brunk appears at the conclusion 

of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much, Mr. Brunk. Ms. Wade. 

STATEMENT OF KIM McCOY WADE, J.D., EXECUTIVE 

DIRECTOR, CALIFORNIA ASSOCIATION OF FOOD BANKS 

Ms. WADE. Good morning, or at least in California it is still good 

morning. I am Kim McCoy Wade with the California Association of 

Food Banks. I represent 40 food banks across the State, serving 

about two million people; 5,000 charities and congregations we 

partner with. I too want to start with a story. Forty years ago my 

mom, who is actually here with us today, was a Texas home economics graduate and went out to become a VISTA volunteer in 

Newark, New Jersey, to help other moms learn how to stretch their 

food stamps. She soon found that living on food stamps, as a 

VISTA volunteer, it was the moms who taught her how to take 

that peanut butter and stretch it all month long for soup for your 

kids. And here we are 40 years later, whether you are in Newark, 

New Jersey where she was, or Texas where she came from, or Oakland, California where I live, food stamps are still the number 1 

child nutrition program, if unsung. People think about school 

meals. They think about WIC. But no matter how old your child 

is, food stamps is there for you. No matter what day of the week 

it is, food stamps are there for you. In California, two out of three 

of the people on the program are children. Ninety percent are families with children. It is our number one child nutrition program. 

Well, why do food banks care about food stamps? Of course, we 

have our mission of ending hunger, but beyond that it is also in 

our self-interest. The Food Stamp Program is a lot bigger than we 

are and we need it to be that way, the frontline. We are the second 

line. But in California only half the folks who are eligible are currently getting benefits, and they are getting $400 less than they 

did ten years ago. So what are the food banks doing? They are trying to fill that gap and we can’t do it alone. Our goal is to partner 

with the Food Stamp Program, promote the Food Stamp Program, 

not replace it. So we have only the food stamp outreach contract 

in California. We contract with 48 CBOs, food banks and nonprofits, in 22 counties, aiming to reach 135,000 people this year. 

We have a similar contract on nutrition education, aiming to reach 

115,000 people, integrating those two messages. Here are benefits 

to help you buy food. Here is how to buy and prepare and consume 

healthy food. 

So what does all that work on the frontline teach us? It teaches 

us that there are three things we need to do. First of all, families 

need enough money to buy healthy food. A dollar a meal is not 

going to do. It is going to fill your plate, but it is not truly going 

to nourish your child. That coupled with nutrition education is 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
37 

needed. Second, we have to serve all people. We have started carving out immigrants, single adults, certain ex-offenders. That has 

complicated the rules on the ground. Kids, particularly in immigrant families, the rules are confusing and those kids do not get 

served. Another thing, surely we want parents to be saving for 

their kids. We want parents saving for tuition and we want them 

saving for apartment security deposits, for a rainy day, for that 

health bill. The asset test keeps those families out. Finally, one 

thing we also want is many doors into the Food Stamp Program. 

The only door can’t be the county welfare office. We want that door 

to be open and friendly, but we also want the health clinic, we 

want the school and we want the food bank to be doors in. 

Many of you all who were around before, thank you much for the 

EBT card. We appreciate that here in California, the Golden State 

Advantage Card, but there is more to do to bring technology and 

modernize this program. We are still fingerprinting every adult in 

California. We don’t have to do that anymore to really make sure 

we have integrity in the program. Those are the food stamp asks 

we have of you. Finally, I do need to mention that the emergency 

food programs have declined in California and nationwide. We have 

lost 5,000 folks off the Commodity Supplemental Food Program. 

We have also lost about 40 million pounds in emergency food assistance, because I am glad to hear the farmers are doing well, but 

that means less food is coming to our food banks and we are feeling 

that, particularly of the citrus freeze. We did not have the food in 

the system that we have had in years past to respond quickly and 

really needed State help and now we are coming to the Feds to 

help us respond to that freeze as well. 

Let me just close with a story. I was very privileged a few years 

ago when Katrina hit, to go spend three weeks at the Bay Area 

Food Bank, helping respond with the food bank there, the Bay 

Area Food Bank. And one of the weekends I was there was the 

weekend you all were rolling out disaster food stamps at the convention center and it really was a wonderful thing to see this program serving children and serving families in their time of need 

and I call on you today to make sure this program doesn’t just 

work in times of disaster, but in the everyday emergencies of the 

families we see all the time. Thank you. 

[The prepared statement of Ms. Wade appears at the conclusion 

of the hearing.] 

Mr. BACA. I want to thank all of the panelists for their testimony. At this time, we will open up to some of the questions and 

I will start, first of all, with Mr. Weill. In your testimony, you 

talked about the strength of the Food Stamp Program, but you also 

mentioned that you think that the benefit levels are not adequate 

in keeping pace with the inflation. What impact do you think it will 

have on the diet health of people who rely on the program? And 

what do you think we could do to fix the problem, especially as I 

look at and I heard the last two witnesses right now testify about 

Kansas and the need in that area, and we are not keeping up with 

the inflation and I just asked a couple of questions. Alaska and Hawaii have different rates in terms of the food stamps and yet, when 

I see California and some of the other States, that it is very difficult for some of the families, some of the poor families, to feed 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
38 

their families based on a household of three. It is difficult on a 

gross income of $1600 to pay for their children under food stamps. 

So can you address that too, as well? I mean, it is so difficult and 

yet, you know, we talk about nutrition and the health and the obesity that is there, but yet, how can you feed a family when we have 

not even made the adjustment based on the inflation and the 

growth and yet only two States are higher and every other State 

has a standardized flat rate for food stamps no matter what the 

cost is for each State. 

Mr. WEILL. Two things, Mr. Chairman. The program benefits 

were inadequate before the 1996 law and some built-in provisions 

of the 1996 law keep pushing those benefits lower compared to inflation. And the result of that in terms of nutrition and obesity is 

significant. There is more and more evidence coming out that when 

families do not have enough resources to buy adequate foods and 

healthy foods, they get into cycles of sort of feast and famine. When 

there is enough food the first week, two weeks of the month, they 

eat enough food and sometimes more than enough food, because 

there are either physiological or psychological changes that come 

from not having enough food at all or any food the last week of the 

month. And so there is more and more evidence that ties inadequacy of food resources to obesity and of course to other nutritional deficits. So the answer to that is to get benefits up to a level 

that are adequate to meet families’ basic needs. And everybody on 

this panel, I believe, has called on Congress to start moving in that 

direction this year. 

Your question about the difference in benefits from State to 

State, Alaska and Hawaii, of course, have radical cost differences 

from the 48 continental States and those differences were built into 

the program. While prices vary from State to State and community 

to community from food, those differences are relatively small compared to differences in housing and compared to differences with 

Alaska and Hawaii. So one of the strengths of the Food Stamp Program is its core national structure. The rules are essentially the 

same State to State. The benefit amount, the same income levels 

are the same. The entitlement is national. So while I understand 

the interest in looking at benefit differences and cost differences 

from State to State, I think it is important to keep the important 

national strengths of this program in mind as well. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. But I realize that the housing is so high, 

especially in California compared to some of the other States, and 

yet, you know, when you have a family, you know, you are paying 

an average home, $350-some thousand now. And that is just the 

standard average compared to buying a home in some of the other 

States where you are paying $150,000. Or if you are renting, the 

average rent right now, it is $900 and that is at the low rate, renting at $900 per month, and it becomes so difficult and yet you are 

talking about people right now that have to determine between the 

Food Stamp Program, paying the rent and trying to feed a family 

that are underfed right now and we are talking about children that 

are being affected too, as well. 

Mr. WEILL. That is a great point. The program does in part, and 

I should have said this before, compensate for those differences in 

housing and child care costs, because families can deduct from 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
39 

their countable income in the program, what are called excess shelter costs and child care costs. So in a place like California where 

those costs are higher, at least some of those costs are offset by the 

ability to deduct them. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you. Ms. Chilton, there is a lot of concern on the committee and in Congress about childhood obesity and 

other nutritional-related issues. Do you have any comments about 

how the Food Stamp Program responds to obesity, diabetes and 

other nutritional-related health diseases? 

Ms. CHILTON. Again, we are mostly looking at children who are 

age zero to three. In our own sample of almost 24,000 children, we 

found no relationship between food stamps and obesity among 

these very young children. And I also wanted to remind you, in my 

written testimony and also in Jim Weill’s testimony, we talked 

about the study that found that girls whose families were receiving 

food stamps were much less likely to be obese. The importance of 

food stamps for protecting childhood obesity and protecting children from diabetes is very important, because it gives children and 

it stretches the family food dollar so that they can purchase 

healthier foods. So I am not sure about the research with older 

children, related to diabetes and food stamps, but in our own study, 

we found no relationship, again, between food stamps and obesity 

and that is something to, again, think about, is that food stamps 

increase the diversity of the kinds of foods that families can buy 

and having a diversity of foods means good nutrition for families. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Janet, in your testimony, you point out 

that the Latino children face higher food insecurity and poverty 

than other children. Do you think there is a direct result of Latino 

children missing out on food stamps? 

Ms. MURGUIA. Yes, that is what we have seen, is that there is 

still so many, not just Latino citizen children who are still having 

trouble participating in the system, but of course, I also know that, 

as was noted consistently by every panel member up here, that we 

still have many legal immigrant children who could benefit from 

this. And we obviously want to see those benefits restored to those 

legal immigrant children and then look for ways that we can make 

the program more accessible to Latino families, and I mentioned in 

my testimony how important it is to work with institutions and organizations where the families we know already go to and trust. 

Many are Latino community-based organizations that have health 

clinics that they are running, or preschool centers that they are 

running, or run charter schools, or run any number of different efforts that they are engaging Latino families. We should find ways 

to build those organizations into the system so that they are getting the information to these families in a more effective way. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. And it has also been my understanding 

that many people who are eligible for government benefits sometimes do not apply because they lack strong English skills. This includes both citizens and legal immigrants. How would you rate the 

USDA’s assistance to limited English proficiency families in respect 

to the Food Stamp Program? And this is a constant problem and 

I know that the Under Secretary indicated that they need to do a 

better job in doing the outreach and reaching out to our communities, because many of the Hispanic members within the commuVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00043 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
40 

nities don’t even know that they are even eligible to receive assistance. 

Ms. MURGUIA. That is right. Well, and I think that is right. I 

mean, there is a lot more work to be done by the USDA and again, 

her reference to reaching out to States is helpful, but it is not 

enough. We have got to drill down deeper into the communities 

where these families actually live and it is not just in urban areas, 

as you know. You have heard from the rural communities and 

there are many community-based organizations and faith-based organizations that do interact with these families and can be more 

culturally competent in working with those parents in different 

languages. And I will remind folks, it is not just Latino immigrants. We are talking about immigrants who speak a different 

language besides Spanish. And we want to make sure that we are 

able to have these programs be accessible to those families so that 

these kids, especially, can get that kind of assistance. So we need 

to do a lot more work and we are prepared to do our part in working with the USDA and with you all as we reauthorize the bill, the 

Farm Bill. Thank you. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you very much. Mr. Bonner. 

Mr. BONNER. I would love to have the time to ask each of you 

a question because your testimony has been very enlightening and 

I am going to try to get about two or three questions in. Let me 

start with Ms. Massey. First of all, thank you for over almost 30 

years of dedicated service to the people of Alabama, and you certainly have set a wonderful example for all of us in public service. 

In your opening statement, you indicated that the Food Stamp Program had been a godsend to many hungry children in the State of 

Alabama. Based on your work in both Baldwin County, which is 

one of the fastest growing counties and more affluent than many 

in the southeast, and your home county, Washington County, 

which is one of the most economically challenged and more rural 

counties in the State of Alabama, can you comment on the importance of not only a strong Food Stamp Program, but also the overall importance of a healthy nutritious lifestyle for our youth? And 

specifically, can you tell the difference when you come from a rural 

area or you are at a fast-growing area, is there really a difference 

between the child who needs that extra help? 

Ms. MASSEY. Congressman Bonner, I would have to say there 

really isn’t a difference. I think children across the board have the 

same basic needs. And again, as I mentioned in my testimony, the 

need for food is so basic for our children, for everyone. I have seen 

over the years, particularly with my work in child welfare, and I 

mentioned that as well in my testimony, that a lot of children that 

we hear reports on in the neglect area are children who are not 

being fed properly. So we see that as a gap and our Food Stamp 

Program has just, as I mentioned again, has been a godsend to 

these families. A lot of families we might receive a neglect report 

on have no idea what food stamp benefits are available to them 

and we can start working with them and get them on the program 

and help them with their nutrition and education of nutrition and 

healthy choices, a healthy lifestyle, and we are able to help them 

to reduce the amount of neglect that we see across both counties, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
41 

in Washington County, which was very economically depressed, as 

well as there in Baldwin County. 

Mr. BONNER. Ms. Wade, I would like to pick up on a comment 

that you made, and we do appreciate your coming to our area after 

Hurricane Katrina. The Bay Area Food Bank is a source of pride, 

that we are all very proud of the role that they have played. But 

being with the food banks, you can probably appreciate this better 

than some might and that is the role. We know that government 

has a role to play. The Food Stamp Program is a good example of 

the partnership between the Federal government and the State 

government and the people. But what about the nonprofits? What 

about the faith-based groups? What about the other groups, especially as you reach out to try to educate people about benefits that 

they may be entitled to but they are not seeking? How do the nonprofits play a role, and especially through the work that you might 

do with the food banks? 

Ms. WADE. Sure. You are right, the food banks do have a long 

history of partnering with USDA on the emergency food programs. 

We work with a network of charities, congregations. Most of the 

food pantries and soup kitchens we work with are faith-based. That 

is exactly right. What is new for us is partnering with other USDA 

programs, including food stamp outreach and nutrition education, 

and we do that because it is a such a valuable resource for the people we serve and we need to help make that connection. So for example, when USDA rolls out an outreach campaign, we want that 

phone number to ring at the food bank and make sure someone of 

the right language who is trusted can help them work through the 

food stamp application. We know the best case scenario for us and 

the California food banks is we are trying to do three things, give 

them more California-grown fruits and vegetables, help them get 

nutrition education to know how to shop and use those fruits and 

vegetables, and then give them the food stamp benefits and they 

can go out and buy that for themselves. We see those three things 

all going hand in hand, the nutrition education, the food stamps 

and the emergency foods. So for us it is just learning how to use 

all of the tools, the nutrition toolbox, to help families get on their 

feet. 

Mr. BONNER. Mr. Chairman, if I might just throw this up to the 

entire panel and if anyone of you feels so inclined, can take a bite 

at it. The challenge we are going to face in writing the new Farm 

Bill obviously comes with fiscal restraint or fiscal constraints 

placed upon us because of a war that we are fighting and other 

challenges that are equally as important, access to healthcare and 

other challenges that we look to every day as a Nation. This is obviously an important part of our bill, but does anyone have a magic 

solution out there that would help us stretch the limited dollars 

that we have go further, especially as it relates to the Food Stamp 

Program? We have got a taker. 

Mr. WEILL. Well, it won’t surprise you that I don’t have a magic 

solution, but I would just quickly emphasize that we are talking 

here about investing in children in a way that solves long-term fiscal and economic problems that increases productivity and reduces 

government health costs. So I apologize that I can’t help you with 

today’s fiscal problem, but from a longer-term point of view, this is 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
42 

a magic bullet. It is magical medicine and it is a magical bullet for 

the Nation’s fiscal problems. 

Mr. BONNER. Thank you. 

Ms. CHILTON. Am I allowed to add something? 

Mr. BACA. Yes. 

Ms. CHILTON. Just to not only just reiterate about investing in 

young children, but also, I think that basing your fiscal decisions 

on evidence is something that we strive for in science and we hope 

that you take the evidence that was presented to you today and be 

fiscally responsible and invest where there is evidence. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you. Anybody else want to tackle it? And 

if not, I would like to call on the gentlewoman from Kansas. Nancy. 

Ms. BOYDA. Thank you and thanks to each of the panelists for 

your very excellent remarks. I would kind of like to address perhaps the elephant in the room and at least in my district, we are 

going in the wrong direction in many, many, many ways. We represent, in the 2nd, District, why the mean income is going up and 

the medium income is going down. That is the 2nd District of Kansas. When you look globally, we are seeing more and more disparity between people who have food and people who don’t, people 

who have wealth and people who don’t, people who can raise their 

family securely and people who don’t. It just seems like we are losing ground and I follow up on Mr. Bonner’s. We are losing ground 

at a time when our fiscal restraints are hitting us harder and harder. So in this room today, my guess is that each one of us thinks 

that we ought to be out there taking care of our children and our 

families and food stamps is a good idea. We are losing ground on 

another war and I will go straight to the issue of immigration. 

We are becoming a very intolerant Nation in many, many of our 

parts and we need to recognize that that is what is going on. I 

don’t mind saying that I think that we need to enforce our immigration laws and I have said that directly, but I have also told people in my district that I refuse to have somebody speak to me hatefully or send me e-mails about any group of people and that is happening constantly and it is happening in my district. And my question to you, you are the nonprofits and you are the NGOs and you 

are working with our faith-based organizations and my question to 

you is, what are we doing from our pulpits, from our temples, from 

anywhere, to go back to people of faith and start talking about 

issues and start turning around what is going on, because the direction that we are headed is getting worse, not better. And somewhere or another we need to get a message into the pulpits on Sunday morning that, you know, no matter what faith you are, I happen to be a Christian and the bottom line is Matthew, Mark, Luke 

and John talk a whole lot about this issue, you know, a whole lot 

about it and yet I don’t hear this coming from the grassroots in my 

district. What I do hear, you all would not be very pleased in hearing. I will be quite honest. So let us talk about the elephant in the 

room. What do we do about that? What are you doing to interact 

with our faith communities? 

Ms. MURGUIA. I would be happy to take a first stab at that and 

I appreciate you raising the question, because I think there are 

many people who first often confuse legal immigrant children with 

undocumented children and I want to be very clear that everything 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
43 

we are talking about today and the history of the Food Stamp Program, we are talking about children who are here legally. And I 

think sometimes people paint with this broad brush and they try 

to confuse the issue. There should be no confusion when it comes 

to this program, which is essential, and I will say that I commend 

Ms. Massey for quoting Mother Theresa, so you may have missed 

that, Congresswoman, but the faith-based community I think can 

also be relevant, but let me get to the broader point. Look, we are 

fighting on a larger scale to get comprehensive immigration reform 

and we understand in working with a broad coalition, left, right, 

Republicans, Democrats, labor and business, faith-based communities and civil rights organizations, that we have come together 

and offered a comprehensive bipartisan solution that we know is 

going to be advanced, we believe, in both chambers this year. We 

must get that broader issue off the table so that it doesn’t confuse 

and limit the ability for us to deal with other issues that we know 

are important to children and families across this country, particularly Latino kids and families. So we must get comprehensive immigration reform done so that we can get this cloud that seems to 

come over every issue when we talk about anything related to oftentimes Hispanic or immigrant kids. But let us be really clear. 

This program today and everything we are talking about today affects only legal immigrant kids and there should be no confusion 

about that and there should be no hesitation in the Congress to 

deal with that. 

Ms. BOYDA. We are limiting. As we talked about, we are cutting 

out whole groups of people out of this and again, it is the direction 

that we are headed that I find very troubling and those of us who 

are in this room believe in this program and think that we ought 

to be out there doing it. What I am asking you all, I am actually 

asking you to get involved. I would like to see what we are doing 

and I talk to people back in my district and say, you know, why 

aren’t you talking to your minister? Why isn’t this being discussed 

from the pulpit on Sunday morning? I hear back virtually, with 

very limited exceptions, that the faith-based community has not 

taken on issues and issues that affect our families like this and I 

would just ask that, as I know you are the private sector, can we 

start bringing in issues and getting the popular conversation going 

around this? I think it would make a big difference in the long run 

and start to return to an America that I would be a little bit more 

comfortable and a little bit more proud of on a given day. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. 

Mr. WEILL. If I may just add quickly one point there. As Kim 

Wade indicated, a huge part of the America’s Second Harvest Network is faith-based and there is a group of virtually every religious 

denomination represented in Washington, called the Food Policy 

Working Group, that works on food stamps and related issues with 

members of the Congress and with the grassroots of the denominations. So I believe you will be hearing from the Food Policy Working Group after your—— 

Ms. BOYDA. Good, good. Anything that you can do. Have at it. 

Hallelujah. Thank you. 

Mr. BACA. Okay. Thank you very much. Next, before I do, and 

thank you very much, Janet, for clarifying that the Farm Bill is 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
44 

about legal immigrants and those citizens that are eligible and this 

is what we are doing now in reference to the legislation. There is 

a misconception out there about everybody else that is eligible. So 

this is about legal immigrants and citizens and children that are 

eligible for the Food Stamp Program and this is what we are dealing with right now. But I am glad for the clarification. Mr. Moran. 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Chairman, thank you very much. Dr. Chilton, 

in looking at these issues with the facts, as you suggest, is there 

a study that demonstrates the dollars saved, as Mr. Weill indicated 

about the investment in children? Is there a study that demonstrates the dollars saved in healthcare down the road? I think 

one of the most serious issues we face in the country today is the 

unaffordability of healthcare and I would like for you to relate to 

me, if you can, what we can do to reduce healthcare costs through 

nutrition programs. 

Ms. CHILTON. Thank you for your question. If you will look in my 

written testimony, I cite a few studies that show that food stamps 

can reduce Medicaid costs for children who are malnourished and 

suffering from anemia. As well, I just wanted to remind you about 

the cost of the hospitalization for a pediatric illness. It is about the 

same cost as what it is to support a family of four for several years 

on food stamps. I am not aware myself of particular studies that 

look at the economics on the long term for children, so I would be 

happy to investigate that and submit that along with my testimony 

and I welcome anybody else’s comments. 

Mr. MORAN. I appreciate your response and I appreciate your 

offer of help. And then, Ms. Wade, you discussed this in your testimony and I had made a note that I wanted to explore this at least 

from a Kansas perspective, is how the Food Stamp Program fits in, 

in conjunction with private entities, church-related groups, with 

the School Lunch and Breakfast Program. Are there formal arrangements between the recipients of foods stamps and their involvement in other programs to help meet further their nutrition 

needs? 

Ms. WADE. The one area is the outreach. In California, we have 

a master plan of about five steps that we ask our charities and congregations to do, beginning with information and moving on to application assistance to help individuals through the process. So 

they come to that interview. Maybe we even scheduled that interview for them. We have an envelope with all of the paperwork you 

have to bring. Maybe we have the interview at the food bank. All 

kinds of things to help them through the process. But the other 

thing we are trying to do in California this year is create other 

doors in, so that once you are on MediCal, you are automatically 

on food stamps. Some States have, if you are on SSI, you are automatically on food stamps. School lunch, automatically on food 

stamps. We are asking the same questions. It is the same families. 

They are working families by and large. We don’t need them spending more time going through paperwork and red tape. Let us get 

them the benefits they need. So those practices on the ground of 

making the direct connection with individuals and the programs 

and policies at the State and county level, to have a one-stop shops 

for families where we are focusing. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
45 

Mr. MORAN. Mr. Brunk, any different response from a Kansas 

perspective? 

Mr. BRUNK. No, I think that there is a vigorous relationship of 

cooperation among all the private providers working, I think, diligently to see how they can coordinate services and be more effective. I will say, in reference to some earlier comments, that there 

is no food bank director, there is no food pantry director that I have 

spoken to who thinks that the solution is absent really improving 

the Food Stamp Program. The Food Stamp Program everybody sees 

as the first line of defense. There is just no way that food banks 

and other private providers can meet the need that is out there and 

I think that the community as a whole believes that we need to 

strengthen the Food Stamp Program. The private sector will continue doing what they are doing, but without the Food Stamp Program, a lot of people would be in much worse shape than they are 

now. 

Mr. MORAN. Much of your testimony, Mr. Brunk, as it should be, 

related to children, as has been several of our other witnesses. My 

assumption is that in Kansas there is a significant, and I know we 

have a significant elder population, and my assumption is that 

there are significant nutrition and hunger issues with seniors. 

Mr. BRUNK. Absolutely. And elderly folks are obviously one of the 

beneficiaries of the Food Stamp Program, so that when we are 

strengthening the Food Stamp Program, we are not only benefiting 

the younger generation, we are also benefiting the older generation. 

Mr. MORAN. In many communities, I, again, assume in Kansas, 

food stamps would be the only access to nutrition programs, in addition, I assume, for children, School Lunch and Breakfast Programs. But we would have a wide array of communities in which 

there is no community pantry, no opportunity for the private sector, at least no one is taking it because we are so rural. 

Mr. BRUNK. I think that is true and I think that raises a related 

question, which is, if you look at the map of Kansas, I don’t have 

it with me, but SRS, our Social and Rehabilitation Services agency 

provides a map, by county, with the number of food stamps recipients and the participation rate, and if you look at that map, the 

broad sense that you get is that, as you move further west, the participation rate drops and I think there is some sort of logistical reasons for that. As you well know, Representative Moran, in those 

frontier counties and those rural counties, we are struggling with 

keeping the population. Those are the counties that are depopulating and the folks that are remaining there increasingly, I believe, elderly citizens and families with young children who economically don’t have the wherewithal to move some place else for 

greater opportunities, and so hunger is a real problem in rural 

areas of Kansas. 

Mr. MORAN. I don’t know whether the chairman intends to have 

another round of questions. If he does, I have other questions, but 

my time has expired. 

Mr. BACA. I don’t, because I think we have exhausted the time 

that we have here, but if you want, do you want to ask another 

set of questions? 

Mr. MORAN. Just to follow up, then, a bit on that topic. In rural 

communities, one of the things that has happened in our State is 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
46 

that SRS has reduced the number of offices. We have consolidated 

State services into more regional centers. I assume, again, there is 

a consequence in those rural communities to access to social and 

rehabilitating services in our State, and access to nutrition programs? 

Mr. BRUNK. Right, that is very true. Many offices have closed 

down over the last several years as a kind of cost-cutting efficiency 

measure. That has been something that has been of great concern 

to me from the very beginning. Supposedly there are new tools, 

mainly the Internet and the phone, that families can access, but 

frankly, I am not sure how many of those families are comfortable 

with using the Internet. And so the loss of that face-to-face contact, 

I am not sure that anybody has said this yet, but it is a matter 

of concern to me, because I think, as you lose face-to-face contact, 

it is very likely that families who would earlier be accessing services might not be accessing them now. 

Mr. MORAN. I appreciate that very much from a rural perspective. And finally, Mr. Brunk, I wanted to give you a chance. You 

indicated something in the President’s budget that you appreciated, 

related to including high child care costs as an offset to income 

guidelines or standards. I want you to just explain to me why that 

is so important. 

Mr. BRUNK. Yes, thank you, Representative Moran. There are, by 

the way, a few things in the President’s budget related to food 

stamps that I don’t appreciate, but one of the things that I do appreciate is that the President proposes that the child care costs of 

families be basically taken out of the calculation for food stamps. 

I think that is very important because, really, families right now 

are often facing the choice between paying for child care, which is 

very expensive, especially if you want to get good child care, and 

paying for food. So by disallowing those child care costs, I think 

that you are now making families make that choice. It is a very 

good proposal and I hope it is a proposal that you and other members of the committee will endorse. 

Mr. MORAN. Thank you very much. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you very much. Before we adjourn, I just want 

to thank all of you for taking the time to share your knowledge and 

your expertise with us today, and what each of you do for our children who live with hunger and poverty is extremely important and 

we appreciate your dedication to our families and all of your hard 

work. I know that we have got a lot of hard work still ahead of us 

and hopefully that we can continue to have hearings on this important issue that impacts a lot of us as we move the Farm Bill. And 

hopefully we can look at ideas in reaching out and developing programs, not only as we look at the suggestions that were just mentioned now, we talk about after school programs, we talk about No 

Child Left Behind, maybe we should develop, you know, after 

school nutritional programs too, as well. I mean, we talk about 

after school programs, so maybe something that we can incorporate 

too, as well, and some of the suggestions that we need to do for a 

lot of our children. But I believe that we have got a lot of work 

ahead of us. 

I believe that the testimony that was heard today reinforces my 

belief that the Food Stamp Program is essential to providing longVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00050 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6602 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
47 

term well-being for our children. And I know it is important for a 

lot of us, and I know Mr. Bonner talked about his children and his 

experience, and a lot of us can talk about our own personal experience and I know, coming from a large family of 15 and I am the 

15th child and I know what it was like growing up and having a 

lot of tortillas and frijoles, you know, during that period of time 

and changing our habits and I know that now at my age, I ended 

up having a heart attack because maybe I ate too much frijoles and 

tortillas and should have had something else during that period of 

time. But we have got to change our habits of eating. 

But it is part of an educational process that we have to go and 

educate in our communities and what needs to be done and we realize the importance, but we also realize it is important that a lot 

of our children and our community are aware that it is important 

that they have good nutrition and food stamps, not only for our 

seniors or disabled, but we want to make sure that it is healthy 

for them, because it is investment that, if we invest now, it is a 

savings to us both in health and future and improving the quality 

of life for all us. So the taxpayers end up saving in the long run 

if we invest now versus saving at the end. And too often we think 

only in terms of what the cost is now, but we really should look 

at what the cost will be in the future, because it is really reducing 

the cost. We will end up paying one way or the other by providing 

those health services that we should have done if we had done the 

preventative at the very beginning, and this is what we are talking 

about. So hopefully through good nutrition and proper education 

and food stamps, we can help our country produce healthy and active adults for generations to come. With that, I thank you. I leave 

closing remarks for my minority chair, Mr. Bonner. 

Mr. BONNER. Mr. Chairman, thank you for holding this hearing, 

and to each of the panelists, thank you for coming and sharing 

your very insightful stories. Every person in this room, whether 

you are a panelist of a member or you have been in the back, can 

relate to a child that we know that has benefited because of the 

concern and the love that our government, our communities, our 

organizations, and more importantly, our individuals care to share 

with that child and the impact you leave on that person is oftentimes lasting. So thank you for being here with us today. It has 

been an enlightening and very informed meeting. Thank you, Mr. 

Chairman. 

Mr. BACA. Thank you. Before we adjourn, under the rules of the 

committee, the record of today’s hearing will remain open for ten 

days to receive additional materials and supplemental written responses from witnesses to any questions posed by members of the 

panel. This hearing of the Subcommittee on Department Operations, Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry is adjourned. Thank you 

very much. 

[Whereupon, at 12:35 p.m., the Subcommittee was adjourned.] 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CHAIRMAN JOE BACA

Welcome to the first hearing of the Subcommittee on Department Operations, 

Oversight, Nutrition and Forestry for the 110th Congress. 

I look forward to a busy and productive session. 

As we look at the Farm Bill, all of us know we have a huge responsibility to 

America’s families and farmers. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
48 

But none of our obligations are as important as the reauthorization of the Food 

Stamp program. 

Food stamps are one of our country’s greatest safety net programs. 

And it helps to feed 26 million legal residents—most of which are children, senior 

citizens, the disabled, and those living in poverty. 

For over 70 years, our government has taken on the moral responsibility to feed 

those who cannot feed themselves. 

And this year will mark the 30th anniversary of the passage of the 1977 Food 

Stamp Act. 

It is appropriate that we mark this anniversary with the reauthorization of the 

Farm Bill. 

We must work to ensure that our country’s long tradition of combating poverty, 

hunger, and disease continues through a strong nutrition title and Food Stamp Program. 

Over the years, the Food Stamp program has changed and grown with the needs 

of our society. 

Many people misunderstand how Food Stamps work and how effective the program is. 

To help correct this mistaken view, today’s hearing will focus specifically on how 

the Food Stamps support the childhood health and nutrition. 

This topic is near to my heart as the representative of California’s 43rd district, 

where Hispanics are twice likely to suffer from diabetes. 

Studies also show that one in four Hispanic boys ages 6 through 11 is obese. 

The rate among other groups is one in six. 

Neither of these statistics are acceptable and they need our attention NOW. 

As citizens of the wealthiest country in the world, I believe we have a moral obligation as public service to provide good, nutritious food to all our people. 

But even if you don’t agree with my philosophy, there is a strong ECONOMIC 

argument to be made. 

The World Bank estimates that 12% of our nation’s healthcare spending is related 

to obesity. 

That equals $90 billion dollars each year! 

My fellow Members of Congress might be interested to also know that almost 

HALF of that amount is being paid with federal dollars through Medicare and Medicaid. 

Good nutrition isn’t a just a ‘‘feel good’’ issue. 

It affects our budget, our economy, our education system, and the health of our 

nation! 

Before we hear from our distinguished witnesses, I want to thank the Members 

of the subcommittee. 

I deeply appreciate your heartfelt interest in children’s health and nutrition. 

Each of you who attended our organizing meeting last month expressed your concern about this issue. 

And I look forward to working with each of you to make the Food Stamp program 

a pro-nutrition, pro-healthy lifestyle program that responds to the needs of our kids 

and working families. 

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN JO BONNER

Good morning. Let me begin by thanking today’s witnesses who have agreed to 

appear before the committee regarding the federal food stamp program and its impact on children’s health. I am pleased that we are able to hear from such distinguished individuals and do appreciate your willingness to testify. I am especially 

pleased that one of my constituents, Rene Massey, will appear before us today during the second panel and offer her expertise as Director of the Department of 

Human Resources in Baldwin County, Alabama. 

The federal Food Stamp Program, established over 40 years ago, has played an 

important role in food security for low-income households throughout the United 

States. A great number of individuals and families in our country depend on these 

benefits. In fact, according to the most recent data available, over 45,000 households 

in Alabama’s First Congressional District are currently receiving food stamp benefits. That’s almost 18 percent of total households in my district. 

The purpose of today’s hearing, to review how this program impacts the health 

of our children, could not have come at a better time given the obesity crisis our 

nation is facing. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention cites two surveys, 

one from 1976–1980, and the other from 2003–2004, to illustrate the prevalence of 

overweight children. Between those two timeframes, the prevalence of overweight 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
49 

children aged 2–5 years increased from 5.0% to 13.9%; for those aged 6–11 years, 

prevalence increased from 6.5% to 18.8%; and finally, for those aged 12–19 years, 

prevalence increased from 5.0% to 17.4%. 

It is absolutely imperative we do what we can to help curb this epidemic. Educating our children with regard to what is healthy versus what is not healthy is one 

of the things we can do to help in this effort. Like many young boys growing-up, 

I know I didn’t always like hearing from my mother to eat my broccoli, but it’s that 

type of education we need in order to help be successful. As the father of two young 

children, trust me, I know how hard that can be. However, we must work to educate, in addition to providing our children the types of nutritious foods they need 

in their daily diets. 

USDA, in the summary of their 2007 Farm Bill Proposal, states that children 

under 18 years of age generally consume 50 percent or less of the recommended levels of fruit and vegetables. The summary goes on to say that providing increased 

fruit and vegetable options in the food assistance programs can help increase consumption as well as improve the quality of many Americans’ diets. I agree with this 

assessment and know we need to work to improve the nutrition aspect of the Food 

Stamp Program as we move forward in the 2007 Farm Bill process. 

Our subcommittee’s first hearing of the 110th Congress will no doubt provide 

some valuable insight as we address this important topic. I look forward to hearing 

from USDA and the various individuals from around the country who will testify 

today to share some of their knowledge and experience in this field. 

Mr. Chairman, thank you for time this morning to provide an opening statement, 

and I look forward to working with you and the other members of our subcommittee 

on this, and other topics of interest. 

STATEMENT OF AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE CHAIRMAN COLLIN C. PETERSON

Thank you, Chairman Baca for recognizing me to speak and for holding this hearing today. I also want to thank the USDA Under Secretary for Food, Nutrition and 

Consumer Services and all of our witnesses for testifying here today. 

The Food Stamp program helps more than 26 million Americans, and that number is on the rise. The Congressional Budget Office recently projected that the cost 

of the current Food Stamp and Child Nutrition programs over the next ten years 

would be about $565 billion. This is 45 percent higher than CBO’s ten-year cost projection made five years ago after the 2002 Farm Bill passed. These numbers reveal 

the fact that more people are relying on our current nutrition programs for help, 

and while it might look like there is more money for nutrition programs, this is actually just the cost of continuing with the programs currently in place. 

Half of those who receive food stamps today are children. Every day, we see reports and new data that suggest that if children do not have adequate nutrition, 

they suffer at school and beyond. I look forward to hearing from our witnesses about 

the ways our current system of nutrition programs meets the needs of children and 

how we can improve the effectiveness of these programs. 

As the Agriculture Committee begins to write the Farm Bill, we have a responsibility to meet the needs of all Americans—farmers and ranchers, consumers who expect a safe and abundant supply of food and fiber, as well as those who count on 

the Farm Bill’s food and nutrition programs for a square meal. This is a tremendous 

responsibility for the Committee, and we intend to fulfill it to the best of our ability. 

Chairman Baca, thank you again for holding this hearing today on this very important issue, and I look forward to the testimony from our witnesses here today. 

STATEMENT OF RANKING MEMBER BOB GOODLATTE

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. As you know, the Federal Food Stamp program consumes nearly two-thirds of the budget allocated to this Committee. Since FY2003, 

Federal costs have grown from $20.6 billion to in excess of an estimated $33 billion 

for FY2006. The food stamp program was intended as an income supplement to help 

individuals and families meet their nutritional needs. And I’m curious if the program is still functioning as it was intended to function. I’m afraid it creates a cycle 

of dependency that lasts for generations and American taxpayers ultimately end up 

paying for this rapidly expanding welfare program. 

I have led congressional efforts to reform the federal food stamp program and to 

end food stamp waste, fraud, and abuse. These reforms are aimed at protecting the 

integrity of the program so that it continues to have the public support it needs to 

accomplish its purpose of helping meet the nutritional needs of those most in need. 

I believe we should limit categorical eligibility to people who receive cash TANF or 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
50 

SSI assistance, thereby concentrating the available funding in the segments of the 

population who need it the most. I’m concerned about efforts to expand eligibility. 

Even small changes to eligibility or benefit rules in a program as large as food 

stamps can lead to relatively large budget costs or savings. 

As we review the food stamp program, we need to focus on how to get benefits 

to those truly in need as effectively and efficiently as possible. Programs such as 

the Temporary Emergency Food Assistant Program, which provides USDA commodities to states who then distribute the food through local food agencies, such as soup 

kitchens and food banks, are good models of efficiency in getting food directly to 

those who need it. Programs like TEFAP allow state and local organizations to meet 

the nutritional needs of their communities with which they are involved in on a day 

to day basis. Local administration of nutrition programs ensures that the specific 

and unique needs of communities across the country. 

I’m interested to hear what our witnesses have to say today and I look forward 

to your testimony. 

OPENING STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN NICK LAMPSON

I want to thank Under Secretary Montanez-Johner and all of our witnesses for 

being here today—to educate and discuss with us the Food Stamp program. The 

issue of food security for those in need is of great importance to Texas and especially 

the 22nd Congressional District. 

Five percent of households in Texas’ 22nd District receive food stamps. While that 

number may not seem out of the ordinary, we must take into account that only 60% 

of those eligible participate in the program, and it is estimated that 1 in 10 Texas 

children are at risk for hunger. This leads to poor concentration at school and poor 

health, both of which are preventable through a strong, effective, and efficient Food 

Stamp program and the Food Nutrition System. The number of children helped by 

food stamps in Texas has increased in the last five years, with one quarter of all 

Texas children rely on food stamps. But the value of the food stamp benefit has 

eroded over the years, costing and many families struggle to make it to the end of 

the month, often relying on private charities to subsidize their food stamp allotment. 

I would like to see an increased effort by the USDA and the state to increase enrollment, to promote healthy food choices, and in turn raise healthy, smart kids, and 

help out America’s farmers at the same time. 

I would also like to see the USDA—along with the states—improve contingency 

plans for emergency situations. In September 2005, the Houston area experienced 

an influx of 100,000 new residents. The Katrina evacuees placed a great strain on 

our resources across the board. The government provided supplemental caseloads, 

but they were only temporary. With an estimated 80,000 evacuees remaining in the 

Houston area, I implore you to use this disaster as a catalyst to reform food aid 

plans for future crisis situations. We were all caught off guard. Victims waited 

weeks or months to receive aid. Many food stamp recipients have now been absorbed into our state’s system as Texas residents, but many others, especially seniors, lost the aid they were receiving through the Commodity Supplemental Food 

Program. 

Again, thank you for being here today and I look forward to a fruitful discussion. 

STATEMENT OF CONGRESSMAN STEVE KAGEN

Chairman Baca and fellow colleagues: I am pleased to be here today to work hard 

with my fellow colleagues on both sides of the aisle. I believe that good government 

makes a real difference in people’s lives. The Food Stamp Program rose from a humble origin. Now, it is one of the most important, and most successful programs our 

Federal Government administers. As we’ve seen on a grand scale in response to 

Hurricane Katrina, and what many of our witnesses see locally, on a daily basis, 

the Food Stamps Program exists solely to assist those in need. As a physician, I 

deeply understand the value of preventive medicine and this program illustrates 

this tenet with the marked improvement we see in the health of children who participate. I hope to be a leader on this committee, and I look forward to hearing from 

today’s witnesses. 

TESTIMONY OF HON. JO ANN EMERSON AND HON. JAMES P. MCGOVERN

Chairman Baca and Ranking member Bonner, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
51 

We are the co-chairs of the Congressional Hunger Center (CHC). This organization administers the Bill Emerson National Hunger Fellows Program and the Mickey Leland International Hunger Fellows Program. We are proud of the work of 

these young leaders, but the future of the Fellowship funding is in jeopardy and we 

have specific recommendations on how to resolve this important matter. 

Bill Emerson and Mickey Leland, former distinguished Members of the House of 

Representatives, were deeply involved in helping the poor, the hungry, and the victims of humanitarian crisis, both at home and overseas. They were ‘‘leaders’’ with 

their words, passions, and action. CHC fights hunger here and abroad by developing 

future leaders in the fight against hunger and poverty. Representatives Leland and 

Emerson demonstrated their bi-partisan commitment to ending hunger by serving 

together on the former House Select Committee on Hunger, and by helping establish 

the fellowship programs named after them. CHC administers the Emerson/Leland 

programs as the successor organization to the House Select Committee on Hunger. 

The Emersonl/Leland Hunger Fellowships are the only programs in the United 

States that provide young leaders with the skills, knowledge and experience to end 

domestic and international hunger. The programs are unique in that they combine 

field program experience and intensive policy training and placements for these 

highly qualified young leaders who are accepted into the program. 

A critical feature of the Emerson program is the ‘‘Hunger Free Community Reports’’ (See Attachment I) which are completed after the first six months of the program. These reports provide insight on how poor people from those communities 

face the daily challenge of hunger and provide evidence on how the Food Stamp Program is making a difference in their struggle. Many of the Hunger Free Community 

Reports are directly connected to the subject of today’s hearing: The Food Stamp 

Program and Its Impact on Child Health. One of our Emerson fellows was placed 

at the Boston Medical Center working on the Children’s Sentinel Nutrition Assessment Program (C–SNAP). C–SNAP medical staff conducts research in pediatric settings on the effects of U.S. social policies on low-income child nutrition and health, 

children whose nutritional status can be positively or negatively affected by changes 

in policy in programs like Food Stamps and WIC. A CHC Emerson Fellow was assigned to the C–SNAP team. He conducted research, helped produce and disseminate the most recent C–SNAP report on the relationship between low income children, food insecurity, and food stamps. This report, entitled ‘‘Food Stamps as Medicine: A New Perspective on Children’s Health,’’ provided important findings such as 

children receiving food stamps are 26 percent less likely to suffer from the negative 

effects of food insecurity. The connection is strong—food insecurity contributes to developmental problems and poor health among children, and food stamps decreases 

child food insecurity. C–SNAP research shows that children in food insecure homes 

are approximately twice as likely to suffer from poor health and one-third more likely to be hospitalized. This report was cited in the testimony of Dr. Mariana Chilton, 

a C–SNAP physician from Philadelphia, a witness on panel two today. 

Other Hunger Free Community Reports cover topics such as the critical importance of providing nutritional support to people living with a life threatening illness, 

such as HIV/AIDS and diabetes; food insecurity within immigrant communities in 

Atlanta, Georgia; farmworker justice in Immokalee, Florida; disaster preparedness 

and access to the Food Stamp Program in Seattle; the story of Hurricanes Katrina 

and Rita and their impact on the Second Harvest Food Bank; and many other community level examples of how to fight hunger and poverty. We have attached a summary of the 23 Hunger Free Community Reports, all of which are available electronically should you, Mr. Chairman or Representative Bonner, or your staff like to 

review them. 

Two of the witnesses at today’s hearing, Kim McCoy Wade of the California Association of Food Banks and Jim Weill of the Food Research and Action Center, have 

hosted Fellows working on Food Stamp outreach. All of the witnesses at the recent 

House Budget Committee hearing on Hunger have hosted Emerson Fellows, including the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Over a two year period, Emerson Fellows 

designed and implemented the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s Food Stamp Outreach Web site. Dr. Deborah Frank, of the Boston Medical Center, has hosted Emerson Fellows for three years and Denise Holland of the Harvest Hope Food Bank in 

Columbia, South Carolina, hosted an Emerson Fellow working on Spanish translation of food stamp materials for people visiting food pantries. 

Our point here is that the Emerson Hunger Fellowship is working exactly as intended. The Fellowship develops leaders that continue working on issues of social 

importance in government, nonprofit organizations and the private sector long after 

their Fellowship has ended. 

On the international side, the Mickey Leland Fellows continue their work in 

USDA and USAID anti-hunger programs, such as school feeding, maternal and child 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
52 

nutrition programs, microenterprise for women, agricultural cooperatives, HIV/AIDS 

and nutrition, and emergency food aid provided through Title II of Public Law 480, 

Food for Peace. Many of these Leland Fellows are now working as program officers 

and policy analysts for organizations such as Save the Children, Catholic Relief 

Services, Counterpart International, Mercy Corps, American Red Cross, Land 

O’Lakes, USAID and the UN World Food Program. Together with the Bill Emerson 

Fellows, they are fulfilling the mandate of Mickey Leland and Bill Emerson in a 

bi-partisan fight against hunger. 

WHY IS FUNDING FOR THE EMERSONL/LELAND FELLOWSHIP IN JEOPARDY?

The FY 2007 Continuing Resolution for Appropriations (CR) removed $2.5 million, 

or 100% of the program costs for the operation of the Bill Emerson/Mickey Leland 

Hunger Fellowships. Without these funds, CHC will be forced to close its operations 

during 2008. The funds were removed because the appropriation was declared an 

‘‘earmark’’ and neither the Fellowships nor the administering entity, CHC, met the 

technical requirements of the authorization contained in the 2002 Farm Bill. If the 

2007 Farm Bill is not amended to establish a permanent authorization for the 

Emerson/Leland Hunger Fellowships to be administered through CHC, future appropriations will continue to be at great risk. 

CHC has received federal funding to administer the Bill Emerson/Mickey Leland 

Fellowships since 1994. The programs were established as a memorial to former 

Representatives Bill Emerson and Mickey Leland and the programs enjoy wide support from both the House and the Senate. But in 2002 the Farm Bill authorized a 

‘‘Congressional Hunger Fellows’’ program (identical to the CHC administered Fellowships) as an independent entity of the Legislative Branch of the U.S. government. This program would have two components: A Bill Emerson Hunger Fellowship and a Mickey Leland Hunger Fellowship, administered by a Board of Trustees, 

appointed by Congress. An authorization for an endowment was included in the 

Farm Bill as a mechanism for funding the Fellowships. The Congressional Hunger 

Fellows Program never commenced operations, no legislative branch of government 

entity was created, no endowment was established and the Board of Trustees never 

met. 

Congress did not implement any elements of the ‘‘Congressional Hunger Fellows’’ 

program as authorized in the 2002 Farm Bill. Instead, Congress provided yearly appropriations for these Fellowships to CHC from FY 02 through FY 07 (mandatory 

funding in FY 03 and FY 04 and regular annual appropriations through FY 07). 

However, since the 2002 original authorization for the Fellowships was not amended, the FY07 appropriation was declared an earmark and funds were removed from 

the CR. 

HOW CAN WE ASSURE THE CONTINUED SUCCESS OF THE EMERSON/LELAND

FELLOWSHIPS?

First, the 2007 Farm Bill should be amended establishing a permanently authorized Bill Emerson National Hunger Fellowship Program and a Mickey Leland International Hunger Fellowship Program to be administered through the Congressional 

Hunger Center. Second, mandatory funding of $3 million should be provided for FY 

2008 as a part of the Farm Bill. Third and finally, the Emerson/Leland Fellowships 

should be authorized for ‘‘such sums as necessary’’ in future fiscal years through the 

USDA to the Congressional Hunger Center. These actions will ensure that the legacy of Bill Emerson and Mickey Leland will continue to inspire the next generation 

of anti-hunger leaders at home and abroad. 

We have attached a list of organizations and Fellow alumni (see Attachment II) 

that support funding for the Emerson/Leland Fellows along with six letters (see Attachment III) from Fellows and host organizations that illustrate how important the 

Fellowship is for these future leaders and the organizations in the U.S. and around 

the world that rely on that leadership. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
53 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 155 36264A.001
54 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 156 36264A.002
55 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 157 36264A.003
56 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 158 36264A.004
57 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 159 36264A.005
58 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 160 36264A.006
59 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 161 36264A.007
60 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 162 36264A.008
61 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 163 36264A.009
62 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 164 36264A.010
63 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 165 36264A.011
64 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 166 36264A.012
65 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 167 36264A.013
66 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 168 36264A.014
67 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 169 36264A.015
68 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 170 36264A.016
69 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 171 36264A.017
70 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 172 36264A.018
71 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 173 36264A.019
72 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 174 36264A.020
73 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 175 36264A.021
74 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 176 36264A.022
75 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 177 36264A.023
76 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 178 36264A.024
77 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 179 36264A.025
78 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 180 36264A.026
79 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 181 36264A.027
80 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 182 36264A.028
81 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 183 36264A.029
82 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 184 36264A.030
83 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 185 36264A.031
84 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 186 36264A.032
85 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 187 36264A.033
86 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert graphic folio 188 36264A.034
87 

1 Research evidence summarized by Fraker (1990) and Fox, Hamilton, and Lin (2004) indicates that an additional dollar of food stamp benefits raises food expenditures by 17 to 47 cents; 

an additional dollar of cash, in contrast, raises food expenditures by 5 to 10 cents. Both summaries also report evidence that the FSP increases household availability of food energy and 

protein. Devaney and Moffitt (1991) report that FSP participation significantly increased household availability of a broad array of vitamins and minerals: vitamins A, B6, C, riboflavin, 

thiamin, calcium, iron, magnesium, and phosphorus. nutritious food to children in summer 

camps and other settings in the summer months, when school is not in session. 

TESTIMONY OF NANCY MONTANEZ-JOHNER

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I am Nancy Montanez-Johner, Under Secretary, Food, 

Nutrition, and Consumer Services (FNCS), U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA). 

I am pleased to be at today’s hearing to discuss the Food Stamp Program (FSP) 

and its impact on children’s nutrition and health. The FSP is the Nation’s primary 

nutrition assistance program, increasing food purchasing power for households with 

little income and few resources by providing benefits that are redeemed at retail 

grocery stores across the country. Over 26 million low-income people make use of 

the program to help put food on the table. 

This program provides substantial benefits to low-income families with children, 

helping them to stretch their buying power. About half of all food stamp recipients 

are children, nearly 80 percent of food stamp benefits go to households with children, and over 80 percent of all children who are eligible for benefits receive them. 

On average, households with children receive about $300 in food stamp benefits 

each month, with the amount varying based on the size and income level of the 

household. Food stamp households also benefit from nutrition education that is part 

of the program in every State—helping to promote thrifty shopping and healthy eating among food stamp clients. 

The evidence is clear that the FSP makes an important difference in the lives of 

low-income children and families, and the others that it serves. With its nationwide 

standards for eligibility and benefits, it represents a national nutrition safety net 

for low-income families and individuals wherever they live. It is designed to expand 

automatically to respond to increased need when the economy is in recession and 

contracts when the economy is growing, making sure that food gets to people who 

need it, when they need it. 

Perhaps most importantly for today’s hearing, the FSP makes more food available 

to households that participate. Food stamp families are able to spend more on food 

than they would be able to without the program, and providing benefits that can 

be spent only on food increases total food expenditures more than providing an 

equal amount of cash would. In addition, there is evidence that program participation can increase the availability of nutritious food in the home.1

To sum up, Mr. Chairman—the Food Stamp Program works, and it works for children. That’s why we’re committed to ensuring effective program operations for all 

eligible people who wish to participate. 

To meet that commitment, we have implemented outreach activities such as the 

national media campaign. The number one reason that people do not apply for food 

stamp benefits is because they do not realize that they are eligible. The national 

media campaign seeks to raise awareness of the nutrition benefits of food stamps 

and encourage low income people to seek out more information about their eligibility 

for this important benefit. National media campaign activities primarily consist of 

radio advertising in areas of low participation. 

The Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) also provides outreach materials for the 

Food Stamp Program including posters and flyers, as well as radio and television 

public service announcements, that State and local food stamp agencies and community and faith-based outreach providers can use in their local outreach efforts. 

For the last four years, FNS has also awarded grants to community and faithbased organizations to implement and study promising outreach strategies. All of 

these outreach strategies are geared towards the working poor, including families 

with children, seniors, and legal immigrants, including citizen children of undocumented parents. 

Mr. Chairman, I know the focus of this hearing is how the FSP affects children’s 

health, but I would be remiss if I did not mention the other major programs that 

I oversee which directly bear on this subject. The 15 domestic nutrition assistance 

programs administered by FNS work together to improve food security, fight hunger, and support healthy eating for low-income people across the Nation. The President’s budget for Fiscal Year 2008 demonstrates the Administration’s unwavering 

commitment to this mission by requesting a record level of $59 billion dollars for 

these vital programs, which serve one in five Americans over the course of a year. 

While these programs are designed to meet the needs of people of all ages who need 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
88 

assistance, they focus most strongly on the needs of children. In addition to food 

stamps, the major nutrition assistance programs include: • The Child Nutrition Programs (CNP), including the school meals (lunch and 

breakfast) program, and the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP), which 

support nutritious meals and snacks served to over 30 million children in schools, 

child care institutions, and after-school care programs. In addition, the Summer 

Food Service (SFSP) Program and parts of the National School Lunch Program provide nutritious food to children in summer camps and other settings in the summer 

months, when school is not in session. • And for the youngest children and infants, we operate the Special Supplemental 

Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children, or WIC. WIC addresses the 

special needs of at-risk, low-income pregnant, breastfeeding, and postpartum 

women, infants, and children up to five years of age. It provides 8 million participants monthly with supplemental food packages targeted to their dietary needs, nutrition education, and referrals to a range of health and social services; benefits that 

promote a healthy pregnancy for mothers and a healthy start for their children. 

Overweight and obesity are critical issues for every part of our population, and 

addressing those problems is most important early in life, when eating and other 

health-related behaviors are developed. The policies that shape the programs are 

aligned with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans, which are revised every five 

years to ensure that policy is based on current scientific and medical knowledge. 

And each major program promotes healthy eating and active lifestyles through nutrition education and promotion. 

Nutrition education and services are provided to WIC participants in conjunction 

with other parts of the WIC benefit to improve birth outcomes and promote childhood immunization, and breastfeeding. Team Nutrition, a comprehensive, integrated 

plan to promote good nutrition through the Child Nutrition Programs, includes nutrition education materials for use in schools and technical assistance for food service providers. We also promote nutrition education across programs through the Eat 

Smart. Play Hard.TM Campaign, and by working with State agencies that operate 

the programs on State Nutrition Action Plans, to foster integrated cross-program 

strategies. 

Nutrition education efforts are not limited to the Child Nutrition Programs but 

are also provided by States to food stamp recipients. The program represents a 

prime opportunity to reach low-income children and families and encourage healthy 

practices that can last a lifetime. 

The FSP clearly has been a major benefit to low-income households with children 

over the years. Children in the FSP have also benefited from the increased commitment to nutrition education as a component part of the Program. Considered an optional benefit on the part of States, spending in the area of nutrition education has 

increased over the last fifteen years. For example, in FY 1992, FNS approved 

$661,000 for Food Stamp Nutrition Education (FSNE) efforts conducted by seven 

State agencies. This year, FNS approved $275 million in federal funds for fifty-two 

State agencies to provide FSNE. It is important to note that FSNE plays a valuable 

role in helping to communicate the Dietary Guidelines for Americans to low-income 

audiences. This includes promotion of MyPyramid and its various iterations such as 

MyPyramid for Children and MiPiramide. 

To that end, FNS has also developed a series of nutrition education and promotional materials targeting women with children entitled Loving Your Family, 

Feeding Their Future: Nutrition Education through the Food Stamp Program. These 

materials are designed for Food Stamp mothers who may possess low-literate skills 

and who may be Spanish speakers. These materials can be used in any setting with 

similar target audiences, such as the WIC Program. The anticipated release date 

of these materials is May 2007. 

The Food Stamp Nutrition Connection is a website designed to provide training 

and information resources to FSP nutrition educators, and it provides more than 

150 nutrition education resources for children. 

For a preview of our excellent children resource materials please visit our web 

sites at: http://foodstamp.nal.usda.gov, http://www.fns.usda.gov/ 

eafsmartplavhardkids/Library/actsheets.htm (For children in Spanish and English) 

I would like to take a moment to outline several of our Farm Bill Proposals, especially those that would benefit households with children. 

We are using the 2007 Farm Bill process to further improve program access and 

facilitate future self-sufficiency. The Administration’s reform-minded and fiscally responsible proposals build on the success of the 2002 Farm Bill—raising food stamp 

participation rates among eligible populations, restoring eligibility for many legal 

immigrants, and providing new flexibility for States to tailor services to better serve 

their clients—with improvements in access, strong integrity, and careful stewardVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00092 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
89 

ship of the taxpayer dollars. Let me outline some of the proposals that have particularly important impacts on families with children: 

First, we want to strengthen efforts to integrate nutrition education into the Food 

Stamp M Program by recognizing in the Food Stamp Act of 1977 that nutrition education is a component of the program and investing $100 million to establish a fiveyear competitive grants demonstration program targeted at developing and testing 

solutions to the rising rates of obesity. These grants will allow us to evaluate creative and innovative solutions in this complex area, such as point-of-sale incentives 

to purchase fruits and vegetables, increased access among food stamp recipients to 

farmers markets, and integrated initiatives that use multiple communication channels to reinforce key messages. These initiatives would include rigorous evaluations 

to identify effective strategies. This is important, as the Committee knows, because 

of the serious health threats of obesity and overweight threaten American citizens, 

but is even more critical when we consider the impact it has on our nation’s children. 

Second, our proposals to increase program access that would affect families with 

children include: 

• Eliminating the cap on the dependent care deduction—Current policy supports 

work or participation in work services by providing for limited deductions from the 

family’s gross income associated with the cost of dependent care when determining 

food stamp eligibility and benefit amount: a cap of $200 per month for children 

under 2 and $175 for other dependent children is the current policy. The cap was 

set back in 1993. It is time to eliminate the cap, which would simplify State administration and help working families with children. 

• Excluding the value of college savings plans from the resource limit—This proposal would expand the plans eligible for exclusion from the resource limit when determining food stamp eligibility and would simplify administration for the States. 

Most significantly, it supports working poor, encourages focused savings for children’s futures, and recognizes that households should not have to deplete college 

savings plans in order to get nutrition assistance. This proposal will exclude from 

the resource calculation the value of certain college savings plans that the IRS recognizes for tax purposes, including 529 plans operated by most States. 

• Excluding combat-related military pay—Enhanced pay from military deployment can sometimes cause families receiving food stamps to no longer be eligible 

for this assistance. This policy change would ensure that military families are not 

penalized for doing their patriotic duty. It supports the families of servicemen and 

servicewomen fighting overseas by ensuring that their families back home do not 

lose food stamps as a result of the additional deployment income. This proposal has 

been a part of the President’s budget for sever years and was first enacted in the 

2005 Appropriations Act; this farm bill proposal would make this annual policy fix 

permanent. 

• Encouraging savings for retirement—This proposal simplifies food stamp resource policy and makes it more equitable because under current law some retirement accounts are excluded and some are included. This proposal supports the 

President’s Ownership Society Initiative, by increasing the ability of low-income people to save for retirement. It is expected, when fully implemented, to add approximately 100,000 persons to the program land to increase benefits by $592 million 

over 5 years. The majority of the new participants will be workers and their families, most with children, but also improves access for the elderly. 

Third, beyond the $100 million in obesity-prevention grants, we also propose to 

improve nutrition for children by: 

• Adding new mandatory funding for the purchase of additional fruits and vegetables for use in the National School Lunch and Breakfast Programs. This $500 million of funding over 10 years represents a net increase in the total purchase of fruits 

and vegetables for school meals over levels available under any other authorities. 

• Increasing Section 32 spending on fruits and vegetables by $2.75 billion over 

10 years. This proposal will increase the availability of fruits and vegetables to low 

income individuals and school children participating in nutrition assistance programs, and the consumption of these healthful foods can contribute to the improved 

health of program participants. 

Mr. Chairman, Food Stamps and the other USDA programs help us lead the fight 

against hunger, and the level of commitment to this task remains high. But we still 

know that there is more to do. We are continuing to improve program operations, 

get benefits to those who are already eligible, but do not participate, and keep our 

eye on program integrity in the process. 

FNS programs enable other programs to operate better by making sure that 

young children have access to proper nutrition and are ready to learn. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
90 

This concludes my prepared remarks. I would be happy to answer any questions 

you might have at this time. 

TESTIMONY OF JAMES D. WEILL

Chairman Baca and Members of the Subcommittee, thank you for the opportunity 

to testify here today. 

I am Jim Weill, President of the Food Research and Action Center (‘‘FRAC’’). The 

Food Research and Action Center has been working for 37 years to reduce and eventually end hunger in this country. Through research, policy advocacy, outreach, public education, and training and technical assistance for state and local advocates, 

public agencies, officials and providers, we seek to strengthen public nutrition programs and have them reach many more people in need. 

FRAC has been instrumental in helping to launch, improve and expand the food 

stamp, WIC, school breakfast, summer food and other nutrition programs. 

Today’s topic is extremely important. The Food Stamp Program is a very strong 

and successful program—the nation’s most important bulwark against hunger. The 

program is essential to the basic well-being of millions of Americans, including the 

nutrition and health of children, but needs to be strengthened further. My testimony 

will discuss: first the reasons that the program is so successful; then its important 

positive impact on children’s nutrition and health; and third, key ways in which it 

needs to be improved. 

Even as the economy has grown year after year, lower-income Americans have received a shrinking share of the economic pie, losing out both relatively (compared 

to high-income groups) and absolutely (compared to the cost of living). Incomes typically have lagged growing health, housing and energy costs. Poverty, food insecurity, 

and similar problems caused by inadequate wages and economic supports generally 

have increased. The number of people living in poverty rose from 31.6 million in 

2000 to 37 million in 2005. The number of people living in households facing food 

insecurity—the government phrase for families without the resources to feed themselves enough, or unable for economic reasons to purchase a healthy diet, or otherwise struggling with hunger—rose from 31 million in 1999 to 38.2 million in 2004, 

and then fell to 35.1 million in 2005, still well above 1999 levels (2006 data are not 

yet available). More than 12 million children live in food insecure households. 

There are many heartbreaking stories those of us on this panel could tell about 

individuals and families struggling against hunger, stories whose poignancy merely 

grows when we think of our nation’s extraordinary abundance. The one I keep coming back to in my mind involves a mother standing on a seemingly endless line of 

896 people waiting outside a food bank in rural southeastern Ohio, as reported by 

the TV show 60 Minutes a couple of years ago. She explained to the reporter that 

she bought whole milk and cut it with an equal part of water: ‘‘It makes milk last 

longer. Because the baby. . .needs milk.’’ When asked what her dream in life was, 

this rural Ohio mother in our rich twenty-first century America said that it was to 

feed her baby undiluted milk. 

A stronger Food Stamp Program could fulfill that dream. We should not have to 

explain to this mother and millions like her that, even as the economy grows, the 

needed program improvements can’t happen and, indeed, food stamp benefits will 

continue to be reduced further each year because of a law Congress passed in 1996. 

As a nation, we can do better. 

I. FOOD STAMPS AND LOW-INCOME AMERICANS. 

The Food Stamp Program is the government’s first line of defense against hunger 

and food insecurity, and a key factor in bolstering family economic success, ameliorating poverty and improving nutrition and health. 

For many low-income people, food stamps are the critical lifeline—a source of 

basic income as fundamentally important as Social Security is to seniors. Indeed, 

In the 1980s then-Senator Robert Dole described the program as the most important 

advance in America’s social programs since the creation of Social Security. Food 

stamp benefits lift the incomes of 2.2 million Americans/year above the poverty line. 

Food stamp benefits are the single most effective program in lifting children out of 

extreme poverty (defined as family income below 50 percent of the poverty line). 

Families with earnings from low-wage work are heavily reliant on food stamps. For 

example, at the earnings level of a family of four with one full-time minimum wage 

worker, food stamp benefits are about $5,000 and the Earned Income Tax Credit 

is $4,100. As cash welfare eligibility has shrunk and more and more people have 

entered the workforce, but at low wages, moreover, there has been a sharp increase 

in the proportion of food stamp households with work income, as opposed to welfare. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
91 

The program has a range of other policy and political strengths that have been 

key to its growing success over the years: 

• An initiative that began with bipartisan support in the 1960s and 1970s, with 

early champions like Senators Robert Dole and George McGovern and then Representatives Bill Emerson and Mickey Leland, has continued to receive an extraordinary level of support from members of both parties. There also is considerable 

state and local official support, again from officeholders in both parties. 

• President Bush’s Department of Agriculture has been a positive force since 2001 

in increasing the access of eligible people to the program. President Bush’s support 

in 2002 of eligibility for legal immigrants and better access for working families was 

an important factor in the steps forward made that year. 

• Polls show that Americans care deeply about eliminating hunger in this country, feel that not enough is being done in that regard, and want greater government 

efforts. 

• The continuing entitlement nature of the program has made it flexible and responsive to changes in economic conditions (whether local or national) and to 

emegencies. The Food Stamp Program stood out among federal programs after 

Katrina for its very fast and effective response to the needs of hundreds of thousands of families on the Gulf Coast. 

• The replacement of food stamp coupons by electronic benefits cards and other 

initiatives have reduced errors and fraud (more than 98 percent of benefits go to 

eligible households), and made the use of program benefits at the checkout lane 

much less visible, thereby reducing the stigma of participation. 

• In a time of growing insecurity and growing economic volatility for low-income 

families—more changes in employment and wages—the entitlement nature of food 

stamps, the national benefit structure (with benefit amounts inversely scaled to 

family income in a way essentially uniform across the nation), and the very few 

‘‘categorical’’ restrictions on eligibility all contribute to the program’s responsiveness 

to need. 

• The program has support from disparate sectors, including the agricultural sector, food companies, and grocery retailers; labor; and the religious community. 

• The program supports many low-income working families (including those leaving welfare), children and seniors, as well as disabled and unemployed persons. 

There also are more than 600,000 veterans in households receiving food stamps. 

• Food stamps reach millions of people from all parts of our society—e.g., Whites, 

African-Americans and Hispanics; rural, suburban and urban households. I know 

that some think of farm programs as the ‘‘rural part’’ of the Farm Bill and food 

stamps as the ‘‘urban part.’’ That doesn’t fully reflect the reality, which is better 

portrayed in a report from the Casey Institute at the University of New Hampshire 

entitled ‘‘Rural America Depends on the Food Stamp Program to Make Ends Meet.’’ 

The Casey Institute found that 22 percent of the nation’s population lived in nonmetropolitan areas in 2001, but 31 percent of food stamp beneficiaries lived there. 

Perhaps the clearest recent summary of the success of food stamps and the results 

of the considerable strengthening of the program came in a January issue of The 

National Journal devoted to ‘‘10 Successes [and] 10 Challenges’’ in American society—major issues in the public and private sectors. Alongside cleaner air, successful 

assimilation of immigrants, American entrepreneurship, and six other successes was 

food stamps, described as ‘‘A Government Reform That Worked.’’ The National Journal was particularly struck by the extremely low rates of program fraud, and the 

quick and effective response of the program on the Gulf Coast after Hurricanes 

Katrina, Rita and Wilma in 2005. I have attached the article to this testimony. 

II. FOOD STAMPS AND CHILDREN’S HEALTH AND NUTRITION

Sometimes we take for granted the general good health and nutrition of our nation’s children, and forget that it is our nutrition programs that have made a huge 

difference for millions of them. I would like to begin this part of my testimony by 

pointing out that 2007 marks the 40th anniversary of a ground-breaking Congressional hearing on hunger in America, and its health and nutrition consequences for 

children. At that hearing, physicians shocked Congress and the nation with their 

descriptions of the state of nutrition and health among children in poor areas of Appalachia and the southeastern United States. Dr. Raymond Wheeler, a physician 

from North Carolina, testified on behalf of the Physicians Task Force on Hunger: 

‘‘Wherever we went and wherever we looked we saw children in significant numbers 

who were hungry and sick, children for whom hunger is a daily fact of life, and sickness in many forms, inevitability. The children we saw were more than just malnourished. They were hungry, weak, and apathetic. Their lives were being shortened. They are visibly and predictably losing their health, their energy and their 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
92 

spirits. They are suffering from hunger and disease, and directly or indirectly, they 

are dying from them, which is exactly what starvation means.’’ 

Beginning that day, many more Americans came to understand the importance 

of ending hunger and improving nutrition to ensure the health and educational 

achievement of our children. Federal nutrition programs have been created and expanded to ensure that the desperate situation Dr. Wheeler described would never 

again happen in our nation. By the late 1970s studies found hunger had been dramatically reduced by food stamps and other government initiatives like WIC and 

school meals. But we have in essence stalled, and in some respects slid backward 

since then. 

We need to reinvigorate our nation’s anti-hunger effort. 

All of us recognize the importance of a healthful and sufficient diet for children, 

from the molecular biologist studying nutrition at the cellular level to the mothers 

and fathers among us who see it each day in our children’s growth and development. But one difference today is that we are seeing and hearing more and more 

findings from laboratory research, epidemiological studies, and nutrition interventions that contribute to our growing understanding of the vital importance of 

enough good food for the next generation—for their health and cognitive, physical, 

emotional and social development—and the role of food stamps in accomplishing 

that. Food security, which the U.S. Department of Agriculture defines as ‘‘access by 

all people [in the household] at all times to enough food for an active healthy life,’’ 

translates, for children, into optimal cognitive development and better education 

outcomes, improved mental health and self-esteem, better family dynamics, 

healthier children with healthier futures, and obesity prevention. Everyday the Food 

Stamp Program works to make sure that millions of low-income children enjoy these 

positive outcomes. And, with additional funding and targeted changes in the program, it can make even more of a difference for these and other children and their 

families. 

Food stamps increase the nutrition available to low-income children. Over half of 

food stamp recipients are children, making it nearly as much of a child nutrition 

program as School Lunch and Breakfast. Food stamps increase household food 

spending, and research on the effects of food stamps on overall household food consumption reveals that basic nutrients in home food supplies are increased substantially (20 to 40 percent) by food stamps. USDA reports that the very large majority 

of benefits are spent on basic food items—for example, vegetables, fruits, grain products, meat and meat alternatives account for nearly three quarters of the money 

value of food used by food stamp recipients. 

One study by USDA researchers using national food consumption data looked at 

the impact of the Food Stamp Program on households’ Healthy Eating Index (HEI) 

scores (an indicator of overall dietary quality developed by USDA based on the Dietary Guidelines for Americans) and found that the value of food stamps received by 

a household had a substantial and statistically significant positive effect on overall 

dietary quality. For each dollar of food stamps that a household received, the household HEI score went up—the higher the level of food stamps, the larger the positive 

nutritional effect. 

Another group of researchers looked specifically at the effects of household food 

stamp participation on the nutrient intakes of children 1 to 4 years old, using the 

same national food consumption data. They found that for iron, vitamin A, thiamin, 

niacin and zinc, the Food Stamp Program had a significant positive effect on the 

intakes of this age group. Again, the intakes of these nutrients were significantly 

related to the amount of food stamps received—as benefits went up, the amount of 

each nutrient in the diet went up as well. 

Another recent study demonstrated that, among 8000 children followed from kindergarten to third grade, those whose families began to receive food stamps 

achieved significantly greater improvement in reading and math than those whose 

families stopped receiving food stamps. 

In short, the evidence is that food stamps make a positive difference for nutrition, 

and the consumption of a nutritionally adequate and healthful diet contributes to 

better health and educational outcomes for children. 

Food stamps increase the food available to low-income children and their families 

and thus move families closer to food security, and further away from the adverse 

consequences of food insecurity. As indicated earlier, more than 12 million children 

in the U.S. live in food insecure households—16.9 percent of children live in food 

insecure households, compared to 10.4 percent of adults. 

Researchers are finding that when children live in food insecure households, their 

health status can be impaired, making them less able to resist illness and more likely to become sick or hospitalized. Iron deficiency anemia among young children has 

also been associated with household food insecurity. Children from food insecure 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
93 

households have problems with learning, resulting in lower grades and test scores. 

They are also more likely to be anxious and irritable in the classroom, and more 

likely to be tardy, or absent from school. Adolescents from food insecure households 

have been shown to be more likely to have psychological problems. 

According to a survey of several thousand mothers of 3-year-old children in 18 

large cities, mental health problems in mothers and behavioral problems in their 

preschool-aged children were twice as likely in food insecure households as in food 

secure households. In discussing their findings, the researchers assert: ‘‘Social policy 

can address food insecurity more directly than it can address many other early-life 

stresses, and doing so can enhance the well-being of mothers and children.’’ The 

Food Stamp Program is one of the social policies that can bring families with children more food security. 

Put differently, in the metaphor used by Dr. Deborah Frank of Boston Medical 

Center and the Children’s Sentinel Nutrition Assessment Program, food stamps are 

like a childhood vaccine against malnutrition, hunger and food insecurity—a miracle 

drug that cuts babies’ chances of dying, reduces hospitalizations, and increases children’s school achievement. But because benefits are inadequate, we are giving children (in Dr. Frank’s words) a ‘‘sub-therapeutic’’ dose of this miracle drug—enough 

to make them better, but less than science tells us they need, the equivalent of giving children penicillin that isn’t quite enough to really cure a strep throat. And we 

are giving this miracle drug only to 60 percent of the people who need it. If this 

nation were giving polio or measles vaccine to only 60 percent of children, and in 

sub-therapeutic doses, I believe this Congress would act immediately. 

Food stamps, by moving families closer to food security and by allowing them to 

afford healthful diets on a more consistent basis, can play an important role in preventing childhood obesity. Certainly obesity among low-income people as well as 

more affluent people in our society is a serious concern. Some have worried that 

food stamps, by the mere fact of paying for food, contribute to obesity. But all the 

evidence is to the contrary. It is adequate resources for a healthy diet that reduce 

obesity, not hunger, stress, or recurrent cycles of eating and lack of enough food to 

eat. Food stamps and other nutrition programs can play a protective role against 

obesity, although that role may well be diminished by the inadequacy of the benefit 

amount. 

Emerging research is showing that participation in nutrition programs has the potential of protecting children from excess weight gain. An analysis of nationally representative survey data shows that school-age food insecure girls are less likely to 

be overweight or at risk of overweight if they participate in the School Breakfast 

Program, School Lunch Program or Food Stamp Program, or any combination of 

these programs. 

Research has shown that obesity can be a potential consequence of food insecurity 

among women. The reasons may include the ways in which low-income mothers 

must cope with limited resources for food—sacrificing at times their own nutrition 

in order to protect their children from hunger and lower nutritional quality. Food 

insecurity and poverty may also act as physiological stressors leading to hormonal 

changes that predispose women to obesity. This interaction between food insecurity 

and obesity does not show up as consistently among children. This may be because 

families work so hard to protect their children from the consequences of household 

food insecurity. One of the programs that helps families do this is the Food Stamp 

Program. An expert panel appointed by the USDA has reviewed the scientific literature and found no evidence of a relationship between food stamp use and obesity. 

Similarly, an analysis of data from a national representative child development survey showed no evidence that the Food Stamp Program contributed to overweight 

among poor children. Research and common sense lead to the conclusion that a 

more adequate Food Stamp Program that supplies vulnerable families with the level 

of benefits they need to purchase healthful diets on a consistent and reliable basis 

will help children avoid both food insecurity and obesity. 

III. ACTING IN FOOD STAMP REAUTHORIZATION TO PROMOTE CHILDREN’S HEALTH AND

NUTRITION

As important and effective as the Food Stamp Program is, it still needs to be improved in significant ways to further reduce hunger and food insecurity and support 

nutrition and health. 

Recently a team of academic researchers, led by Harry Holzer of Georgetown University, produced an analysis of The Economic Costs of Poverty in the United States: 

Subsequent Effects of Children Growing Up Poor. They concluded that childhood 

poverty imposes very large long-term economic costs on American society—by adversely affecting health, education, productivity and other attributes and outcomes, 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
94 

children’s poverty leads to such outcomes as added health costs and lower earnings 

as adults. The total cost to this country is equal to nearly four percent of GDP, or 

about $500 billion per year. 

One reason these costs are being incurred—why our children are being harmed 

and our economy is being held back—is the nation’s widespread hunger and food 

insecurity among families with children. As just one example, as Dr. Deborah Frank 

testified to the House Budget Committee four weeks ago that among children under 

age 3 (she specializes in the problems of very poor, very young children) those who 

are food insecure are 90 percent more likely to be in poor health and 30 percent 

more likely to require hospitalization. 

Our nation can improve the nutrition and health of children, as well as seniors, 

parents and others, and strengthen its schools, health care system and economy by 

making needed investments in the Food Stamp Program. 

Our top priority for the 2007 Farm Bill thus is a strong nutrition title that reflects this strategy by reauthorizing and improving the Food Stamp Program. The 

2002 Farm Bill made important progress upon which to build. That bill restored 

food stamp eligibility for some (but not all) of the many legal immigrants excluded 

six years earlier; improved access for low-income working families; very modestly increased the standard deduction for some (but a minority of) beneficiaries whose allotment levels had been cut several years earlier by freezing that deduction; reformed how USDA evaluates state administration of the program; and gave states 

new options to streamline enrollment and reporting, aiding both clients and caseworkers. 

But, we have far to go in addressing hunger and food insecurity in this nation. 

The Food Stamp Program has brought the nation a long way; but it must be 

strengthened so we can truly move towards eradicating hunger and food insecurity 

in the midst of our great affluence. To realize the program’s potential, Congress 

must follow three broad strategies: making benefit allotments adequate; opening eligibility to more needy people; and connecting more eligible people with benefits, 

since only 60 percent of currently eligible people, and barely half of eligible low-income working families, participate in the program. The recommendations below are 

aimed at achieving these three goals. 

These goals are reflected as well in two statements attached by this testimony. 

The first is a joint position of the Food Research and Action Center, America’s Second Harvest—the Nation’s Food Bank Network, and the American Public Human 

Services Association, the association of state food stamp directors and other state 

and local government human services professionals. The second is a letter to Congress in support of a strong nutrition title signed by more than 1200 national, state 

and local organizations, with more joining every day. 

As a threshold matter, the 2007 Farm Bill must maintain the entitlement structure of the Food Stamp Program, which responds to increases in need whether due 

to local or national economic changes or disasters. One recent example underscores 

this point: the absolutely essential role that the Food Stamp Program played as an 

effective ‘‘responder’’ in the wake of the devastating hurricanes of 2005. Several factors contributed to that response: leadership from USDA; key efforts of state governments; the efficiency of the Electronic Benefit Transfer (EBT) delivery system; and 

outreach and advocacy by nonprofit partners. But the foremost factor underpinning 

the Food Stamp Program’s ability to act as an effective post-Katrina ‘‘responder’’ 

was and is its entitlement structure that lets it respond immediately and flexibly 

to changes in need. 

One essential priority in the Bill must be making benefit allotments more adequate—increasing the minimum benefit and other allotment levels and reversing the 

impact of long-term benefit cuts embodied in the 1996 law. It is the norm rather 

than the exception for a food stamp recipient household’s benefits to run out several 

days before the end of the month—often in the third week of the month. The average benefit of roughly $1 per person per meal is not enough to purchase an adequate diet. The Thrifty Food Plan, which is the underlying rationale for the benefit 

amounts, does not represent what a family needs to purchase a minimally adequate 

diet, particularly for long-term consumption. This shortcoming was bad enough before—it has only been exacerbated by program changes in 1996 that cut benefits 

across the board and froze the standard deduction from income. By next year these 

cuts will cost a typical family of a parent and two children $450/year in food stamp 

benefits—a huge reduction for families struggling with poverty and hunger. 

As this testimony has discussed, food stamps fight both obesity and hunger, and 

more adequate allotments would do a better job of both. Food stamp benefits should 

be based on a food plan that reflects what it actually costs to feed a family a healthy 

diet, and the impact of the reductions in benefits enacted in 1996 must be addressed. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
95 

Moreover, the $10 minimum benefit—unchanged since 1977—is woefully inadequate. It provides barely one-third the purchasing power today that it did when 

it was set. Most often applicable to seniors and persons with disabilities, the $10 

minimum helps too little and discourages very needy people from going through an 

often complicated application process to obtain such a small amount. A significant 

increase in the minimum benefit is long overdue. 

It is essential, and also long overdue, to revise resource rules so that families need 

not forfeit meager savings in order to participate. Current resource limits are terribly restrictive—$3,000 for households with an elderly or disabled member; $2,000 

for other households. The $2,000 limit has not been adjusted for more than two decades—while inflation has nearly doubled. Allowing families that suffer unemployment, involuntary part-time work, illness or other financial emergencies to access 

food stamp benefits without exhausting their resources will help those families rebound and promote their self-sufficiency long-term, and will further bipartisan goals 

of fostering savings and asset development. I recently heard Robert Dostis, Director 

of the Vermont Campaign to End Childhood Hunger and a Vermont state legislator, 

tell about a client who was homeless and trying to save two months’ rent—one for 

the security deposit and one for the first month—so she could get herself and her 

family back into housing. Because this hard and laudable effort on her part pushed 

her above $2,000 in assets, as it would in most housing markets in this country, 

she couldn’t get food stamps. We have to fix this problem. 

We also urge that the 2007 Farm Bill expand eligibility to more needy people left 

out of the program now. These include all otherwise eligible legal immigrants, ablebodied adults who now face arbitrary time limits, ex-drug felons making new starts 

in life but disqualified from food stamps for life, and others struggling to make ends 

meet but facing arbitrary restrictions. We at FRAC are delighted that you will be 

hearing from Janet Murguia of the National Council of LaRaza this morning about 

the importance of restoring benefits for legal immigrants. The limitations on these 

groups’ eligibility imposed by the 1996 law, only slightly mitigated since then, has 

had only one outcome—more hunger and suffering. 

The food stamp reauthorization also should allocate funding for food stamp outreach and education activities. As I have indicated, the department estimates that 

just three of six of those eligible under current rules are participating in the program, and even fewer among working families. USDA’s ‘‘Food Stamps Make America Stronger’’ media campaign and competitive grants to fund community-based outreach efforts are important initiatives, and a sound start. Considerably more funding for these and other efforts will be important to connect more eligible people with 

benefits. 

Good customer service is undermined by inadequate investments in caseworker 

staffing and office systems. The problems states have in funding these operations 

have been exacerbated in the last decade, as the federal government discontinued 

an enhanced federal match rate for state computer expenses and adopted a cost allocation formula below the traditional 50/50 match rate. As states have been squeezed 

and have under-invested in staff and systems, that has had negative effects on access to the program. We urge increased support for state administrative operations. 

The 2007 Farm Bill must continue to allow recipients choice among food purchases 

and support healthy choices through benefit adequacy, nutrition education, farmers’ 

market access and other strategies. The current clear distinction between food and 

non-food items is in keeping with the fundamental purposes of the program and provides consumers and retailers with a simple test for determining an eligible product. 

Proposals to differentiate among food products, drawing lines among the 300,000 

food products on the market, would introduce unnecessary complexity. They also 

could well drive hungry people out of the program. Much of the stigma that had 

attached to the Food Stamp Program in the past stemmed from the public nature 

of redeeming food stamp coupons (the physical scrip that formerly was used) in a 

supermarket line. The implementation of EBT technology has helped to mainstream 

and make virtually invisible the food stamp purchase transaction at point of sale. 

Conversely, treating recipient shoppers differently from other consumers and raising 

questions at check-out as to what is reimbursable would threaten to increase stigma 

and run counter to national and state efforts to empower people as they move to 

self-sufficiency. 

Providing people with adequate resources to purchase food is essential, and 

strengthening the Food Stamp Nutrition Education programs is a second important 

component in a multi-faceted approach to ensuring good nutrition outcomes and addressing the nation’s obesity problem. Other components include: supporting strategies that allow food stamps to be used at farmers’ markets; ensuring appropriate 

outlets in communities for obtaining reasonably priced fruits and vegetables; and altering environmental messages that affect individuals’ behavior. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
96 

Finally, we agree with USDA that the program should be renamed to reflect its 

modernization, reforms and current thrust. 

In conclusion, the 2007 Farm Bill should include significant new investments in 

the Food Stamp Program to renew the nation’s effort to eradicate hunger and food 

insecurity and improve the nutrition, health and learning of all our people, and especially children. The increased investments would pay dividends in good child development, child health, school achievement, a more productive work force, and 

greater economic security for America’s rural, urban and suburban families. 

Mr. Chairman, we appreciate this opportunity to share our views on the 2007 

Farm Bill and look forward to continued work with you and the Committee as the 

process moves forward. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
97 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 207 here 36264A.035
98 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 208 here 36264A.036
99 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 209 here 36264A.037
100 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 210 here 36264A.038
101 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 211 here 36264A.039
102 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 212 here 36264A.040
103 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 213 here 36264A.041
104 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 214 here 36264A.042
105 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 215 here 36264A.043
106 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 216 here 36264A.044
107 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 217 here 36264A.045
108 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 218 here 36264A.046
109 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 219 here 36264A.047
110 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 220 here 36264A.048
111 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 221 here 36264A.049
112 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 222 here 36264A.050
113 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 223 here 36264A.051
114 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 224 here 36264A.052
115 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 225 here 36264A.053
116 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 226 here 36264A.054
117 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 227 here 36264A.055
118 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 228 here 36264A.056
119 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 229 here 36264A.057
120 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 230 here 36264A.058
121 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 231 here 36264A.059
122 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 232 here 36264A.060
123 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 233 here 36264A.061
124 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 234 here 36264A.062
125 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 235 here 36264A.063
126 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 236 here 36264A.064
127 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 237 here 36264A.065
128 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 238 here 36264A.066
129 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 239 here 36264A.067
130 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 240 here 36264A.068
131 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 241 here 36264A.069
132 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 242 here 36264A.070
133 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 243 here 36264A.071
134 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 244 here 36264A.072
135 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 245 here 36264A.073
136 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 246 here 36264A.074
137 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARINGInsert offset folio 247 here 36264A.075
138 

TESTIMONY OF GARY BRUNK

Mr. Chairman and distinguished committee members: 

I come before you in the shadow of several Wheat State political leaders who have 

fought hunger over the last decades through the Food Stamp program. 

No state has done more in the U.S. Congress to strengthen the Food Stamp Program, our nation’s first line of defense against hunger. 

Senator Bob Dole, one of the principle architects of the Food Stamp Act of 1977, 

took a program that existed largely as an add-on to public assistance and opened 

it to the working poor, the temporarily unemployed, the elderly, and people with disabilities. 

Representative Keith Sebelius helped craft the House version of Senator Dole’s 

legislation. 

Representative Dan Glickman helped write important legislation that protected 

and strengthened the program. 

And in the mid-1990s then-Representative Pat Roberts led an effort to preserve 

the integrity of the program’s structure. Later, as Senator, he worked to restore food 

stamp cuts made in 1996 that he believed went too far. 

Historians among you will note that Kansas’ food stamp champions came from 

both political parties. That too is a legacy of Senator Dole, who in the late 70’s 

worked with Democratic Senator George McGovern to improve the food stamp law. 

Their bipartisan friendship continued when, in 2005, Dole, McGovern and Donald 

E. Messer, a Methodist theologian, wrote Ending Hunger Now: A Challenge to Persons of Faith. The book mentions that the senators also collaborated to champion 

school lunch programs and supplemental nutrition programs for women, infants and 

children. 

The authors give an important clue about the values that brought them together 

in this book. ‘‘Every religious tradition,’’ they write, ‘‘emphasizes caring for children.’’ 

The connection Senators Dole and McGovern make between caring for children 

and eliminating hunger explain why, as director of a Kansas child advocacy organization, I am here. 

Let me tell you about children in Kansas today. In many ways Kansas is a terrific 

place to be a child. Year in and year out we do well in cross-state comparisons of 

child well-being. Kansas ranks 12th in that regard, according to the KIDS COUNT 

Data Book, a widely used compilation of statistics about children. 

Whenever I talk about how we rank, I immediately follow with two very large 

‘‘howevers.’’ 

The first ‘‘however’’ is that we’ve achieved our high ranking in comparison to 

states within a nation that does not itself compare well with most other industrialized nations. For example, as regards childhood poverty, the United States compares poorly with the world’s economically developed nations. 

My second ‘‘however’’ is that we need always remember that no matter where our 

state places in a ranking, a significant number of Kansas children live with economic insecurity. And the odds are stacked against them. 

Of all our children, 14.6 percent live in families with incomes below the poverty 

level. Another 20 percent live in families with incomes below 200 percent of poverty. 

City setting or countryside, it makes little difference. The child poverty rate in thinly settled Kansas ‘‘frontier counties’’ is about the same as in urban areas—15 percent. Densely settled rural counties fare worst, with poverty affecting about 17 percent of their children. 

One of the consequences of poverty is that about 12 percent of Kansas households—133,000—are food insecure, meaning that their lack of resources makes them 

uncertain about access to food. For many of the children in these families, food 

stamps are the most important protection from persistent hunger. In Kansas, 

183,000 persons depend on Food Stamps and almost half of them are children. Of 

those children, 76,000 live in poverty, 41,000 in extreme poverty. 

Of course when I say the Food Stamp Program protects thousands of Kansas children from hunger I’m talking about more than the discomfort or pain that comes 

of missing meals, bad as those consequences are. 

Others appearing at this hearing can speak with more authority about the radiant 

effects of hunger. A brief summary would note that hungry children are more likely 

to have behavioral and emotional problems. They are less likely to perform well in 

school. Hungry children are more likely to struggle with obesity. They are less likely 

to be in the full bloom of health. 

The effects of hunger are especially devastating for small children. Brain and 

child development research has focused increasing attention on life’s earliest years. 

When things go right, this is a period of phenomenal cognitive and physical growth 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
139 

that lays the foundation for successful adulthood. When things go wrong, the foundation is weakened, and the negative consequences multiply. 

Children for whom much has gone wrong are likely to start behind their peers 

and to stay there. 

The trickle-down of poverty and hunger acts, cumulatively, like a slow poison. 

Food stamps help protect against that poison. The Children’s Sentinel Nutrition Assessment Program (C–SNAP) calls the Food Stamp program ‘‘one of America’s best 

medicines’’ because the nutrition it provides improve children’s health, decreases 

hospitalizations, and optimizes mental, social and emotional development. 

I come to you today with a sense of urgency about keeping the Kansas medicine 

chest stocked with the remedy we call food stamps. In my view, it is imperative that 

Congress strengthen the nutrition title of the Farm Bill by improving the food 

stamp program. 

The number of food stamp recipients in the Wheat State has grown by more than 

50,000 in five years. My friends at the Catholic Charities Food Pantry in Wichita, 

who served around 6,500 clients in 2001, tell me that the number was 10,500 four 

years later. People come to them once a month to take away a supply of food good 

for two or three days. Increasing numbers of these folks, I’m told, are working-poor 

families. This reflects the inadequate levels of benefits provided in the Food Stamp 

program. 

That leads me to four recommendations for strengthening the Food Stamp Program. 

The first is this. I’d like to encourage improving the food stamp benefit. In Kansas, the benefit is 95 cent per person per meal. How can that level of benefit purchase an adequate diet, given other claims on household income? It’s not enough for 

basics, let alone a healthy nutritious diet. But not only is the benefit level insufficient, for many families it is actually eroding. 

As a result of benefit cuts enacted as part of the 1996 welfare law, the purchasing 

power of most households’ food stamp benefit is eroding in value each year. Food 

Stamp Program budget calculations allow households to subtract a ‘‘standard deduction’’ from their income, to reflect the basic costs of housing, utilities, transportation, 

and other inescapable living expenses. The standard deduction represents a portion 

of household income that is not available to purchase food because it must be used 

for other necessities. 

Prior to 1996, the standard deduction was indexed each year to account for inflation, in recognition of the fact that basic living expenses rise with inflation. The 

1996 welfare law, however, froze the standard deduction at $134 for all household 

sizes. In the 2002 Farm Bill, Congress improved the standard deduction to help address the needs of larger households. The standard deduction remains frozen at 

$134 a month, however, for households with three or fewer members. 

In 2008, food stamp benefits for a typical working parent with two children will 

be about $37 a month lower than they would have been without the across-theboard benefit cuts included in the 1996 law. That is 13 million dollars less for Kansans to spend on food in FY2008 alone, and 168 million dollars in lost benefits between FY2008 and FY2017. By 2017, a typical working parent of two will, over the 

course of a year, miss out on more than one and a half months-worth of food 

stamps, compared to the amount of benefits she or he would have received under 

the law in place prior to 1996. Under current rules, this lost ground will never be 

recovered. 

To restore the purchasing power of food stamp benefits, the standard deduction 

needs to be raised from $134 to $188 in 2008 and annually adjusted for inflation. 

A typical household of three or fewer members would see its benefits increase by 

about $24 a month. This would not restore benefits to the levels they would have 

been without the 1996 law because of the cut in the maximum benefit, but much 

of the lost ground would be recovered. I realize that this would be very expensive, 

but even a partial fix would make a big difference to people trying to put food on 

the table. 

One way to begin stopping the erosion of benefits is to improve the proposal enacted in 2002 and raise the standard deduction from 8.31 percent of the poverty line 

to 10 percent, as the Administration proposed in 2002. This would increase benefits 

right away for households of three or more people. Going from 8.31% to 10% would 

mean that in FY17 a typical working household of 3 would have about $11 more 

per month (in real terms) than it would have received under current law. Households of two would start to see an increase ten years earlier than under current law. 

Virtually all of the increased benefits in the first five years would go to families 

with children. (Over time, households of one and two would benefit as well.) At a 

minimum, Congress should ensure that benefits don’t continue to erode in value. 

The problem should stop in 2007. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
140 

Secondly, only about two out of three of those who are eligible for food stamps 

in Kansas are getting them. It’s not just working-poor families who are eligible but 

not receiving them, but legal immigrants and seniors, too. I hope your committee 

will look for ways to simplify and streamline enrollment so state agencies can serve 

eligible households. 

The 2002 farm bill reduced paperwork and office-visit requirements for workingpoor households. The same allowance should be made for households that include 

elderly or disabled members. The 2002 provision that allowed people to apply for 

the food stamp program over the Internet should be expanded so that they also can 

apply by telephone. Finally, Congress should give states the ability to coordinate 

food stamps with other programs that support those with low income, as well as 

supporting state efforts to use technology improvements and business models to 

help with program access and to realize administrative savings. 

Third, I would like to endorse a proposal in the President’s budget: adjusting food 

stamps more accurately to reflect high child care costs. Tens of thousands of working families in Kansas do not have child care subsidies and have to pay out of pocket for child care cost. The Administration’s proposal would allow working families 

with high child care costs to deduct the full cost of that care from households’ income when determining their food stamp benefits. Right now that amount is capped 

at $160 per month per child for children over 2 ($200 per month per child for younger children.) This proposal helps those families with child care costs above those 

amounts. 

The choice of paying for food or buying safe quality child care for your kids is no 

choice that a working poor parent should have to make. This proposal won’t fully 

fix the problem of too little funding for child care, but it will ease the ripple effects 

of that serious problem. 

Finally, I’d urge you to expanding access to legal immigrants and poor households 

that have modest savings. The legal bar facing these parents now has implications 

for children born citizens here. Please note that 16% of children under 150% of poverty in Kansas have an immigrant parent. Serving these children and their families 

is critical to a comprehensive solution to child poverty in Kansas. 

I believe stopping the erosion of benefits, simplifying enrollment, making adjustments for child care costs, and expanding access moves us closer to the goal of eliminating hunger in America. On this committee are two Kansans, Representative 

Moran and Representative Boyda, a Republican and a Democrat. 

My challenge to them is to emulate the bi-partisan example set by Senators Dole 

and McGovern in the fight against hunger. That is also my challenge to all of you. 

TESTIMONY OF KIM MCCOY WADE

I’m Kim McCoy Wade, Executive Director of the California Association of Food 

Banks, and I represent 40 food banks united to build a well-nourished California. 

Our 40 community food banks partner with a network of 5,000 charities and congregations to serve over 2 million Californians in need of food. 

Forty years ago in Texas, my mom graduated with a college degree in home economics and followed a call from President Johnson to enlist as a VISTA volunteer. 

She soon found herself living in Newark, New Jersey, where her new job was to 

teach moms how to use food stamps to shop and prepare healthy food for their families. Of course, as a VISTA volunteer, she also was living on food stamps herself, 

and found that first-hand experience more educational than anything she had 

learned in home economics. The women in her classes taught her how to stretch 

peanut butter into soups to last through the month. 

In California, just as in Texas and New Jersey, food stamps are the ultimate, if 

unsung, nutrition program for children. Food stamps can serve every child, of every 

age, on every day of the year, school day or not. Because of food stamps’ creation 

40 years ago, it’s rare to find a starving child in America—and for that accomplishment we can all be proud and protective. Two million people now receive food 

stamps in California each month, and 2 out of 3 are children. Ninety percent are 

families with children. These 1.3 million children, like all participants, receive 

around $100 per month for their parents to spend on food at the grocery store. For 

states, this provides tremendous economic activity: more than $2 billion is spent on 

food in California alone, generating $3.7 billion in economic impact. For parents, it’s 

a simpler equation: food stamps prevent them from sending their children to bed 

hungry or off to school unprepared to learn. 

While we can be proud that child starvation is largely a thing of the past in America, what, is far too common still is children eating oatmeal every night for dinner 

because the money has just run out. Families everywhere are struggling to afford 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
141 

housing, health care, and all the basic costs of raising kids today. Often, the first 

place that gets squeezed is the family food budget. Many kids end up with oatmeal—or other very low-cost, low-quality foods—for dinner because the food stamps 

they receive do not go far enough. Healthy food is expensive, with fruits and vegetables costing more than more processed foods, according to research from Adam 

Drewnowski at the University of Washington. Food stamps’ average benefit of $1 

per meal helps fill the plate, but isn’t enough to truly nourish a child. One youth 

in Georgia, whose soccer team was recently featured on the front page of the New 

York Times, held his stomach and told his coach that he was hungry. When the 

coach said he could have a snack at home, he told her he couldn’t because there 

was no food at home—it was the end of the month when the food stamps run out. 

That story matches food bank survey data finding that food stamps tend to last only 

2 weeks of the month. 

Even worse, there are millions of poor children who don’t get any food from the 

Food Stamp Program, because of the bureaucratic hurdles in their way. Only half 

of all eligible families participate in food stamps in California (46%)—and even 

fewer of our eligible working families (36%). More and more, the typical family eligible for food stamps is not unemployed or relying solely upon public assistance. Instead, they are working families and they are having tremendous difficulty navigating the system on their own. Some of these families give up because of state and 

local barriers that we are working to overcome with outreach, innovation, and advocacy. Nationally, however, we need Congressional leadership to continue to focus on 

making food stamps really work for kids and parents. As one example, ‘‘categorical 

eligibility,’’ which has helped boost participation in our neighbor state of Oregon to 

80%, should not be eliminated as a State option, as the President’s budget proposed. 

Why do the California food bank network and food banks around the country care 

so much about children and food stamps? Quite simply, because our mission is to 

end hunger in America, and we know we can’t do it alone. The Food Stamp Program 

provides 8 times the amount of food that the charitable food network in America 

does, according to America’s Second Harvest: the Nation’s Food Bank Network. The 

new debit card system efficiently delivers benefits to families, which are then spent 

in the local grocery stores for foods that families choose to meet their health, cultural, and dietary needs. We especially need the Food Stamp Program to be strong, 

because when it is weak, families lean more on food banks and our tremendous network of charities, congregations, and volunteers. Food banks aim to promote and 

partner with the Food Stamp Program—not replace it. 

For all these reasons, food banks in California have taken the lead to connect 

families to food stamps through a partnership with USDA and the California Health 

and Human Services Agency. Our Association has contracted with 48 food banks 

and other community groups in 22 counties to target 135,000 people this year with 

information and assistance on food stamps. In communities across the state, food 

banks are taking a comprehensive approach to ending hunger that integrates three 

goals: providing healthy emergency food, especially California-grown fruits and 

vegetables; promoting nutrition education to encourage healthy food choices; and 

connecting people to food stamps so they are able to purchase the food they need. 

Statewide, we have also helped pilot a state hotline, on-line applications, and a web 

resource center, www.myfoodstamps.org. We are determined to move California from 

its current last place ranking among the states for food stamp participation. 

Our work on the front lines with children in need of food has shown us both the 

strengths and the weaknesses of the Food Stamp Program, and what’s needed to 

deliver good nutrition to all children: 

1. Enough money to buy healthy food all month long 

Families now receive less in food stamps than they did 10 years ago. The typical 

working family of 3 will receive over $400 less this year—and that loss is growing 

with each passing year. That’s a particularly discouraging number to food bankers. 

Assuming we provide a family with a box of food worth roughly $35 each month, 

that’s about the same as the $400 lost annually from food stamps. That’s not 

progress in reducing hunger, that’s just passing the buck. This loss of food dollars 

is a direct result of a freeze in the food stamp standard deduction enacted in 1996. 

Over the next 10 years, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities estimates that 

California families on food stamps will receive $1.6 billion less than they would have 

had the 1996 cut not been enacted. Our food banks can’t and shouldn’t have to try 

to fill that difference. This lost ground in the fight against hunger can be regained 

by Congress focusing first on restoring food stamp benefit levels. 

An adequate monthly food budget, coupled with positive nutrition education, is 

what children and families need to get the healthy food they need. The minimum 

benefit of $10 that many of our seniors receive needs to be increased, too (and CaliVerDate Aug 31 2005 09:21 Oct 05, 2007 Jkt 036264 PO 00000 Frm 00145 Fmt 6633 Sfmt 6621 E:\HR\OC\A264.XXX A264

cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
142 

fornia needs specific assistance to fix our unique rules prohibiting food stamps for 

seniors and disabled children and adults receiving SSI.) 

2. Food for all people in need 

The Food Stamp Program used to ask only if you were poor and needed food— 

and that’s the right question. Now, there are different and complicated rules for immigrant families, unemployed adults without children, and certain ex-offenders. 

California is feeling the affects of this patchwork right now in our recent citrus 

freeze. Many newly unemployed farm workers are not turning to food stamps to 

help feed their children—either because they are not eligible or are confused about 

the different eligibility rules—and instead are coming to community food banks that 

now need additional freeze relief to meet the need. Currently, adult legal immigrants are generally not eligible for federal food stamps during their first five years 

in the country and then face complicated and intimidating rules after that period. 

All legal immigrants should be made eligible for the program. It’s the right thing 

to do and it would have the added benefit of dramatically simplifying the program 

in California. Children in immigrant homes are hurt by program rules that feed 

some people in need, and not others. 

A second group of people who can’t get food is people with savings. Surely children 

need parents to be saving for a security deposit for an apartment, for their tuition, 

or for the next rainy day when someone’s sick or the car breaks down. But families 

can’t get food stamps if they have more than $2000 in the bank. Don’t let family 

savings be a barrier to family nutrition: eliminate the asset test. 

No red tape 

Only about 1⁄3 of food bank clients are receiving food stamps, though many more 

are likely eligible, according to America’s Second Harvest. Through food banks’ outreach to our clients, we have found that long waits, repetitive paperwork, and outdated finger imaging requirements all prevent families from completing the application process. One California study documented that it takes an average of 2 trips 

to the food stamp office to successfully submit an application. Working families 

could particularly benefit from food stamps’ power to boost their wages, but half 

don’t apply because of red tape that means too much bureaucracy and not enough 

help. Partly as a result of this frustration, as many as half of the people food banks 

now serve are working families, according to several California food banks’ 2006 

Hunger Studies. 

Even sophisticated outreach efforts will not achieve increased participation if not 

coupled with innovations that allow families to get food stamps in places outside the 

county welfare office—including on-line and at schools, medical centers, and food 

banks. The Electronic Benefit Transfer card that resulted from the 1996 farm bill 

was a great step to modernize the program. Congress should demonstrate similar 

ingenuity in this year’s Farm Bill by continuing to invest in technology, combined 

applications, a new name, and other common-sense steps to simplify this process, 

while of course still preserving integrity. 

Another essential part of the Food Stamp Program is Food Stamp Nutrition Education (FSNE). At 14 food banks in California and throughout the country, FSNE 

projects are working to help low-income families achieve nutrition goals consistent 

with the Dietary Guidelines for Americans. By empowering children—and their parents—to make healthy choices, these programs can bring about positive lifestyle 

changes and especially increased fruit and vegetable consumption. But we can do 

more to unlock the potential of FSNE programs, to strengthen their ability to reduce 

hunger, and to help avoid costly health disparities such as obesity and type 2 diabetes. The Farm Bill provides an opportunity to modernize FSNE, to ensure that state 

and local programs can utilize evidence driven public health interventions that 

reach current and potentially-eligible food stamp recipients in multiple venues 

where they live, work, go to school, worship, and make their food and physical activity choices. 

The Food Stamp Program isn’t the only nutrition program that food banks directly work with. We also partner with USDA to distribute emergency food, through 

both the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEF AP) and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP). Alarmingly, these emergency food programs are 

now serving fewer people in California than in recent years, despite increased need 

and their benefit to both families and the agricultural sector. In California, TEFAP 

and bonus commodities are down from 97 million pounds in 2002 to 57 million 

pounds in 2006. CSFP, which serves mainly seniors, cut 5,000 people last year in 

California and is again proposed for elimination in the President’s budget. Both programs deserve significant, additional investment in food purchase to feed the people 

food banks serve every day. 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING
143 

Finally, I have one last message on children’s health and nutrition: this year, you 

are going to be presented with a lot of appealing new ideas around nutrition. I am 

hopeful that there is the opportunity and the funding available to explore many of 

these proposals. However, I also urge you to keep focused on what is our largest 

and most successful US nutrition program, preventing severe hunger and boosting 

nutrition for millions of children nationwide: the Food Stamp Program. Twenty four 

million Americans count on food stamps today, and another 20 million in need are 

counting on us to make sure the program will also work for them. 

There’s a reason the National Journal recently ranked the Food Stamp Program 

as one of the top 10 American success stories. Children displaced by Katrina received food stamps. Teenagers with their growing appetites use food stamps. Infants—like my one year old son, just trying fruits and vegetables for the first time— 

participate in food stamps. All of these children are now relying on all of us adults 

to help them get the food they need to grow, learn, and thrive. Thank you for taking 

up that challenge. 

Æ 


cprice-sewell on PROD1PC72 with HEARING