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

57–099 PDF 2010

H.R. 5504, IMPROVING NUTRITION 

FOR AMERICA’S CHILDREN ACT 

HEARING 

BEFORE THE

COMMITTEE ON 

EDUCATION AND LABOR 

U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES

ONE HUNDRED ELEVENTH CONGRESS 

SECOND SESSION 

HEARING HELD IN WASHINGTON, DC, JULY 1, 2010 

Serial No. 111–71 

Printed for the use of the Committee on Education and Labor 

( 

Available on the Internet: 

http://www.gpoaccess.gov/congress/house/education/index.html 
(II) 

COMMITTEE ON EDUCATION AND LABOR 

GEORGE MILLER, California, Chairman 

Dale E. Kildee, Michigan, Vice Chairman 

Donald M. Payne, New Jersey 

Robert E. Andrews, New Jersey 

Robert C. ‘‘Bobby’’ Scott, Virginia 

Lynn C. Woolsey, California 

Rube ́n Hinojosa, Texas 

Carolyn McCarthy, New York 

John F. Tierney, Massachusetts 

Dennis J. Kucinich, Ohio 

David Wu, Oregon 

Rush D. Holt, New Jersey 

Susan A. Davis, California 

Rau ́l M. Grijalva, Arizona 

Timothy H. Bishop, New York 

Joe Sestak, Pennsylvania 

David Loebsack, Iowa 

Mazie Hirono, Hawaii 

Jason Altmire, Pennsylvania 

Phil Hare, Illinois 

Yvette D. Clarke, New York 

Joe Courtney, Connecticut 

Carol Shea-Porter, New Hampshire 

Marcia L. Fudge, Ohio 

Jared Polis, Colorado 

Paul Tonko, New York 

Pedro R. Pierluisi, Puerto Rico 

Gregorio Kilili Camacho Sablan, 

Northern Mariana Islands 

Dina Titus, Nevada 

Judy Chu, California 

John Kline, Minnesota, 

Senior Republican Member 

Thomas E. Petri, Wisconsin 

Howard P. ‘‘Buck’’ McKeon, California 

Peter Hoekstra, Michigan 

Michael N. Castle, Delaware 

Vernon J. Ehlers, Michigan 

Judy Biggert, Illinois 

Todd Russell Platts, Pennsylvania 

Joe Wilson, South Carolina 

Cathy McMorris Rodgers, Washington 

Tom Price, Georgia 

Rob Bishop, Utah 

Brett Guthrie, Kentucky 

Bill Cassidy, Louisiana 

Tom McClintock, California 

Duncan Hunter, California 

David P. Roe, Tennessee 

Glenn Thompson, Pennsylvania 

[Vacant] 

Mark Zuckerman, Staff Director 

Barrett Karr, Minority Staff Director 
(III) 

C O N T E N T S 

Page 

Hearing held on July 1, 2010 ................................................................................. 1 

Statement of Members: 

Kline, Hon. John, Senior Republican Member, Committee on Education 

and Labor ...................................................................................................... 5 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 6 

Kucinich, Hon. Dennis, a Representative in Congress from the State 

of Ohio, submissions for the record: 

Article, ‘‘Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing Contributes 

to Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done About It,’’ by Jennifer L. Harris, et al, Annual Review of Public Health, Oct. 2008, 

Internet address to ................................................................................ 27 

Article, ‘‘Television viewing, computer use, obesity, and adiposity in 

US preschool children,’’ by Jason A. Mendoza, et al, International 

Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, Sept. 25, 

2007 ......................................................................................................... 83 

Article, ‘‘Television viewing, fast-food consumption, and children’s 

obesity,’’ by Hung-Hao Chang and Rodolofo M. Nayga, Jr., Contemporary Economic Policy, July 2009, Internet address to .................... 92 

Article, ‘‘Fast-Food Restaurant Advertising on Television and Its Influence on Childhood Obesity,’’ by Shin-Yi-Chou, et al, Journal 

of Law and Economics, Nov. 2008, Internet address to ..................... 93 

Miller, Hon. George, Chairman, Committee on Education and Labor ......... 1 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 3 

Additional submissions: 

Statement of the Food Research and Action Center ....................... 82 

Questions submitted for the record .................................................. 114 

Statement of Witnesses: 

Colicchio, Tom, chef and restaurateur ............................................................ 40 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 42 

Monroe, Paul D., major general, U.S. Army (ret.), on behalf of Mission: 

Readiness ....................................................................................................... 64 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 66 

Rector, Robert, senior research fellow, the Heritage Foundation ................. 44 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 45 

Sanchez, Eduardo, vice president and chief medical officer, Blue Cross 

and Blue Shield of Texas .............................................................................. 58 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 60 

Responses to questions submitted for the record ................................... 124 

Vilsack, Hon. Thomas, Secretary, U.S. Department of Agriculture ............. 7 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 9 

Responses to questions submitted for the record ................................... 116 

Weill, James D., president, Food Research and Action Center .................... 53 

Prepared statement of ............................................................................... 55 

Additional submissions: 

Child nutrition reauthorization materials ....................................... 93 

Letter, dated June 16, 2010, to the U.S. Senate leadership ........... 94 

(1) 

H.R. 5504, IMPROVING NUTRITION FOR 

AMERICA’S CHILDREN ACT 

Thursday, July 1, 2010 

U.S. House of Representatives 

Committee on Education and Labor 

Washington, DC. 

The committee met, pursuant to call, at 9:21 a.m., in room 2175, 

Rayburn House Office Building, Hon. George Miller [chairman of 

the committee] presiding. 

Present: Representatives Miller, Kildee, Scott, McCarthy, Tierney, Kucinich, Wu, Davis, Loebsack, Hirono, Clarke, Courtney, 

Shea-Porter, Fudge, Polis, Tonko, Titus, Chu, Kline, Petri, Castle, 

Ehlers, Biggert, Platts, McMorris Rodgers, Guthrie, Cassidy, Roe, 

and Thompson. 

Staff present: Andra Belknap, Press Assistant; Calla Brown, 

Staff Assistant, Education; Daniel Brown, Staff Assistant; Jody 

Calemine, General Counsel; Denise Forte, Director of Education 

Policy; Ruth Friedman, Senior Education Policy Advisor (Early 

Childhood); Jose Garza, Deputy General Counsel; David Hartzler, 

Systems Administrator; Liz Hollis, Special Assistant to Staff Director/Deputy Staff Director; Sadie Marshall, Chief Clerk; Bryce 

McKibbon, Staff Assistant; Alex Nock, Deputy Staff Director; Julie 

Peller, Senior Education Policy Advisor; Meredith Regine, Junior 

Legislative Associate, Labor; Alexandria Ruiz, Staff Assistant; Melissa Salmanowitz, Press Secretary; Gabrielle Serra, Education and 

Nutrition Policy Advisor; Dray Thorne, Senior Systems Administrator; Daniel Weiss, Special Assistant to the Chairman; Stephanie 

Arras, Minority Legislative Assistant; Kirk Boyle, Minority General 

Counsel; Allison Dembeck, Minority Professional Staff Member; 

Barrett Karr, Minority Staff Director; Alexa Marrero, Minority 

Communications Director; Brian Newell, Minority Press Secretary; 

Susan Ross, Minority Director of Education and Human Services 

Policy; Linda Stevens, Minority Chief Clerk/Assistant to the General Counsel; and Loren Sweatt, Minority Professional Staff Member. 

Chairman MILLER [presiding]. The Committee on Education and 

Labor will come to order. Good morning to everyone, and welcome 

to our first witness, Secretary of Agriculture Tom Vilsack. We will 

be with you in a moment. We have a couple of opening statements. 

This morning we will discuss the new bipartisan child nutrition 

legislation we introduced earlier this month to address critical 
2 

health and economic needs in this country. We are on the brink of 

a national health crisis that is affecting our youngest children. 

Childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 30 years. 

Nearly 1 in 3 children are obese. The frightening reality in many 

doctor’s offices is very young children are presenting adult onset 

health problems like diabetes and heart disease. 

At the very same time, over 16 million children are hungry and 

live in households where families are struggling to put food on the 

table. In this economy, families are faced with the difficult and 

daunting choices of paying their bills and keeping the lights on or 

putting food on the table. They simply do not have enough resources to make ends meet. 

For these families, the federal child nutrition programs provide 

a nutritional safety net. They help parents avoid this painful choice 

between basic necessities. This makes the role of these programs 

increasingly important. 

We cannot ignore the fact that for millions of children the only 

meals that they can count on are those that they get at school or 

in childcare. Hunger affects every aspect of children’s lives, including their ability to keep up with their peers to achieve academically. 

If children are hungry, they can’t focus and they can’t learn. And 

if we do nothing, if we allow these children’s health to deteriorate, 

to jeopardize their success in school, we compromise their ability to 

grow into healthy, productive adults. 

Research shows that healthy eating and a child’s ability to focus 

and benefit from classroom—and benefit from classroom time are 

absolutely linked. The federal child nutrition programs provide us 

with a tremendous opportunity to help change children’s lives and 

the future of this country by not just feeding children healthier 

meals, but teaching them about the importance of healthy choices. 

If we educate our children about the importance of nutrition 

early, they can develop healthy habits that will translate into a 

lifetime of healthy eating and healthy living. This is why we need 

to place so much emphasis on healthy nutrition and education in 

childcare, and for mothers in the women and infants children’s programs. 

This won’t be the first time we look to the classroom to help stop 

national health crises. That is how we worked to get people to stop 

smoking. We educated children about the dangers, and they started 

talking and questioning their parents about it. With the use of 

seatbelts, we told children about the need for seatbelts, and they 

started asking their parents to buckle up and to make the car a 

safer place for them to ride in. 

Education has mastered many difficult problems in this country. 

If we work in the schools to both increase nutritional opportunities 

and educate children about the food they are eating, we have a 

chance to really dramatically drive down future health care costs. 

And we have a real opportunity to ensure our children will be able 

to reach for success and live healthier lives. 

At Dover Elementary and Richmond Elementary in my district, 

the kids help take care of the school garden. They use it for a biology class, they use it for zoology class, and they use it for an art 

class. But most importantly, they are eating the products of their 
3 

garden, they are understanding the richness of fresh fruits and 

vegetables, and they are taking what they learn in the garden back 

home with them to teach their parents about healthy living. 

This is the type of program we want to replicate in the legislation we have introduced. We want to empower schools across the 

country to start their own gardens, to run green cafeterias, to accept nothing but the highest quality food in schools in the cafeteria 

and in the vending machines. We want to empower schools to help 

improve meal quality, to change children’s lives, and take the issue 

of children’s health seriously. 

The Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act will help accomplish this task by making four important improvements in 

America’s child nutrition programs. 

First, we streamline and increase access for children to healthy 

nutritional food during the school day. 

Secondly, we work to improve food safety and the recall process 

in our schools for unsafe food. 

Third, we increase the reimbursement rate for the first time in 

30 years to better support the schools’ ability to offer healthy school 

meals. 

Lastly, we provide opportunities for year-round service, on the 

weekends, during vacation and holidays, and during the summer, 

because hunger and children’s nutritional needs do not take a summer vacation. 

This is smart policy that responds to significant needs to help 

improve children’s health. 

We have many partners in this effort, including health organizations, anti-hunger organizations, school and nutrition organizations, teachers and parents, who really want better nutrition in our 

schools. 

We also have the help of Michelle Obama. With her Let’s Move 

initiative, the First Lady has lent her leadership, her vision, and 

her knowledge to help end the childhood obesity crisis and to bring 

national attention to the problems facing our country. This bill answers her call and moves us closer to meeting President Obama’s 

challenge to end childhood hunger in America. 

The issues of child hunger and poor nutrition require immediate 

action and a joint effort between government, communities, families, schools, and the unwavering support of advocates. 

The nation’s greatest treasure is at risk; our children deserve a 

chance to reach for more and to pursue opportunities that will 

drive this country to even greater heights. It is now clear that the 

time to get America’s families and children back on the road to 

healthy eating and healthier living. 

Our witnesses today will tell us what is really at stake and why 

this bill is so absolutely critical. 

And I want to thank all of them in advance for being here and 

recognize the senior Republican at this morning’s hearing, Mr. 

Kline. 

[The statement of Mr. Miller follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. George Miller, Chairman, 

Committee on Education and Labor 

Good morning. 
4 

This morning we’ll discuss the new bipartisan child nutrition legislation we introduced earlier this month to address critical health and economic needs in this country. 

We are on the brink of a national health crisis that is affecting our youngest children. Childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 30 years. 

Nearly one in three children is obese. 

The frightening reality in many doctors offices is very young children presenting 

with adult onset health problems like diabetes and heart disease. 

At the same time, over 16 million children are hungry and live in households 

where families are struggling to put food on the table. 

In this economy, families are faced with the difficult and daunting choices of paying their bills and keeping the lights on or putting food on the table. They simply 

do not have enough resources to make ends meet. 

For these families, the federal child nutrition programs provide a nutritional safety net. 

They help parents avoid this painful choice between basic necessities. This makes 

the role of these programs increasingly important. 

We cannot ignore the fact that for millions of children, the only meals that they 

can count on are those they get at school or in child care. 

Hunger affects every aspect of children’s lives, including their ability to keep up 

with their peers and achieve academically. 

If children are hungry, they can’t focus and they can’t learn. If we do nothing, 

if we allow these children’s health to deteriorate, and jeopardize their success in 

school, we compromise their ability to grow into healthy, productive adults. 

Research shows that healthy eating and a child’s ability to focus and benefit from 

classroom time are absolutely linked. 

The federal child nutrition programs provide us with a tremendous opportunity 

to help change children’s lives and the future of this country by not just feeding children healthier meals but teaching them about the importance of healthy choices. 

If we educate our children about the importance of nutrition early, they can develop healthy habits that will translate in to a lifetime of healthy eating and 

healthy living. 

This is why we need to place so much emphasis on healthy nutrition and education in child care and for mothers in the Women, Infants and Children program. 

This won’t be the first time that we took to the classrooms to help stop a national 

health crisis. 

How did we get people to stop smoking? We educated kids about the dangers of 

smoking and they talked about it with their parents. 

Why do people use seatbelts? Their kids were educated about it in school and then 

they came home and made sure their parents wore their seatbelts in their cars and 

now they do. 

Education has mastered many of the difficult problems in this country. 

If we work in the schools to both increase nutritional opportunities and educate 

kids about the food they’re eating, we have a chance to really dramatically drive 

down future health care costs. And we have a real opportunity to ensure our children will be able to reach for success and live healthier lives. 

At Dover Elementary and Richmond Elementary in my district, the kids help take 

care of a school garden. They use it for the biology class, they use it for zoology 

class, and they use it for the art class. 

But most importantly, they’re eating the products of their garden, they’re understanding the richness of fresh fruits and vegetables and they’re taking what they 

learned in the garden back home with them to teach their parents about healthy 

living. 

This is the type of program that we want to replicate in the legislation we introduced. 

We want to empower schools across the country to start their own gardens, to run 

green cafeterias, to accept nothing but the highest quality food in schools in the cafeteria and in vending machines. 

We want to empower schools to help improve meal quality, to change children’s 

lives and take the issue of children’s health seriously. 

The Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act will help accomplish this task 

by making four important improvements in America’s children nutrition programs: 

First, we streamline and increase access for children to healthy nutritious food 

during the school day. 

Second, we work to improve food safety and the recall process in our schools. 

Third, we increase the reimbursement rate for the first time in over 30 years to 

better support schools ability to offer healthy school meals. 
5 

Lastly, we provide opportunities for year-round service, on weekends, during vacation and holidays and during the summer because hunger and children’s nutritional 

needs do not take a summer vacation. 

This is smart policy that responds to a significant need to help improve children’s 

health. 

We have many partners in this effort including health organizations, anti-hunger 

organizations, school and nutrition organizations, teachers and parents, who really 

want better nutrition in their schools. We also have the help of Michelle Obama. 

With her ‘‘Let’s Move’’ initiative, the First Lady has lent her leadership, her vision 

and her knowledge to help end the childhood obesity crisis and to bring national 

attention to the problems facing our country. 

This bill answers her call and moves us closer to meeting President Obama’s challenge to end childhood hunger in America. 

The issues of child hunger and poor nutrition require immediate action, and a 

joint effort between government, communities, families, schools, and the unwavering 

support of advocates. The nation’s greatest treasure is at risk and our children deserve the chance to reach for more and to pursue opportunities that will drive this 

country to even greater heights. 

It’s clear now is the time to get America’s families and children back on the road 

to healthy eating and healthier living. 

Our witnesses here today will tell us what is really at stake and why this bill 

is so absolutely critical. 

Thank you for being here today. 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Good morning to you and 

to the Secretary. Thank you for being with us here this morning. 

This morning’s legislative hearing is the first public examination 

of H.R. 5504, the recently introduced Improving Nutrition for 

America’s Children Act. The National School Lunch Program and 

the other initiatives that make up the Child Nutrition Act are designed to combat hunger and poor nutrition among low-income children and families. 

According to the Congressional Research Service, federally supported child nutrition programs reach more than 40 million children and 2 million lower-income, expectant and new mothers daily. 

Every 5 years or so, Congress has the opportunity to update and 

extend these programs, and that is exactly what we ought to be 

doing this year. We all recognize the role of nutritious school 

lunches, WIC supports, and other nutrition programs in preventing 

hunger and helping promote healthy children and families. We 

stand ready on this side of the aisle to reauthorize the programs 

and improve their effectiveness and efficiency. 

What has given us pause, however, is the almost $8 billion price 

tag attached to this bill. 

[Audio gap.] 

Our child nutrition programs are a worthy investment. 

[Audio gap.] 

This is a threat to our long-term economic security. It is also a 

threat to our national security. 

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, recently warned our national debt has become our greatest national 

security threat. As he noted, the interest on our debt is now roughly equal to the annual defense budget. Every dollar we spend and 

every program we create must be weighed against the crushing 

burden we are placing on future generations with this unchecked 

spending. This is a particularly valid question on legislation professing to improve our children’s futures. 
6 

Today’s hearing will delve into specific detail about the proposed 

legislation. I hope we do not allow an important discussion about 

nutritional science and wellness policy reporting to detract from 

our larger obligation to prevent hunger and improve child nutrition 

responsibly. 

We can modernize these programs and improve their efficiency 

and reach without further bankrupting our nation. This is the approach to child nutrition reauthorization I would gladly support, 

and I look forward to hearing from our distinguished witnesses 

today about how we can do exactly that, and I yield back, Mr. 

Chairman. 

[The statement of Mr. Kline follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. John Kline, Senior Republican Member, 

Committee on Education and Labor 

Thank you Mr. Chairman and good morning. This morning’s legislative hearing 

is the first public examination of H.R. 5504, the recently introduced Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act. 

The National School Lunch program and the other initiatives that make up the 

Child Nutrition Act are designed to combat hunger and poor nutrition among lowincome children and families. According to the Congressional Research Service, federally supported child nutrition programs reach more than 40 million children and 

two million lower-income expectant and new mothers daily. 

Every five years or so, Congress has the opportunity to update and extend these 

programs. And that is exactly what we ought to be doing this year. We all recognize 

the role of nutritious school lunches, WIC supports, and other nutrition programs 

in preventing hunger and helping promote healthy children and families. We stand 

ready on this side of the aisle to reauthorize the programs and improve their effectiveness and efficiency. 

What has given us pause, however, is the $8 billion price tag attached to this bill. 

That’s $8 billion the majority plans to spend—on top of the nearly $20 billion we 

are already spending each year on these programs, on top of the more than half billion dollars in stimulus funds appropriated last year for nutrition, obesity, and other 

community wellness programs, on top of the $15 billion Congress added this year 

in the health care bill for community based prevention programs, including nutrition and exercise programs. Let me be clear: our child nutrition programs are a worthy investment, and one we will continue to prioritize. But at a time of record debts 

and deficits, creating new programs for green cafeterias and federalizing our local 

wellness policies and nutrition standards seems fiscally irresponsible. 

As introduced, the cost of H.R. 5504 is not offset; if enacted today, it would add 

to our deficit. And we all know that within this committee’s jurisdiction, we do not 

have $8 billion for these purposes. That means we will be forced to move a bill 

through committee without paying for it, trusting the Speaker to find the money 

elsewhere or simply swipe our burgeoning credit card once again. 

Our nation’s debts and deficits cannot be ignored as abstract concepts. The Congressional Budget Office announced this week the national debt will reach 62 percent of our gross domestic product by year’s end. This is a threat to our long-term 

economic security. It’s also a threat to our national security. 

Admiral Mike Mullen, chairman of the Joint Chiefs, recently warned our national 

debt has become our greatest national security threat. As he noted, the interest on 

our debt is now roughly equal to the annual defense budget. Every dollar we spend 

and every program we create must be weighed against the crushing burden we are 

placing on future generations with this unchecked spending. This is a particularly 

valid question on legislation professing to improve our children’s futures. 

Today’s hearing will delve into specific detail about the proposed legislation. But 

I hope we do not allow an important discussion about nutritional science and 

wellness policy reporting to detract from our larger obligation to prevent hunger and 

improve child nutrition responsibly. 

We can modernize these programs and improve their efficiency and reach without 

further bankrupting our nation. That is the approach to child nutrition reauthorization I would gladly support, and I look forward to hearing from our distinguished 

witnesses today about how we can do exactly that. I yield back. 
7 

Chairman MILLER. I thank the gentleman for his statement. 

Our first witness this morning will be the Honorable Tom 

Vilsack, who was appointed by President Barack Obama as the 

30th Secretary of the United States Department of Agriculture, 

where he is working to improve the health of America’s children, 

targeting child hunger and obesity, with efforts to encourage balanced meals, nutritious eating, and increased physical activity. He 

has ordered a top-to-bottom review of USDA’s food safety standards 

and has begun to implement policy changes to ensure the safety of 

America’s food supply. 

Prior to his appointment, Secretary Vilsack served two terms as 

Governor of Iowa and was the first Democrat elected to that office 

in more than 30 years. He received a bachelor’s degree from Hamilton College in 1972 and earned his law degree from Albany Law 

School in 1975. 

Mr. Secretary, welcome to the committee. You are now an old 

hand at testifying before congressional committees. As you know, 

when you begin, a green light will go on. You will have 5 minutes 

for your opening statement, but you make sure that you are comfortable imparting the information that you think the committee 

needs to know. 

Welcome. 

STATEMENT OF HON. THOMAS J. VILSACK, SECRETARY, 

U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE 

Secretary VILSACK. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Representative Kline, thank you, as well, and to all the 

committee members. I certainly appreciate the opportunity to be 

here this morning. 

I am going to not use the prepared text that my staff has prepared. I would like to speak from the heart about this issue today. 

When I was asked to serve as Secretary Obama’s—Secretary of 

Agriculture by President Obama, the first thing that he asked me 

to do was to improve the nutrition available to our children. I was 

struck by that and recognized that that was my first instruction 

from my boss. 

I took and take that responsibility very seriously, and that is 

why I am here today, to encourage this committee and this Congress to take action now to improve the nutritional opportunities 

for our children. 

You have before you a bill that will provide ten improvements to 

the current system, a bill that will expand access to school breakfast, an extraordinarily important part of starting every child’s day 

properly, an opportunity to improve the quality of the meals that 

are available to youngsters in schools across the country. 

The Institute of Medicine essentially did a study of the nutritional value of the meals that we are currently serving to our children and found that there was too much fat, too much sugar, too 

much sodium, not enough fruits, not enough vegetables, not enough 

whole grains, and not enough low-fat dairy. There is obviously 

room for improvement. 

You have an opportunity with this bill to also provide consistency 

in terms of the nutritional opportunities at schools by providing op-
8 

portunities for us to create standards for vending machines and a 

la carte lines that are also consistent with nutrition. 

You have a chance and the opportunity to bridge the gap during 

weekends and summer programs in summer months. As the chairman rightly indicated, we can do all we can do for 5 days during 

the school year, but on weekends and during the summer, youngsters are often left to their own design. 

You can improve the equipment and the training that is available in schools. You can improve the safety of food that is being 

provided to our youngsters. You can place greater integrity in the 

system. You can reconnect youngsters with their food supply so 

there is a better understanding of what farmers and ranchers contribute to us every single day. You can provide better information 

for students and parents so they can make more informed decisions. And you can continue the commitment to early childhood so 

that youngsters get a healthy first start. 

All of this is important for the following reasons. One, the research is fairly clear. Youngsters who are hungry and youngsters 

who are dealing with weight issues have a difficult time learning, 

and our youngsters are now engaged in the most competitive circumstances we have ever seen. It is important that every single 

youngster be at the top of their game. That is why it is important 

for us to do what is right in terms of school nutrition. 

So it is educational achievement and attainment. It is also health 

care. Youngsters who are obese will carry that situation into adulthood and, with it, rising costs associated with diabetes, heart conditions, and certain cancers, so it is also a health care issue. 

You will also find out it is a national security issue. Today, only 

25 percent of youngsters in America today, ages 19 to 24, are fit 

for military service. And one of the principal reasons for that is 

that too many of our youngsters are overweight. 

And then there is the whole moral issue associated with this particular legislation. A country as strong, as rich, as powerful as ours, 

and yet we have youngsters who are hungry, hundreds of thousands of youngsters who are hungry? It is one of the reasons why 

Harry Truman in 1946 established the school lunch program, because he recognized the country was only as strong as its youth. 

So I am here today to urge action on this bill. There are many 

priorities that this Congress has faced, many complex issues, but 

I believe there is none more important than this. This is an opportunity for us to make a clear, unconditional statement about the 

importance of our children and their future. 

We are urging Congress not to delay, not to delay expanded access, not to delay increased food safety, not to delay improved quality, not to delay improvements in equipment and training, not to 

delay the connection between farm and school, not to delay an additional commitment to early childhood. 

I talk to a lot of folks around the country. And I appreciate that 

this Congress does a lot of important work. And, frankly, you deal 

with a lot of complex issues. Health care was a complex issue, regulatory reform a complex issue. Sometimes the rest of us don’t 

quite understand all the details of those programs. 

But I will tell you this: There are moms and dads all over this 

country that understand precisely what this bill is about. It is 
9 

about making sure their youngsters are treated right in school, and 

I certainly appreciate the fiscal challenges that we face. I understand the importance of dealing with deficits, and I am committed 

to working with this committee and this Congress to find the necessary offsets, if that becomes necessary, to make sure that we 

don’t delay action on this bill. 

This is a top priority for USDA. It ought to be a top priority for 

the American people, and I believe it is. 

So, Mr. Chairman, I look forward to answering questions about 

this, but I want to impart to this committee: I know of no more important role or responsibility I have than the one that I am talking 

about today. 

There are tens of millions of children whose future depends on 

what we do here, tens of millions of children who will get a better 

deal in school, a better opportunity to succeed if we do our job 

right. I certainly encourage this committee to take this very seriously, as I know you do, and to encourage your colleagues to take 

the difficult steps to get this done this year. 

Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

[The statement of Secretary Vilsack follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Hon. Thomas Vilsack, Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee, thank you for the opportunity to 

discuss the pending legislation to reform and reauthorize the Department of Agriculture’s (USDA) Child Nutrition Programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition 

Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) program. The first task that the 

President asked me to take on when I was first selected for this job was to provide 

our children with healthier, more nutritious meals. I pledged then and reaffirm 

now—the USDA will do everything it can to support the health of our children and 

the health of the school environment in thousands of schools across the country. 

I appreciate the Committee’s leadership on this legislation and the efforts to date 

to pass a robust Child Nutrition bill. The Administration is strongly committed to 

passing legislation this year that reduces child hunger and improves the quality of 

school meals and the health of the school environment. The priorities that the Administration has unveiled for this legislation would transform our school meals programs by making it easier for eligible students to participate in the programs, expanding program coverage to gap periods like breakfast, after school, and summers 

when some children struggle to access healthy meals, and significantly improving 

the nutritional quality and health of school meals and the school environment 

through upgraded meal standards and targeted increases in meal reimbursement 

rates, new standards for competitive foods, and support for school food service professionals through training, certification, and investments in school food equipment. 

I am proud to be joined in my support for this effort by the First Lady of the 

United States, Michelle Obama, as well as Education Secretary Arne Duncan and 

the Secretary of Health and Human Services, Kathleen Sebelius. This showing of 

support underlines the fact that reforming these programs can have a significant 

positive impact on child obesity and nutrition, as well as health and education outcomes. The recently released White House Report on Childhood Obesity called for 

the passage of a robust Child Nutrition Reauthorization bill as a key strategy to 

combat child obesity. 

I thank Chairman Miller for his leadership on this issue. The legislation he recently introduced would achieve a number of the policy priorities of the Obama Administration. The legislation proposes to invest significant resources in these programs and would reduce barriers to participation, improve program access, and enhance the quality of school meals and the health of the school environment. There 

are a number of provisions in this proposal that mirror the legislation that was 

passed unanimously by the Senate Agriculture Committee and reported out in early 

May. The strong letter of support from 221 Members of the House of Representatives for a robust Child Nutrition Reauthorization, along with the bipartisan Senate 

action and the Chairman’s bill show that there is broad support for this important 

legislation. 
10 

As the number of remaining legislative days continues to get smaller, I urge this 

Committee to continue your work and to act quickly and forcefully on this legislation in order to provide all of our children with the healthy meals that are so important to their health and education. If we are going to support our children, we must 

pass a strong bill this year. 

Background 

A discussion of the importance of reauthorizing the Child Nutrition and WIC programs must begin with the recognition that these programs are some of the largest 

and most important enterprises in our nation to invest in and support a healthy future for our children. Operating in over 100,000 schools in nearly every community 

in America, the school meals programs touch the lives of millions of children every 

school day and represent a partnership between the Federal and State governments 

and local schools. 

The meals served through the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the 

School Breakfast Program are the main nutrition intervention in elementary and 

secondary schools. The lunch program is available to 90 percent of the 55 million 

American children enrolled in elementary and secondary schools—that is 75% of all 

Americans under age 18. And these meals are a substantial and important part of 

the diets of many school children. For schools to contribute effectively to reshaping 

eating behaviors, the meals offered at schools must model healthful choices and contribute effectively to healthful dietary intakes. 

The National School Lunch Act, now the Richard B. Russell National School 

Lunch Act, (NSLA) was enacted in 1946 as a necessary response to the widespread 

malnutrition-related health problems revealed among young draftees during World 

War II. Leaders in Congress also recognized that nutritious lunches would contribute to success in schools. Yet, now—over 60 years later, a recent report showed 

that 75 percent of Americans ages 17 to 24 are not fit for military service. Unlike 

the malnurishment problems of the 1940s, today, being overweight is the leading 

medical reason that young Americans are rejected from military service. Our understanding of the links between nutrition, health, and education have grown over 

time, and the program has responded with changes that make the program more 

accessible to low-income children, and improve the content of meals to reflect the 

day’s nutrition science. Through these changes, the core nutrition and education 

mission behind school meals remains just as important, if not more important, 

today; but, there is more that we can and must do to continue making important 

and necessary changes to the programs. 

Over the years, USDA has made a number of changes to bring school meals into 

alignment with the most current Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Given the scope 

and complexity of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines recommendations, USDA contracted 

with the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine (IOM) to provide evidence and 

science-based recommendations for the foods offered in these programs. Last Fall, 

the IOM issued recommendations, including—— 

• increase the amount and variety of fruits, vegetables, and whole grains; 

• set a minimum and maximum level of calories; and 

• increase the focus on reducing the amounts of saturated fat and sodium provided. 

I am pleased to report that we will be ready to publish proposed changes to the 

school meal nutritional requirements based on IOM’s recommendations as soon as 

later this year. Stakeholders and the public will have ample opportunity to comment 

on USDA’s proposed rule. After all public comments are considered, USDA will issue 

a final rule to implement changes to school meals. 

In the meantime, USDA will continue to provide technical assistance to schools 

to increase the availability of the food groups recommended by the Dietary Guidelines (fruits, vegetables, whole grains, and low-fat/fat-free dairy products) in the 

lunch and breakfast menus. 

USDA’s HealthierUS School Challenge is also helping schools move in the direction of the recommendations of the 2005 Dietary Guidelines. The awards criteria 

have been updated to reflect the 2005 Dietary Guidelines. To date, over 700 schools 

have received Challenge awards and we are working towards increasing the number 

of award winners to 3,000 by fiscal year 2012. 

As we improve school meals to ensure they are promoting good health, we must 

improve other foods, sold in competition with school meals, as these foods can displace these more balanced meals and undermine healthy choices. Nutrition education, food service settings, and operational constraints, along with other aspects 

of the school environment, should also be strengthened. 

To sustain a food and nutrition environment that fosters children’s healthful behaviors, we need your help to support improvements in the nutritional content of 
11 

school meals to meet updated standards; changes in other foods available to ensure 

that all food sold at school support healthful diets and revisions to policies and practices in the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and the WIC Program 

to ensure that key childhood programs also support healthy eating. 

We know that healthy eating habits are established early in the lives of young 

children, and quality food and nutrition in child care and after school can be a 

sound, effective foundation. The CACFP provides healthful meals through preschool 

child care and also includes after school care programs, along with other community 

settings. Currently serving about 3.2 million children on an average day in child 

care homes and centers, CACFP supports the health and education of the children 

that participate in these programs, and enhances the ability of child care providers 

to ensure quality care. We have asked the IOM to recommend improvements to nutrition standards for CACFP just as they did for the school meal programs. We expect the expert panel to issue their findings this Fall. 

Finally, WIC continues to serve as both a supplemental nutrition program and as 

a gateway to the health care system. WIC provides supplemental foods to pregnant, 

postpartum and breastfeeding women, infants and children. WIC reaches nearly 9.1 

million people each month. About half of the infants in the United States participate 

and benefit from the WIC program. 

I am pleased to report that the new food packages now include fruits, vegetables 

and whole grains, and less fat, along with other changes to reflect the latest nutrition recommendations. Contracting with IOM to review and recommend changes to 

the WIC food packages proved invaluable in improving the supplemental foods offered under WIC. 

WIC offers a critical opportunity to intervene early to reduce the likelihood of 

childhood obesity. We know children who are breastfed during the first nine months 

of life are at reduced risk of childhood or adolescent obesity. Studies have found that 

the likelihood of obesity is 22 percent lower among children who were breastfed. The 

strongest effects were observed among adolescents, meaning that the obesity-reducing benefits of breastfeeding extend many years into a child’s life. 

Despite these health benefits, although most (74%) babies start out breastfeeding, 

within three months, two-thirds (67%) have already received formula or other supplements. By six months of age, only 43 percent are still breastfeeding at all, and 

less than one quarter (23 percent) are breastfed at least 12 months. 

While breastfeeding is not a viable alternative for all mothers and babies, it can 

be more widespread than it is today. WIC provides an opportunity to increase 

breastfeeding initiation and duration rates. Providing recognition and financial incentives to State agencies and clinics that support breastfeeding will complement 

Congress’ support of breastfeeding peer counseling in the FY 2010 appropriations. 

Given the reach of the Child Nutrition and WIC Programs and the substantial 

investment Congress has made to the national nutrition safety net, the tools to become an active part of the solution are within our grasp. Yet, absent a robust reauthorization bill, we cannot move forward. 

Schools need resources to improve the quality of school meals and to increase the 

number of needy children participating in the programs. USDA needs the authority 

to set nutrition standards for all food sold in schools. And we need funding to improve wellness activities in schools and in child care centers and to encourage 

breastfeeding in the WIC program. 

Challenges 

There are compelling reasons to act now. This reauthorization comes at a time 

of significant challenges. Addressing them boldly and decisively is critical to the future of our country. 

Our most fundamental challenge is a health crisis of the first order—the epidemic 

of obesity among our children. One in every three children and adolescents in the 

United States is overweight or obese, with particularly high rates among certain 

populations, such as Hispanic boys, African-American girls, and American Indian/ 

Native Alaskan children. This has a negative impact on children’s health and wellbeing today, and even more serious consequences for their future. 

Research shows that children and adolescents with this condition are more likely 

to be overweight or obese as adults. And that obesity increases health risks for coronary heart disease, Type 2 diabetes, cancer, stroke, and a range of other serious conditions—and causes an estimated 112,000 deaths per year in the United States. Experts forecast that one third of all children born in the year 2000 could develop diabetes during their lifetime. 

These devastating health impacts result in substantial economic costs. Excess 

weight is costly during childhood, estimated at $3 billion per year in direct medical 

costs, and far more costly in future years. Obese adults incur an estimated $1,429 
12 

more in annual medical expenses than their normal-weight peers. Overall, medical 

spending on adults attributed to obesity topped approximately $40 billion in 1998, 

and by 2008, increased to an estimated $147 billion. We cannot let these costs continue to grow at a time when we must reduce health care costs to remain competitive. Absenteeism and lost productivity at work are additional costs of obesity that 

our nation cannot afford. 

The second major challenge we face is the need to ensure that our children have 

access to the healthful, nutritious food they need to support educational achievement. As the members of this Committee know as well as anyone, a successful educational experience for every child is critical to our nation’s future. President Obama 

has said that what matters is what we do to lift up the next generation—and that 

few issues speak more directly to our long term success as a nation than the education we provide to our children. 

Yet we know that for too many families in our country, hunger remains a real 

problem. In over 500,000 families with children in 2008, one or more children simply did not get enough to eat—they had to cut the size of their meals, skip meals, 

or even go whole days without food at some time during the year. This costs us 

more, not to mention the suffering and deprivation of those families. Ask any teacher how students who fail to eat a healthy breakfast or lunch perform in class. Hungry kids don’t learn as well. In fact, the damage extends beyond the hungry children. We want and need our children to be fully prepared for a competitive world 

and global economy. We will not succeed if our children are not learning as they 

should because they are hungry, and cannot achieve their potential because they are 

unhealthy. 

Finally, the problem of poor nutrition among our children represents a challenge 

to our nation’s military readiness. As I noted previously, during World War II, the 

health effects of malnutrition were a common disqualifier for military service. Our 

leaders understood the importance of investing in good nutrition to ensure that the 

country would never want for healthy, strong young people to serve in uniform. And 

so, in 1946, President Harry Truman signed the National School Lunch Act, declaring that ‘‘in the long view, no nation is healthier than its children.’’ 

Today, the nutrition problems are different, but the impact on preparedness for 

the military remains. A recent report showed that 75 percent of adults age 17-24 

are not physically fit for military service. One of the top disqualifiers for service is 

obesity. Because of these troubling statistics, a coalition of retired generals and admirals has formed to advocate for a strong Child Nutrition reauthorization bill that 

ensures that the programs can address today’s nutrition issues as effectively as possible. I thank them for their leadership and welcome their efforts to promote this 

important legislative initiative. 

The Child Nutrition Programs can do more to address these challenges: 

• We are working to update school meals nutrition standards based on recommendations from the Institute of Medicine. We must use the opportunity of reauthorization to strengthen our work with schools to improve the content of the meals 

they serve in ways that make them appealing as well as nutritious. 

• We need to ensure that all food sold in school supports good nutrition and 

health by creating the statutory authority to set national standards for these foods. 

• We must ensure, simplify, and expand access to programs when and where children need them 

• And we must make physical activity a natural and compelling choice for our 

children, so that they can strengthen their bodies and develop good habits that can 

last a lifetime. 

So today, President Truman’s belief that a healthy nation depends on healthy 

children remains as true as ever. We must respond as past generations have before 

us to improve child nutrition. Our children deserve more and our country’s better 

and brighter future depends upon it. And with the reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Programs scheduled this year, now is the time to act boldly. 

Priorities 

For all of these reasons, we must take steps to streamline access, improve the 

quality of school meals, increase participation, and work to eliminate childhood hunger in this country. For many children in our programs, school lunch and breakfast 

represents the only healthy food that they eat all day. We must work to ensure access to nutrition assistance for children, when and where they need it, particularly 

during the ‘‘gap periods,’’ when we know children struggle to receive the nutrition 

they need—summer months, during breakfast, and in after-school environments. 

Bold action with reauthorization must include the following elements: 

1. Improving access to the school nutrition programs must be a priority. States 

and local communities need to be fully engaged as partners in our efforts to identify 
13 

innovative strategies to ending child hunger. We cannot rest while so many of our 

young children struggle with access to food, which is why I’m calling on Congress 

to provide tools to increase participation, streamline applications, and eliminate gap 

periods. Quite simply, we must do everything we can to ensure that eligible children 

have access to these critically important programs. I call on you to fund a new program of State Hunger Challenge Grants for States willing to take strides to reduce 

and eliminate hunger in their communities. With authorization and funding, we will 

provide competitive grants to Governors for them to implement creative and innovative approaches to eliminating hunger. We want States to be the laboratories for 

successful strategies and that means freeing them up to be creative and providing 

resources for innovative models that match program delivery with evaluation, so 

that we can learn what works and what does not. These steps will include policy 

modifications to existing nutrition programs, enhanced outreach efforts, improved 

coordination between nutrition assistance programs and family supportive services, 

such as emergency housing, child care, and family preservation services, counseling 

and support services, and work with community and non-profit organizations to coordinate services and resources. Competitive grants would be provided to States 

with comprehensive and innovative plans for reducing hunger, applications that target communities with higher prevalances of hunger, especially among children, and 

projects that reflect collaboration with a wide range of partners. 

In addition, we should offer grants to states and non-profit organizations to develop web-based or other systems to streamline the application process and expand 

efforts to enroll eligible students through direct certification. If a child already 

qualifies for other assistance programs, there is no reason why their parent should 

have to fill out one more application to qualify for school breakfast or lunch. Bonus 

payments should be offered to states and school districts that effectively use direct 

certification to enroll children who currently qualify but who are not participating. 

The object should be to ensure—particularly in communities where children are at 

high risk for hunger—that every child eats the food they need. I am also calling on 

Congress to provide USDA with the tools necessary to establish paperless application programs in school districts with very high rates of children with free and reduced price-eligible students. In these districts, the cost of paperwork and the risk 

of lost of forms far outweigh any benefits. We must ensure that communities across 

the country have access to these types of solutions in order to get more kids into 

the program and reduce the bureaucracy of filling out forms. Through these reforms, 

I believe that we will be able to increase participation in these programs by one million children in the next five years. 

2. Increasing financial support and expanding participation in School Breakfast 

is a vital part of reauthorization. I view breakfast as one of the critical gap periods 

when children struggle to access nutritious meals. On school days, almost two-thirds 

of children who participate in the lunch program do not participate in the school 

breakfast program. While School Lunch is served in around 100,000 schools, the 

breakfast program is only available in 88,000. A healthy breakfast is critically important to educational achievement. No child should go without fueling up at the 

beginning of the day. Innovative approaches like breakfast in the classroom have 

been shown to reduce stigma and improve participation rates. This reauthorization 

is an opportunity to reduce stigma and promote participation in the breakfast program. The Institute of Medicine’s recommendations show that the biggest gap between current Federal support and what will be needed to support healthy meals 

is for the breakfast program. I call on Congress to increase the reimbursement rate 

for school breakfasts and combine that support with USDA-purchased foods to give 

more children the option of a healthy breakfast. And, I call on K-12 organizations 

and States to work with USDA to aggressively promote the breakfast option and to 

ensure that policies and practices are in place to reduce stigma. 

3. Our efforts to combat hunger cannot end when the school bell rings on the last 

day of the school week or year. More children report going hungry during the summer—which is when we see a significant drop in participation in our programs. 

Working with local governments, nonprofit organizations and community groups, 

USDA must continue to help bridge the nutrition gap when school is out. We need 

to encourage more schools, community centers and organizations to provide meals 

during the summer, and to increase the number of days they make meals available. 

And we should expand the existing authority of the Child and Adult Care Food Program to all 50 states to provide after-school meals to at-risk kids. This important 

program currently provides additional nutrition assistance to eligible children in 14 

States—it is a successful and popular program and there is no reason it should be 

limited to only a handful of States. This reform will increase access to another 

140,000 school children. I commend Congress for providing $85 million in the in the 

fiscal year 2010 agriculture appropriations bill to test innovative methods to im-
14 

prove access to healthy foods during the summer. We have already awarded projects 

to two States—Arkansas and Mississippi—to test ways of increasing the number of 

sponsors, sites, and children served through the Summer Food Service Program 

(SFSP) with incentives to extend the duration of operations and funding to support 

improved enrichment activities. Next summer, we expect to award additional state 

projects. 

4. But no matter how many children we reach, we do them a disservice if we are 

not offering them meals that help them be their best. Reauthorization must substantially improve the nutritional quality of the meals being served to our children, 

which plays a central role in the First Lady’s effort to solve childhood obesity in a 

generation. The recent Institute of Medicine study commissioned by USDA sounded 

an alarm about the nutritional value of school meals. The study concluded that our 

children are eating too much sugar, salt, and fats and too few fruits, vegetables, 

whole grains, and low fat dairy products. This mix may help explain why one half 

of the calories consumed by children ages 6-11 in this country are ‘‘empty’’ calories. 

USDA is working as aggressively as possible to implement the Institute of Medicine 

recommendations to better align our meals with the Dietary Guidelines, but we also 

know that the improved foods will increase costs for local schools. The very same 

Institute of Medicine report showed that increases in reimbursement rates, training, 

school equipment, and technical assistance will be necessary to implement this 

package. This assistance is critically important if we expect schools and school food 

service professionals to successfully implement the new standards and our enhanced 

expectations for the program. 

That is why I am calling on Congress to improve meal quality by increasing reimbursements for schools that meet the new nutritional standards and providing funding for equipment upgrades and additional training. We must empower our schools 

to take important steps toward enhanced nutrition. Higher reimbursement rates, 

tied to performance, will help schools purchase the whole grains, fruits, vegetables, 

and low fat and fat-free dairy products that our children need to grow strong and 

healthy. At the same time, Congress should provide USDA with the tools we need 

to ensure that the reimbursements we are providing for schools are being used appropriately for the program, so that all kids have access to healthy meals. And, it 

is our responsibility to work together with schools to ensure they are serving the 

most nutritious meals possible. 

Recognizing that many schools do not have the equipment in place to improve 

food selections, our hope is that Congress will build upon the investments in equipment made by the American Recovery and Reinvestment Act and the FY10 appropriations act, and provide funding to improve school kitchens so schools can provide 

meals that meet the Dietary Guidelines and offer fresh fruits and vegetables. At the 

same time, we should create a credentialing program for school food service directors, and support school food service providers with resources for the critical training they need to do their jobs. 

5. The reauthorization effort should ensure that all foods served in schools are 

healthy and nutritious. A 2006 study showed that outside the cafeteria, children are 

three times more likely to be able to purchase cookies, cakes, pastries, and high fat 

salty snacks than fruits or vegetables. Foods served in vending machines, the a la 

carte line, and other school settings should not undermine our efforts to enhance 

the health of the school environment. That is why USDA must have the capacity 

to set standards for all foods sold in schools. It does not mean the end of vending 

machines in schools—it just means filling them with nutritious offerings to make 

a healthy choice the easy choice for our nation’s children. Though many in the 

media have portrayed this as an area of conflict, I will tell you that I have heard 

nothing but broad support for efforts to establish standards for food sold in schools. 

From food service professionals to the National PTA to the food industry, there is 

support for this authority, and it is an essential component of the reauthorization 

bill. 

6. We also believe that every lunchroom ought to double as a classroom—and that 

schools should be challenged to make meals a learning experience. That is why it 

is important for us to build on the step taken in the 2004 Reauthorization bill to 

establish school wellness policies in every school by strengthening the requirement 

and raising the standard. Schools should work in consultation with parents to develop and implement a strong wellness policy centered on healthy eating, nutrition 

education and physical activity. 

7. Making sure that parents and students have correct and complete nutritional 

information about foods being served in schools must be part of the reauthorization 

effort as well. With better information and simple assessments, parents will know 

what is available in their child’s cafeteria and can better assist their children in 

making the right nutritional choices. And, in addition to transparency, we also need 
15 

to work on being smarter about how we serve food: Steps as simple as putting the 

fresh fruit in a more prominent place in the cafeteria can help kids eat healthier. 

And we should promote new approaches based on the most recent research. 

8. Strengthening the link between local farmers and school cafeterias must also 

remain a priority in this legislation. Supporting farm-to-school programs will increase the amount of produce available to cafeterias and help to support local farmers by establishing regular, institutional buyers. Many schools have found farm-toschool programs an important component of nutrition education and I call on education leaders and our State and local partners to embrace farm to cafeteria programs and school gardens. 

9. Guaranteeing the integrity of the nutrition programs remains central to a credible reauthorization. We should fund periodic studies to eliminate erroneous payments in the meals programs. Support for new technology will help schools avoid 

inaccuracies in eligibility determinations, and maintain the confidence that our help 

is provided to those who truly need it. 

In his first year in office, President Obama pulled us back from the brink of the 

greatest economic crisis since the Great Depression and worked to lay a new foundation for economic growth. He identified three key strategies to building that lasting 

prosperity: innovation, investment, and education. All three strategies require the 

next generation to be the healthiest and best educated in our history. The health 

of our nation—of our economy, our communities, and our national security—depends 

on the health of our children. We will not succeed if our children are not learning 

as they should because they are hungry, and cannot achieve their dreams because 

they are unhealthy. 

When our future was on the line after World War II, our nation’s leaders understood the importance of well-fed and healthy youngsters. We would do well to remember that lesson today, and to act on it once again. 

Again, I would like to thank the Committee for the opportunity to appear before 

you this morning to discuss the reauthorization of the USDA’s Child Nutrition Programs and I look forward to answering any questions that you may have. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much, Mr. Secretary, and 

certainly thank you so much for your leadership on these issues of 

child nutrition and the health of our children. 

As one who was pretty deeply involved in the health care debate, 

no matter whether I met with doctors or insurance companies or 

academics on the issue of our national health status, the question 

of childhood obesity, the question of how that then moves to adult 

onset illnesses, both in children and later in those children as 

adults, if they don’t adopt a healthier eating pattern, as a major 

driver of health care costs was just explained over and over and 

over and again. 

And you see some of the larger health organizations struggling, 

including corporations, trying to get people to adopt a wellness policy, a healthy lifestyle policy, a dietary policy, an exercise regime, 

all of those things combined together, because we now know—and 

whether it is the business community or families trying to push— 

that those are the drivers, the big drivers in that cost. 

And yet we have the—as you point out—the ability to—with 

these children in this lunch program to not only feed them better 

and healthier, but also to give them information so they will understand what it means to them as they grow up and to their families. 

One of the questions I wanted to raise with you is, obviously, we 

are trying to use all our resources as best we possibly can. And as 

we go through and we look at the various programs that are on 

campus at any given time, between free and reduced-price lunches 

and paid meals and a la carte services and how costs get apportioned out, I just would like you to talk a little bit—that you have 

looked at that, USDA has looked at the relationship between paid 

meals and subsidized meals, and what you can tell us about that. 
16 

Because I think there is a growing concern that perhaps the a la 

carte line and the paid meals are really infringing upon some of the 

costs that we would use for the free and reduced price meals. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, Mr. Chairman, first of all, let me acknowledge the obvious, which is that schools are struggling because of state and local budgets and their own budgets. And so oftentimes what you see is the food budget, obviously, being in place 

where they look to either gain resources or to increase opportunities. 

We have taken a look at the issue of paid meals and recognizing 

the importance of making sure that every youngster has a fair 

shake. What we found is that about 80 percent of our reimbursement rate is the cost of a paid meal. 

In other words, school districts put out about 80 percent of what 

we reimburse for a meal for paid meals, which would suggest to us 

that there is some degree of subsidization between what we are 

providing to the free and reduced lunch program and what is being 

provided generally on the paid meal side. 

And, you know, that raises the question that you all will have 

to answer, in terms of whether or not that is a fair allocation of 

resources and whether that is appropriate. If you decide that there 

needs to be a rebalancing of this, obviously, I think you will take 

a look at trying to do this over a long period of time so that whatever adjustments are made are reasonable and effective and fair. 

But right now, there is about a 20 percent subsidization that takes 

place. 

Chairman MILLER. That study was done over what population? 

Or was that looking at a number of different districts or states 

or—— 

Secretary VILSACK. It was an effort to basically get a real sense 

around the country of how school districts are—I mean, we are 

dealing with over 100,000 school districts, so everyone has a slightly different approach. But we tried to get some general recognition 

of the extent of this, and this is what we came up with from the 

study and review. 

And I think it is important also, in terms of the a la carte line, 

that that subsidy gives the school district a lot of flexibility, in 

terms of what it does with that a la carte line and in terms of 

whether or not there are more appropriate choices or that, for that 

matter, choices that aren’t as appropriate. 

And one of the things we want to do is make sure that there is 

consistency in what is being supplied in the a la carte lines, in the 

vending machines, and in the school lunch program so that there 

is no encouragement of a less nutritious snack or a less nutritious 

meal. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. I think that that is helpful. So 

you think that that was a fair look across the country? 

Secretary VILSACK. Yes, it was a national sample that spanned 

the 2005-2006 school year. 

Chairman MILLER. Just quickly, a local concern. In my area, we 

still—I have a pretty suburban area, but we still have a significant 

number of small farmers. And they are really, I think, working now 

with the University of California at Davis, but trying to figure out 
17 

how they can get their products that are grown locally into the 

local programs. 

We talk about that in this legislation. We try to encourage that. 

But I think it is not just my area. As I travel around, I see more 

and more interest in this and connecting young people with how 

food is produced, but also providing some additional market space 

for those local farms. 

What is your department doing here on—— 

Secretary VILSACK. Mr. Chairman, we have a program called 

Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food. It is an effort to try to reconnect people with agriculture of all sizes, both smaller commercial 

operations, as well as production agricultural operations. 

And part of that program is to create tactical teams. We call 

them tactical teams. There are 15 of them right now, and we are 

having these teams go out to 15 different school districts and work 

with them to encourage them to have a better understanding of 

what is grown and raised in their area. 

We find that there are schools that are interested in potentially 

linking up with local producers, but don’t know who they are, don’t 

know where they are, don’t know what they produce, and don’t 

know how to go about creating the quantity necessary to be able 

to do this on a regular, consistent basis. We are providing that kind 

of assistance and help. 

We are also using our rural development resources to the extent 

that we can to create the supply chain infrastructure—the slaughtering houses, the warehousing, the cold storage facilities—that are 

necessary to congregate enough product so schools, as I say, have 

a consistent supply. 

This is extremely important, because the rest of the country has 

got to reconnect with what farmers and ranchers do for them every 

single day. We have an extraordinary story here of success in agriculture that is often underappreciated, and it gives all the rest of 

us tremendous flexibility in terms of our take-home pay, because 

we spend so little for food than other developed nations and developing nations. 

So this is extremely important, not only to improve the quality 

of the meals, but also to reconnect people with their food supply. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much. 

Mr. Kline? 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, thank you again for being with us today. It is 

sometimes confusing to people across America and perhaps even us 

here—we are the Education Committee, and we have got the Secretary of Agriculture here, and so there are a lot of complicated 

ways we try to get at things. 

One thing that is not really complicated is we do have solid bipartisan agreement that these child nutrition programs are not 

only worthwhile, they are important, they are essential. 

But as I said in my opening remarks, there are concerns on both 

sides of the aisle, by many members of Congress, and I think by 

the American people that we don’t have enough money to do everything we want to do. 

And so I have been hearing from the folks in the Minnesota 

Farm Bureau, for example, and most of them have kids. They are 
18 

living on farms. They are very concerned about these programs. 

They are interested in farm to school and all of that. 

But they are looking at suggesting out of the Senate that in 

order to pay for this, you take $2.5 billion out of the Environmental 

Quality Incentive Program, EQIP, and they are not happy about 

that. 

That is something in your jurisdiction, as well. Have you got any 

thoughts about that as a way to pay for this? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, Representative, this is—you know, it is 

very much like asking me which of my two sons I love the most. 

Mr. KLINE. Exactly. 

Secretary VILSACK. And these are difficult issues. But let me say 

on the conservation side that I think it is important for us to be 

able to adequately fund conservation, but to do it in a way where 

we can justify to the taxpayers that resources are being spent appropriately and wisely. 

I am thinking of the audit that was recently done of NRCS suggesting that perhaps we would sort of outpace the capacity of the 

personnel at NRCS to adequately monitor and adequately provide 

oversight in some of these programs. So what we are trying to do 

is match up appropriately the personnel that we have and the capacity that we have to do things right in terms of conservation. 

Having said that, you know, we are obviously anxious and interested in preserving as many of those dollars as we can. There may 

be other areas in our budget which I am more than happy to sit 

down and visit with folks about. There may be other places in the 

large federal budget that might be available. 

The bottom line from my perspective is that I can’t think of anything more important than getting this done this year. So if we 

have got to figure something out within our budget, if we are given 

a target, a directive from Congress, we are more than happy to assist in trying to figure out how this gets paid. 

This is extremely important. And I don’t underestimate the difficulties of your job here. And I absolutely understand the whole 

issue of deficits. 

I was a governor. I dealt with balanced budgets for 8 consecutive 

years. It is not easy to do. 

Having said that, if we don’t do this, this year, this is not going 

to get any easier. It is going to get much, much tougher in the future, and there will be 1 more year of delay in terms of improving 

the quality and nutritional value of what we are feeding our children. 

The Institute of Medicine study was a wake-up call for me, Representative. I mean, it was a wake-up call suggesting that we are 

not doing right by our kids. 

So I am committed to finding the resources wherever that might 

be and making sure that we do it in a fair and equitable and balanced way. 

Mr. KLINE. So I think what I heard out of that is that taking the 

$2.5 billion from EQIP is probably okay with you. Is that right? 

Secretary VILSACK. I don’t think—I think it would not be fair to 

say it is okay, because there may be—you know, $2.5 billion, $1 billion, $500 million, $250 million, not from EQIP, from some other 

program, I think the point of this is, you give us a target, you basi-
19 

cally say to us this is the target that we have to—we have to meet 

in order to get this bill through the process, and we will work with 

you to find that resource. 

Mr. KLINE. Actually, I agree with that, and that is the point. We 

need to figure out what that target is—right now, it looks to be 

close to $8 billion—and make those decisions now before we push 

this legislation through out of this committee and onto the floor. 

We need to make those decisions. 

And a lot of it is going to come back on your committee—I mean, 

on your department. There is just no question about this. This is 

a suggested $2.5 billion. You are suggesting maybe there are other 

places inside of Ag where we ought to be looking for ways to pay 

for this bill. 

And it is going to be tough for all of us. I just think we need to 

be doing it now and making those tough decisions now and not 

pushing this thing through unpaid for. 

Secretary VILSACK. Here is one concern I have about that. This 

was some months ago. There was another proposal that we had 

where we offered up a series of offsets from our budget to try to 

fund it. What happened was, the proposal that was beneficial to 

USDA didn’t get passed through the Congress, but the offset was 

taken for something else. 

So with due respect, Representative, let’s make a deal here. 

Mr. KLINE. Let’s make a deal. [Laughter.] 

Secretary VILSACK. We get this through the committee, we get it 

on the floor, we will help you find the resource. 

Mr. KLINE. All right. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. I thank you. 

Mr. Courtney? 

Mr. COURTNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here today. 

First of all, I just want to say that, you know, this committee has 

established its credibility in terms of pay-fors, pay-as-you-go budgeting. When we passed the Student Aid and Fiscal Responsibility 

Act, about $700 billion in new financing for Pell Grants, and for 

helping students with lower interest rates, we paid for every penny 

of it by reducing wasteful spending, in terms of bank loan origination fees. 

So I agree with Mr. Kline that this has got to be a paid-for measure. Under our PAYGO rules, it has to be. And I think everybody 

on this side of the aisle certainly recognizes that and acknowledges 

that. 

But on the other hand, we also have to make sure that we get 

the policy right. We have an epidemic of obesity in this country. 

The military’s advice about readiness, in terms of young people for 

our—and I serve on the Armed Services Committee—is clearly an 

indication that we are not getting it right now and we have to 

make necessary changes. 

One comment that you made regarding beverages during your 

opening remarks is that low-fat milk is something that your department recognizes as a component of trying to get to a balanced, 

healthy meal for kids that—in breakfast and lunch. 
20 

And I was wondering if you could comment on that. We are obviously seeing in the last 20 years, it is exactly the same time that 

obesity rates are climbing, that the consumption of soda by young 

teenagers is now twice as much as milk, low-fat milk in schools. 

It was reversed approximately 20 years ago. And I just wonder if 

you could maybe embellish a little bit on those comments. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, you know, I think, Representative, it is 

important for us to distinguish between, as they say, everyday 

foods and sometimes foods. And I think basically milk, low-fat milk 

is an everyday food. It is nutritionally dense, which means that you 

get more bang for your caloric buck, and I think it is important for 

us to continue to look for ways in which we can make sure that 

our calorie intake is appropriate and that we get the kind of nutrition we need from calories. 

The problem with some of our school programs is that there are 

a lot of empty calories associated with what is available to youngsters, and therefore it adds to the obesity issue, and it doesn’t necessarily give them the kind of energy that they need to be able to 

be good students. 

At the same time, we also want these youngsters to be physically 

active. That requires strong bones. It requires nutrition that matters. And so low-fat milk is one way of us, together with whole 

grains, fruits and vegetables, that we can improve these programs. 

We are asking for the capacity to provide consistency in the 

schools by basically taking a look at what is available in the vending machines and what is available on the a la carte line and make 

sure that we are sending the right set of messages. 

If families want pop or soda to be available to their youngsters 

as a treat, there is no problem with that. But on a day-to-day regular basis, on an everyday basis, we want to make sure that they 

get adequate supplies of wholesome, nutritious food. And low-fat 

dairy is certainly one of the ways to do that. 

Mr. COURTNEY. Well, thank you. And I think, you know, Mr. Miller’s comment about trying to strengthen the farm to cafeteria connection with school lunches, I mean, obviously the dairy component 

is a place that, from Maine to California, you can, I think, find almost school district that opportunity. 

In addition, I just would note that a number of us have a 

Healthy Milk and Dairy Choices in Schools Act, which would encourage a low-fat cheese meals, pizza, which obviously is, you 

know, number one, I think, across the board, as a way, again, of 

trying to introduce healthy consumption of dairy, again, on a lowfat basis. And hopefully you will take a look at that as one of the 

changes we can maybe make to this legislation. 

Lastly, I just wanted to say, the requirement for eligibility, the 

test which is now 50 percent eligibility for school lunch, the bill 

proposes lowering that to 40 percent in rural areas. I would just 

say, from a state like Connecticut, you know, we would like to, you 

know, see if we can get involved in that 40 percent threshold, as 

well, because there are a lot of school districts that are being excluded right now with that 50 percent threshold, which in historic 

terms is a higher standard and excludes more kids than certainly 

in the past. And, again, I hope that is a piece that we can work 

with the department to try and make more across the board. 
21 

And with that, I would yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Castle? 

Mr. CASTLE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And thank you, Mr. Secretary, for being here and for your wisdom in this area. And I agree with you on almost all of what you 

are saying. 

But I have one problem I would like to ask you about. I don’t 

know, you know, what your knowledge in the area is, but in Delaware, in my schools, I have gone to the schools. I remember one 

particular school I went to, and they were very proud of how they 

were meeting all the nutritional standards, et cetera. 

And then at the end of the food line, they had a series of other 

choices that were not particularly nutritional, shall we say. And 

the kids see—and I just watched it for a while, and the kids 

seemed to be taking from that. 

My question to you is not what is in this bill and not what you 

necessarily enforce in the Department of Agriculture, but how it is 

carried out in the schools. We have good nutritional people in Delaware and that kind of thing, but my impression is—and not just 

the vending machines, but even in the cafeteria lines there are offerings that are not as healthy as is in this legislation or as you 

would advocate or as any health nutritionist would advocate. 

Can you tell me what oversight you have—and I am not saying 

we have to demand what people serve or whatever—what oversight 

you have or what guidance you have, as far as schools are concerned, in terms of what they are actually serving and what children are actually eating in the schools. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, Congressman, we want to establish a 

set of standard that are consistent with the Institute of Medicine 

study so that that gives school districts an understanding and appreciation for precisely what they need to be focused on, which is 

making sure that these calories count, and making sure, as I have 

said before, that they change the mix of what is available. 

We also think that this bill provides additional resources for 

training and equipment. Oftentimes, schools want to do the right 

thing, but because of budget cuts in the past or because of decisions 

made in the past, they may not have the equipment necessary to 

provide steamed vegetables, for example, but they may have fryers 

that makes French fries more readily available, that type of thing. 

And we also want to make sure that youngsters and parents 

have better information about what is actually being served. I 

mean, our view is that if you educate parents and you educate 

youngsters about the choices that they have to make that they are 

going to make the right set of choices more times than not and that 

they are going to demand and request of the school board and of 

the school administrators that there be a better mix or better, more 

appropriate menu for youngsters. 

Right now, in some schools, you just don’t know how many calories you are consuming. And I think youngsters are becoming 

much more astute to this, and there has been a lot of discussion 

because of the First Lady’s Let’s Move initiative a lot of conversation nationally about this. 
22 

We have got, as you will see in your next panel, major chefs, personalities who are very engaged in food—engaging themselves in 

local school districts to try to help educate. 

And then, finally, we want to make sure that folks have information available to them that will help them improve the choices they 

make, in terms of menus. We can do a much better job of providing 

information to schools about how to basically stretch that food dollar, to come up with innovative and creative ways to make vegetables and fruits and so forth delicious and appealing. 

And so there are a whole series of things that we can do to significantly improve, by providing standards, by providing equipment 

assistance, by providing training, by providing more information to 

children and parents. 

Mr. CASTLE. But do your—I don’t know if agents are the right 

word—but either people who work for your department or others 

have any oversight of what is actually happening in the schools? 

Or has that all become local, once they get their equipment and 

they get their dollars or whatever it may be, or does—I mean, who 

is actually monitoring to see if the things that we are talking about 

and we put in the legislation that we passed 6 years ago and we 

are going to pass again are actually occurring? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, we have within our food and nutrition 

service the capacity to check and make sure that folks are living 

up to the standards. You know, obviously, there are over 100,000 

school districts, which means that there are many, many, many different places that have to be looked at. 

So I think the candid answer is that we have got to rely heavily 

not just on our own resources, but on the capacity of local school 

administrators to understand the significance of this and the importance of it. 

Candidly, I think food for many was a revenue source, and we 

need to change that mindset a bit to, hey, this is an important part 

of the school day. You have got to do it right if you want your 

youngsters to perform well. 

I mean, if we are going to hold people accountable for results, 

then nutrition is part of what we should be holding them accountable for. And by providing parents more information—I will tell 

you—I don’t know about your experiences—but as I travel and talk 

to parents, they are very engaged in this issue. There is an understanding, a basic understanding we have got to do a better job. 

Mr. CASTLE. Well, my time is up. 

Chairman MILLER. Mr. Loebsack? 

Mr. CASTLE. I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

And first of all, I did want to thank the chairman for working 

with me to make sure that we incorporate some provisions into this 

bill that I have offered on direct certification and expanding access 

to nutrition programs. So I really do appreciate that, Mr. Chairman, for your incorporation of those provisions into the bill. 

And, Mr. Secretary, it is still hard for me not to think of you as 

my governor. It is really wonderful to see you here today. I really 

appreciate all the great work you are doing on this. 
23 

I do want to also at the outset just talk a little bit about the fiscal issue. We are all concerned, obviously, at the moment about 

whether we can pay for this and how we are going to pay for this. 

But I think all too often in this body we think in short term. We 

have a short-term perspective as politicians, especially trying to get 

re-elected every 2 years. 

We have to think, obviously, right now, about the fiscal issues 

that are confronting this, but I think that, when you talk about 

and others talk about how this is a long-term issue, especially as 

it relates to chronic diseases, preventing chronic diseases, when we 

talk about health care costs, long-term health care costs, I think it 

is really critical that we think not in the short term, and I think 

that is what you are advocating today, as well. 

This is an investment that we can make in the short term so 

that we can actually save a lot of money, I think, in the long term 

by preventing the development of chronic diseases, so it is a health 

care issue, and it is a fiscal issue, but not just in the short term— 

in the long term, as well. 

This is an issue near and dear to my heart, first of all, in terms 

of access, because as somebody who grew up in poverty myself, I 

am very determined to make sure that all those kids out there in 

America who deserve to be in this program get into this program. 

That is why I offered the direct certification legislation. 

So it is very important to me, and I have gone around and talked 

to a number of folks and a number of schools in my district over 

the course of this spring and into the summer. 

And I think there is so much that we can do here. You have already talked about, sort of, how complex this problem is and this 

issue is. 

If you would just elaborate a little bit more, this is really the 

only issue that I want to discuss with you today, although it may 

take the form of a follow-up, we will see. But you talked about the 

role of agriculture, and both traditional and non-traditional. 

A lot of my friends are involved in community-supported agriculture in Iowa. And you are very aware of what that program is. 

That is part of the farm-to-school effort or could be part of the 

farm-to-school effort. 

Can you talk to us, elaborate a little bit about traditional, as well 

as non-traditional agriculture, and the contributions that those two 

sectors can make to making sure that we have good, quality food 

in our schools? 

Secretary VILSACK. Sure. Well, I mean, I think it is important to 

recognize that all sides of agriculture contribute. There are—I am 

just thinking of your congressional district, of which I am quite familiar, because my home area is there. 

I mean, there are turkey producers, for example, in your district, 

in your congressional district. There is no reason in the world why 

those producers can’t be providing lean, low-fat protein for school 

lunch programs. 

What we may need is to make sure that there is a supply chain 

available. We may make sure that—need to make sure that school 

districts that are maybe 50 miles away from those producers understand and appreciate that turkeys are being raised in Henry 
24 

County, Iowa, in the southeastern part of the state of Iowa. They 

may not know that. 

The same thing may be true for pork, opportunities there for production agriculture to participate, but we need to make the connection. People just aren’t thinking about that. And we need to make 

sure that we have, as I say, the supply chain. 

On the other hand, you have got folks who are transitioning 

some of their property to orchards, to vegetable production systems. 

They, too, need to be connected. And there I think the key is to 

make sure that there is sufficient numbers of them so that school 

districts have some predictability and consistency that they can 

rely on. 

I think the benefit that they currently have under the system is 

that they can order fruits and vegetables. They may travel 1,000 

miles to get to them, but they know that they will always have a 

supply. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. That is right. 

Secretary VILSACK. And here, the growing season—depending 

upon the growing season—there may be some limitations. But, 

again, consistency is important. 

And then making sure that the safety issues are addressed, so 

it is about setting up a system and an infrastructure which we are 

prepared to do and anxious to do. We want to reconnect. 

It is also—as the chairman indicated—encouraging schools to 

have their own gardens. These are tremendous learning experiences and opportunities. I mean, it is amazing what a science 

teacher, a math teacher, an environmental teacher can do with a 

small garden, and it is amazing to see children’s reaction when 

that tomato occurs or when that green bean is picked or that pea 

is consumed, and they see it in the lunch line. They have a sense 

of pride and ownership. 

So there are a multitude of ways in which we can do this and 

should be doing it. And if we do it right, all parts of agriculture 

can be connected and benefit. And most importantly of all, then the 

rest of us can better understand and appreciate exactly what our 

farmers and ranchers do, whether they are small commercial operations or very, very large production agriculture operations, they 

are providing something extraordinary to us. 

And, you know, candidly, they are very underappreciated, in my 

view, in this country. 

Mr. LOEBSACK. Thank you so much. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. 

And thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Congresswoman Biggert? 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

And, Mr. Secretary, thank you for being here. One thing that is 

very important to me and I think goes along with the nutrition— 

and I think there is something in this bill to complement the nutrition—and that is physical education. 

And I come from Illinois, which is the only state that mandates 

P.E. every day. And I think all of the people from the other states 

are amazed at that, but I have continued to push for that since I 

was in the state legislature, because I think it has to go hand in 

hand with the nutrition, if we are going to solve this problem. 
25 

But my question really is about the—is not about that, but that 

is just my commercial. 

In your estimation, about how many schools would be required 

to change their menus to comply with these new standards? I know 

I have gone into my schools, too, and they have really been working 

hard to provide the nutrition, but then they will have kind of that 

backup of probably low-nutrition calories and foods that the kids 

will pick up because they won’t try the others. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, I think, first of all, if I can respond to 

your commercial, I think you are absolutely right. I think people 

would be surprised how few schools actually have any kind of recess or physical education component on a regular basis, and that 

is important. 

It is one of the reasons why we have teamed up with the NFL 

and the Dairy Council to the Fuel Up to Play 60 program, to get 

kids outdoors and active for 60 minutes a day. 

I think it is fair to say that every school will be impacted by this 

legislation and about what we are trying to do here. Every school 

will be challenged to re-think what they are doing and how they 

are doing it. 

For some schools, it may be a very small adjustment. For some 

schools, it may be a fairly significant shift. But we want to be there 

to be of help and assistance in making that shift. 

Again, it is important for all the reasons we have talked about 

before. I mean, educational achievement, I will tell you, personally 

I know what it is like when you are overweight and you are in a 

school and you are made fun of. I mean, that was my early life, 

and I—you know, I didn’t perform as well. 

You know, I have told this story before. I can remember when 

my fourth-grade teacher accused me of not being able to do a math 

problem because I was fat. I mean, that still sticks with me today, 

and that is quite a few years ago, right? 

So this is really important for every school to understand the significance of this period of time in the school day, and I think, you 

know, we sort of ignored this for a long time. And fortunately, as 

a result of your work and as a result of the First Lady’s work and 

of a lot of other people, we are finally putting the focus back on 

this important time during the school day. So I think every school 

is going to be impacted by this. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. 

Then, you know, as a former school board president, I was—I 

have always been a fierce defender of local control. And if the bill 

passes, how will you ensure the flexibility to provide meals based 

on local tastes and preferences? 

For example, years and years ago, I volunteered for the Head 

Start program one summer. It was the first year of the program. 

And I was in an area in Chicago that was completely Hispanic, and 

I can remember that they would bring in the food for the kids, and 

it had, you know, nothing to do with their culture. 

And so for a week, the food would be there, and the kids wouldn’t 

eat it. I mean, they were afraid to eat it or whatever, but finally, 

after a week, they said, ‘‘Well, this is silly,’’ and they brought in 

food that was part of their culture. 
26 

So will these standards focus on, you know, just—will they have 

the flexibility for the cultures? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, I think they will. In fact, I am confident 

that they will. 

For example, when we say more fruits and vegetables, while it 

would be terrific if every school district all year round had access 

to fresh fruits and vegetables, the reality is that there are many 

school districts where that won’t be the case because of weather. 

And so we don’t preclude frozen fruits, frozen vegetables from 

being used or canned fruits and vegetables. The point of this is getting that back into the mix. 

I don’t think we are so prescriptive that local tastes, local culture 

would be ignored. In fact, we would hope that they would be integrated in the education component of this. 

I mean, every culture has wonderful food. And the diversity of 

it is what makes this really exciting. And every culture has the capacity to provide nutritious meals consistent with the culture, so I 

don’t think this is about prescribing that you have to eat, you 

know, so many items from a list of things. It is basically, here are 

the standards from a caloric standpoint and from a—you need more 

fruits and vegetables and whole grains. How you get that mix is 

going to be up to you. 

Mrs. BIGGERT. Thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Kucinich? 

Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

Secretary Vilsack, thank you for your commitment and for the 

chairman’s—I want to thank the chairman for his commitment in 

this very important socioeconomic issue and health issue. 

We know that the Centers for Disease Control has estimated 

that one-third of children are obese or overweight. And we also 

know that, according to the American Public Health Association, 

that at current obesity rates, obesity will add nearly $344 billion 

to the nation’s annual health cost by 2018. 

Now, Franklin said a penny saved is a penny earned, while billions saved would be billions earned when we look at a very aggressive effort at targeting the root causes of childhood obesity. 

And, Mr. Chairman, I ask unanimous consent to include the following scholarly articles in support of this legislation. The first is 

‘‘Crisis in the Marketplace: How Food Marketing Contributes to 

Childhood Obesity and What Can Be Done About It.’’ This reviews 

scientific literature that documents food marketing to children is 

massive. It expands in number of venues, such as product placement, videogames, the Internet, cell phones. It is composed almost 

entirely of messages for nutrient-poor, calorie-dense foods and having harmful effects. 

I ask unanimous consent to submit that. 

Chairman MILLER. Without objection, that will be part of the file 

of this hearing. Thank you. 

[The information may be accessed at the following Internet address:] 
27 

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/20100701hearingarticle2.pdf 

Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you. From the International Journal of Behavioral Nutrition and Physical Activity, a research article on television viewing, computer use, obesity, and adiposity in U.S. preschool children. It says that, in U.S. preschool children, 2 hours a 

day of TV or video is associated with a higher risk of being overweight or at risk for overweight and higher adiposity. 

There is another—without objection, Mr. Chairman, if that could 

be in—another one, television viewing, fast food consumption, and 

children’s obesity, speaks to a number of studies that have examined the association between children’s hour TV viewing or the fast 

food consumption and childhood obesity. And it says the government should encourage the food industry to limit TV advertising 

with less healthy food items or junk foods targeted to children. 

Finally, a scholarly article on fast food restaurant advertising on 

television and its influence on childhood obesity. It cites the 1997 

National Longitudinal Survey of youth to estimate the effects of 

television fast foot advertising on children and adolescents with respect to being overweight. It says a ban on these ads would reduce 

the number of overweight children ages 3 to 11, and a fixed population by 18 percent would reduce the number of oversight adolescents ages 12 to 18 by 14 percent. 

It says the elimination of tax deductibility of this type of advertising would produce smaller declines of between 5 percent and 7 

percent in these outcomes. These are all the UC matters, Mr. 

Chairman. 

We are aware, Mr. Secretary—and I know you have worked 

closely with the First Lady in the announcement of the White 

House Task Force on Childhood Obesity and the report to the 

President—that pointed out that food and beverage advertising to 

children is a big business and is a primary contributor to childhood 

obesity and calls for a shift away from marketing unhealthy foods 

to children. 

The Institute of Medicine in 2004 estimated that approximately 

$10 billion was spent on food advertising directed at children. So 

you have the federal government actually helping to contribute to 

this preying on children by granting a tax write-off for expenses associated with this advertising. 

And I know so much of this discussion is going to come down to 

budget issues. And we know that marketers and advertisers spend 

billions of dollars a year to research the developmental 

vulnerabilities of children, to exploit those vulnerabilities, and they 

do it because it is extraordinarily profitable for them to do so. 

So, Mr. Secretary, do you think it is fair that taxpayers should 

subsidize that marketing and advertising like they are now? And 

I would ask if you would be congenial to studying H.R. 4310, which 

actually amends the IRS code to protect children’s health by denying any deduction for advertising and marketing directed at children to promote the consumption of food at fast food restaurants 

or foods that are poor nutritional quality and to re-channel that 

money—it could be as much as $10 billion—into paying for this 

program? 

Mr. Secretary? 
28 

Secretary VILSACK. Representative, in terms of the advertising 

issue, our focus has been working with the Federal Trade Commission to basically figure out how to better educate the marketplace 

and better educate all of us about what is appropriate in terms of 

advertising, what is appropriate in terms of directing information 

to youngsters. 

I mean, our focus here has been primarily on an education component. We are working, for example, with ‘‘Sesame Street’’ and the 

workshop to focus on early childhood and young parents, to get 

them a textbook, if you will, or a manual for how they might be 

able to make better decisions for their children with better information. It is in both English and Spanish. It was distributed to 3 

million WIC mothers. 

That is the kind of thing that we are focused on. We are focused 

on making sure that we use PSAs to focus on the dietary guidelines 

that we are in the process of reviewing. And by the end of this 

year, we will probably have revisions to those. We will be aggressively promoting that through the media. 

We are working on making sure that we use our SNAP-Ed program to, again, better educate parents, particularly parents who 

are in that program, of how they might be able to do a better job 

of stretching their dollar. 

So the focus for us is on education. I honestly have not had a 

chance to look at your bill. I would be more than happy to look at 

it. And it probably wouldn’t be appropriate for me to comment on 

it without looking at it, but I will tell you that we are focused on 

this issue, at least from the standpoint of an educational component of it. 

Mr. KUCINICH. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. I look forward to 

working with you to find the money to fund this program. 

Chairman MILLER. The gentleman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Guthrie? 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary. This may get a little bit off the subject, but it is tied to it. And it is tied. It is a different committee’s 

jurisdiction, but the issue we are looking at is kids—and I like 

what the chairman said, was we have to educate kids, because 

when we educate kids, they got their parents—picked on their parents for smoking and things like that, and that is perfect. 

The problem is—or bigger problem, after they leave school, they 

are with their parents. You know, it is—and a lot of us have philosophical problems with trying to tell parents how to raise their 

kids. 

But the one thing that your department does do that we have 

spent taxpayer money on—I always say, if you take the dollar, then 

you should take the implications of it—is with the food stamp program. And I paid my way through—well, high school, I didn’t pay 

my way through high school, but summer college, before I went to 

military, working in grocery stores, and back then you had the old 

paper dollar, so you really couldn’t put a lot of restrictions on food 

stamp purchases, because it would just be difficult for the retailer 

to do. 

But now with the cards and the swiping and so forth, is there 

talk about—when I was—I mean, you would see sugar drinks, you 
29 

would see potato chips, you would see things bought with food 

stamps that would go home for the kids to eat and the families to 

eat, where we could make them have fresh vegetables, fresh—you 

know, I am not saying you don’t do, you know, canned corn, but 

tying more nutritional value to the food stamp program that would 

help these kids when they go home? Because not every reduced 

lunch has food stamps. I know that. But some of them do. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, part of the challenge is, even though we 

have got electronic benefit cards available to many of the SNAP recipients, and even though we are trying to encourage them to use 

them at farmer’s markets to access fruits and vegetables, the problem is that there are over 300,000 items in grocery stores across 

the country, and another 12,000 new items are introduced every 

single year in grocery stores. 

I mean, you used to be able to go to the store and get a box of 

Triscuits and that is what you got was a box of Triscuits. Well, now 

there are 48 varieties of Triscuits. And so there is an operational 

issue here. 

Secondly, there is no indication that even if you were to create 

some kind of system, and even if it were somehow feasible to do 

it, that that would necessarily result in those items not being purchased. It is possible that the small amount of discretionary income 

that those folks have would be used for those purposes. 

And then, finally, how do you distinguish between the family 

that understands that these are treats and special occasion foods 

and those who don’t? I mean, I think—to your point, I don’t think 

it is—I think if we educate, we have to trust that people will make 

the right set of decisions for their family and for their children. 

You know, I don’t know of very many parents who don’t really 

at the end of the day want to make what is the right set of decisions for their children. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. Oh, I agree. And I appreciate the difficulty of it. 

I don’t think that is the problem. 

But even though they would—and I think they should buy, if 

they choose with discretionary income, snacks, and the kids should 

have snacks. You said it perfectly. You said everyday food versus 

sometime food, and I think sometime food is fine for some time, you 

know, as you said. 

But they could still do that with discretionary. But if they were 

allotted so much money and only could buy fresh fruits—and I 

know the difficulty of—— 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, let me say what we are—— 

Mr. GUTHRIE [continuing]. And that they would bring those 

home, because that is what they would be able to buy. 

Secretary VILSACK. Let me say what we are trying to do, which 

is to focus on an incentive-driven program. We are taking—by virtue of the farm bill, we are taking resources this year and we are 

challenging states to come up with point-of-sale incentives to encourage fruits and vegetables, so that when you swipe the card and 

you are buying a head of cauliflower, instead of it being $1, which 

is what the grocer will get for that cauliflower, your card only credits you 70 cents. You get a 30 percent discount, if you will, if you 

buy fruits and vegetables. It is a way of encouraging them to 

stretch the dollars. 
30 

Then when you add to that the educational component of, ‘‘Here 

is how you can use nutritious food to stretch your food dollar and 

do the right thing for your family,’’ the combination of those two 

things, I think, could potentially be powerful in getting people to 

make the right set of choices with those SNAP resources. 

Mr. GUTHRIE. And I agree. And I am going to yield back, because 

I am almost losing time anyway, because we need to focus on this, 

but that would have the same technological issue. If you could do 

that technologically, you could do the other, as well, couldn’t you? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, except that there is—— 

Mr. GUTHRIE. There are fewer items—— 

Secretary VILSACK [continuing]. You are only talking about a few 

items. That is—— 

Mr. GUTHRIE. I will yield back, because I know we need to get 

back on this—— 

Chairman MILLER. We are going to send you two guys to the lab 

to work this out. 

In the meantime, Congressman McCarthy has time. 

Mrs. MCCARTHY. Thank you, Chairman Miller. And thank you 

for having this hearing. 

And welcome, Mr. Secretary. I am the chairwoman on the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities. And we have actually been working on this for a number of years, and I want to 

thank, certainly, my chairman for having a number of our—my 

standalone legislation going into 5504. 

Let me say one thing. When Nancy Pelosi was made Speaker of 

the House, the day she got her gavel, she said that—and she 

brought all the children up that were there and said that my administration and her work here would have to do with children. 

And, as one of my colleagues said, we will find the money, because we can’t afford not to find the money. My background is as 

a nurse and a number of years ago the Pediatric Association came 

out and said that children from the age of 13 to 16 basically had 

arteries of those who were 40, 45 year old. 

Our military has already said that our young people are not fit 

to come into the military. As far as I am concerned, this is a national security—because if we don’t have a healthy country for the 

future, we cannot certainly be a productive country. 

So with that being said, again, I want to thank George Miller. 

We had introduced the Food Marketing in Schools Assessment Act, 

and it calls for the Secretary of Agriculture to conduct a study on 

the extent and types of marketing of foods and beverages in elementary and secondary schools. 

One of the things that my other colleague had mentioned that— 

we have a couple of model programs in my district. And it is not 

like the—you know, we are going to go in and say, ‘‘Okay, you have 

got to change all your whole food program here.’’ 

What the schools have done—and it took them a year—was introduce one side of a peanut butter and jelly sandwich with white 

bread and the other side with whole wheat. And over a year’s time, 

all of the other junk food kind of things that they would eat were 

gone, and the kids really, really enjoyed it. It is an educational program. 
31 

One of the things that is also in the bill is the Breastfeeding Support Act, mainly because we find that, if we can educate women to 

breastfeed, their children are actually off to a much better start. 

The Start Healthy Habits Early Act, commonsense action by establishing nutrition requirements for childcare, because that is 

where we want to get, the youngest children in the beginning, and 

to also educate the parents, and the Partnership for Wellness Act, 

which we can do all the nutrition that we want, but if we don’t 

have physical activity that goes with it, and there are so many 

great programs. 

Again, in my district, we have five models from kindergarten all 

the way to fifth grade, and the children exercise 10 minutes a day, 

3 times a day. They don’t waste that time. The kids could not do 

it when they first started the physical program at their—you know, 

next to their desk. 

One of our hospitals came up with a great program, so it is an 

educational piece, also, while they are exercising. Those that are in 

third grade now can do more than 10 minutes 3 times a day, so 

we know that this works. 

We, as the responsibility of this committee, certainly for the future, take this very seriously. And I certainly want to thank Mrs. 

Obama for bringing national attention to this. 

I just wanted to ask you a question. On the next panel, in the 

testimony of one of the witnesses, basically states that there is little or no evidence suggesting that government spending on child 

nutrition programs can be a cost effective means of reducing overweight and obesity. Instead, reducing consumption of low—energydense foods may be promising means to limit weight gain among 

children. 

I think people are missing the point, and I guess I would like 

your opinion on that. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, when you realize that many youngsters 

in this country today get one and possibly two meals of the three 

that they get or perhaps only the two meals that they get in a 

school setting, and you realize that there are some studies that 

suggest that there is a significant number of empty calories that 

are currently being provided in some of our schools in breakfast 

and the school lunch program, it is hard for me to understand how 

we couldn’t have a positive impact on this if we altered and structured this with more fruits and vegetables and whole grains and 

low-fat dairy and less fat, less sodium, and less sugar. 

I mean, it just seems to me common sense that you are going to 

have some impact and effect on this. If you also provide an educational component, then these youngsters will begin making more 

informed decisions for themselves outside of school and, as you say, 

physical education is extraordinarily important. It is one of the reasons why we think 60 minutes a day of physical activity is really 

important for youngsters. 

We want kids to get outdoors. They spend 6 to 7 hours in front 

of a TV and a computer screen. They could get plenty of computer 

time. That is fine. But they also need to get outdoors and need to 

reconnect with Mother Nature. 

So the combination of those things, I think, can and will have an 

impact. And then if you educate parents and if you start early with 
32 

the WIC program and with the SNAP program and with some of 

the things that we are doing, breastfeeding, as you outlined, all of 

those things cumulatively will have a tremendous impact. 

And if we—we raise this to a point where youngsters realize that 

it is part of their commitment to their country—you know, I remember being raised in the 1960s when John Kennedy said physical fitness was part of what students were supposed to do. It was 

part of our responsibility to our country. 

It is what Harry Truman recognized when the school lunch program was established. So with due respect to scholarly studies, I 

think it will have an impact, and I think it will make a difference. 

And I will tell you, if it makes a difference in one child’s life, it is 

important. 

Mrs. MCCARTHY. Looking forward to working with you. 

I yield back the balance of my time. 

Chairman MILLER. Mr. Thompson? 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member. 

Secretary Vilsack, good to see you. Just different to see you outside the realm of the Ag Committee, where we normally get together, and very proud of the fact that sitting before me is the 

former Iowa Governor and the Secretary of Agriculture who got a 

start in Pennsylvania. 

Secretary VILSACK. That is right. 

Mr. THOMPSON. I want to just thank you for your support of nutrition. Obviously, nutrition is extremely important. It is an underpinning for health and wellness, which leads to prevention, and 

that is the most cost-effective care that we can provide, obviously, 

is prevention, when it comes to disease and illness. 

And I also really appreciate your commitment for assisting with 

the offsets. And I say assisting because I know what an impact $8 

billion would have on the agriculture budget. For what agriculture 

provides, you know, for what—it is very cost-effective for what we 

invest in it. 

And wearing two hats, this committee and obviously the Agriculture Committee, the fact that production agriculture really provides us the quality and the affordability of food is fundamental to 

the nutrition of all Americans. We are blessed with what we have 

in this country. 

So I am confident, as you work with us, to find the $8 billion offsets, and we need to do that. That is the right thing to do, that 

we will keep that in mind, the importance of production agriculture 

and make sure that we are doing our best to continue to provide— 

meet the nutrition needs of everyone. 

You had talked about some of the national partnerships on nutrition, which were really interesting, the NFL, Dairy Council, very 

exciting. My question is, when it comes to the USDA nutrition programs, have you reached out to organizations such as the National 

School Board Association, that really represents those who truly 

have the governing responsibility in our schools, in terms of either 

education or advocacy or, you know, preparing those policy—the 

ones that really are the policymakers. That is the local elected 

school board members. 

Is that something USDA has done or are there plans to do that? 
33 

Secretary VILSACK. We have made an effort to reach out to anybody and everyone who might have a connection with this particular issue to see if we could get them to support this effort, from 

school administrators to school boards, to folks who are responsible 

for the food preparation in schools to teachers. 

Everyone in the school system—and by that, I include the school 

board members—understand and appreciates the importance of nutrition in terms of educational achievement. 

You cannot learn if you are hungry. You cannot learn if you are 

worried about your self-image. And the reality is, we have got too 

many kids in both of those categories, and one way we can address 

that is by passing a bill that provides significant resources to 

change the direction of our school lunch and school breakfast programs. 

I am concerned, Representative, that we have over 100,000 

schools participating in school lunch, but only 88,000 participating 

in school breakfast. What do we need to help those additional 

13,000, 14,000 schools to get into the school breakfast program? Because you know and I know, that is really important. Youngsters 

have got to have a good start. 

And how do we create a system where school breakfast doesn’t 

create a stigma? You know, everyone goes to the cafeteria for 

school lunch. Not everybody goes or needs school breakfast. So if 

you have it in the cafeteria as opposed to the classroom, are you 

creating the kind of situation where you are discouraging kids from 

participating? 

So these—it is a set of complex issues, and it absolutely requires 

everyone, from the teacher, the food preparation folks, to the school 

board to be engaged. 

Mr. THOMPSON. All right. With the USDA proposed nutrition programs, I mean, the past year-and-a-half, I don’t know what the 

total is, but I think the ranking member actually in his opening remarks really covered well the amount of just tremendous—billions 

of dollars in investments we have made related whether it was a 

stimulus or the patient protection care act. 

And much of that—a lot of that was slated at nutrition. Have we 

assessed—do we have mechanisms in place to assess how effective 

those—obviously, some of those have not been implemented yet, 

but some of those have gone into operation. Have we assessed the 

baseline of what difference those have made? 

I think that—to me, that seems to be important information, as 

we look at a new bill that looks at investing $8 billion, to make 

sure we know where the baseline is, in terms of need, and we have 

done a tremendous amount of investment up to this point. I think 

measuring that effectiveness to know where we truly are in a baseline seems to be important. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, the stimulus resource was primarily in 

three categories. It was additional support for WIC, which I think 

this committee is well aware of. It was additional SNAP payments. 

And it was also primarily equipment money for schools. And it was 

a relatively—given the need—a relatively small amount in the 

stimulus that went to school districts for upgrading their equipment. 
34 

If memory serves me correct, for every dollar that we had available, there was four or five or six dollars of applications. And that 

is one of the reasons why part of this component is to help schools 

with the equipment needs, because if you have a French fryer, but 

you don’t have something that can steam or produce vegetables, it 

just makes it a little bit more difficult for you to comply. 

So I am not sure that those resources go to the issue here. The 

issue here is, how do we help school districts be able to afford the 

cost of fruits and vegetables, recognizing that there may be some 

additional costs associated with those items? 

They may be a little bit more expensive than some of the processed food that can be purchased that is high in calories, has high 

fat content, high sodium, sugar, and so forth. So I think it is sort 

of apples and oranges here. 

We have invested the resources and equipment. We know that 

that is making a difference, but it is a very small part of a very 

large set of issues that we are dealing with here. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Okay, thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. It is the intent of the chair to go—we now 

have a vote on the floor of the House, to go as deep into this vote 

as our little legs will carry us and not to miss it. 

So next I have Ms. Titus, Mr. Cassidy, hopefully back to Ms. 

Chu, but when we do leave for the vote, I—the Secretary will be 

done. I will not ask him to wait through the vote to come back. 

And then as soon as we come back from the vote, we will begin 

with our next panel. 

Ms. Titus? 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Secretary, in the remarks that you have made over the past 

year regarding the Obama administration’s priorities for reauthorization of this act, you have noted that you are concerned that too 

many low-income children lack access to food when school is out, 

when they go home on the weekend or during the holidays or during the summer. 

This is certainly a problem in southern Nevada. We have got 45 

percent of the schoolchildren who rely on free lunch. That is why 

I am pleased that a bill that I have sponsored is part of this act. 

It is called the Weekends Without Hunger Act, has 22 bipartisan 

co-sponsors of it. 

It would establish a 5-year pilot program. In that program, we 

would provide commodities to eligible institutions like schools or 

food banks that could do backpacks that you could take—children 

could take home over the weekend, and that would help to feed 

them, be sure they get their nourishment when they are not at 

school, where they depend so much on those meals. 

I just wonder if you would comment on that, if you would be supportive of that kind of program. 

Secretary VILSACK. Representative, that is a very important component of this. You know, we can do everything right for 5 days, 

but if we don’t do everything right for 7 days, we may not get it 

right. 

The sad reality is that there are a lot of youngsters who are living in families where they are not necessarily going to get nutri-
35 

tious snacks and/or meals during the weekend. And then they come 

to school very, very hungry and not able to perform. 

So programs like the one you are talking about that will help us 

bridge that gap are important. It is equally important for us to 

focus on the summer months, which is one of the reasons why we 

are working hard to take resources that are available to us to create demonstration projects to try to figure out where the best practices in the country are. 

There are a number of communities that are doing this, and we 

need to make sure that we get the best practice models out. We 

need to engage the faith-based organizations. We had a meeting 

with them recently, how they can help and assist us in bridging 

these gaps, very, very important. 

And so my hope would be that we do make a commitment to programs like the one that you are sponsoring. 

Ms. TITUS. Well, I appreciate that. In southern Nevada, we have 

Three Square that is doing a good job. It is just that in these economic times, when they depend on charitable contributions, sometimes they can’t spread their resources as far as they are needed, 

so some support would be helpful. 

Secretary VILSACK. We have seen food banks very, very stretched 

during this difficult time. 

Ms. TITUS. Thank you. 

I will yield back. 

Chairman MILLER. Mr. Cassidy? 

Mr. CASSIDY. Thank you, Secretary Vilsack. 

I am going to follow up with where Mrs. McCarthy spoke of. I 

am not advocating these positions, but I think intellectually we 

have to consider it. 

It does seem the more money we put at food stamps, the more 

money we put at this program, the worst nutritional outcomes we 

get. I mean, empirically, our kids are heavier now than they used 

to be, as we are putting more money towards food stamps and more 

money towards school nutrition programs. 

I think when you were in—I forget if I said this—when you were 

in Ag Committee and we were discussing the Food Stamp Program, 

but I keep on thinking of the Pogo quote, ‘‘We have met the enemy 

and he is us.’’ 

So how would we—you know, it is a correlation. It may not be 

causal, but it still seems to be a correlation. What would be your 

response to someone pointing out that the evidence is, the more 

money we put here, the worse results we get? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, I think it is a combination of a lot of 

things. Part of it is the fact that we are asking schools to do a tremendous amount, and it makes it more difficult for them to 

squeeze the time out of the school day for physical education. That 

is clearly an issue. 

We have got to get our kids more physically active. That is why 

the First Lady’s initiative is very important. 

And I think more schools are recognizing that. I think that getting the relationships with the NFL and the Dairy Council to 

heighten the awareness of folks about this. 

I think, secondly, it is how we use our food dollars. It isn’t so 

much the fact that we have increased the resources, that we have 
36 

increased the resources because food costs have gone up, doesn’t— 

but now what we need to do is make sure that people understand 

how they can stretch those dollars more effectively and get more 

nutritional value out of those dollars, and that hasn’t necessarily 

been part of the equation until recently. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Is it possible that the more federal control we put 

in there, the less—and going back to what Ms. Biggert said—the 

more federal control we put in there, the less—the more hidebound 

the program becomes, the less able it is to adapt to local circumstances, buy local foods, for example. 

Secretary VILSACK. I don’t think so. I think basically what we 

need to be able to do is have a set of guidelines and a set of standards that everybody understands are important. I mean, when you 

have got an Institute of Medicine study that says you have got too 

much sodium, too much salt, too much sugar in what we are feeding youngsters, then it is pretty obvious that we need to do a better 

job of reducing those and increasing fruits and vegetables and 

whole grains. 

The problem is that there are resource issues associated with 

that. When you have more fruits and vegetables and whole grains 

and you want to integrate more fresh fruit and vegetables and 

more local products, there can be a cost associated with that, which 

is why we are asking for some additional resources here. 

My sense is that we are approaching this in a much more comprehensive and cohesive way. Instead of bits and pieces, this is a 

holistic approach to this. It is about physical education. It is about 

bridging the gap between weekends and summer. It is about making sure that fruits and vegetables and whole grains are associated 

with the diets. It is about education of parents and students. It is 

about providing the local producers an opportunity to engage. It is 

about expanding significantly the knowledge of how you can do a 

better job of making and preparing food that is more nutritious. 

And it is about making sure that the country understands that 

national security is an issue, health care costs in the future an 

issue, educational achievement is an issue. And we haven’t really 

talked about the fact that there are still 500,000 to 600,000 youngsters who are living in families where they absolutely don’t get fed 

at some point in time during the month. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Well, there is a little bit of a discordance here, because we are speaking concomitantly of obesity and hunger. Now— 

and I—you know, I mean, you mentioned that, and I have no doubt 

that there are kids who go to school hungry, but I have to admit, 

you know, every time I hear that we have an obesity problem and 

everybody is going hungry, how do you reconcile those two? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, the hunger and obesity may have the 

same parent. I think if you study both of them, you are going to 

find that there is a correlation between low-income families that 

are trying the best they can to take care of their children and 

stretch scarce food dollars by focusing on foods that are processed, 

foods that are, you know, bulk, if you will, and youngsters who are 

just flat-out not getting fed because their parents don’t have the resources to feed them. 

Mr. CASSIDY. I am not quite sure I follow. Obviously, if somebody 

is eating red beans and rice, they can eat a very, you know, full 
37 

meal. And so—now, if you want to say there is a correlate between 

poor food decisions and obesity and poverty, I will accept that correlate, but since we are integrating these two as a rationale, I am 

still not—— 

Secretary VILSACK. It is not so much poor decisions as it is we 

need to do a better job of educating folks about the decisions that 

they make and give them an understanding that there is a way in 

which they can stretch those food dollars more effectively and still 

not compromise the nutritional quality and value of what they are 

feeding their youngsters. 

I mean, it is hard for parents. I mean, parents are working a couple jobs, you know, part-time jobs. 

Mr. CASSIDY. Well, I accept that. 

Secretary VILSACK. There is also the issue of—— 

Mr. CASSIDY. I accept that, but I am still not sure I figured out 

how hunger and obesity are both goals that we are achieving here. 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, the hunger issue—— 

Mr. CASSIDY. I yield back. Thank you very much. 

Chairman MILLER [continuing]. Mr. Cassidy. 

Congresswoman Chu? 

Ms. CHU. Thank you, Mr. Chair. 

Secretary Vilsack, I appreciate your comments regarding the 

prices charged to children who don’t qualify for the free or reducedprice meals, and you referred to the study that found that the average charge for paid lunches is approximately 75 cents less than the 

federal reimbursement for free meals. 

Now, on the surface, there is a simple logic to asking families 

who can afford to pay it to pay at least the full cost of the meal 

that they are receiving. At the same time, there is an argument to 

be made that many families at 185 percent of the poverty line can’t 

even afford these subsidized prices for these paid meals, and that 

is particularly true in areas like Los Angeles, which is an area I 

represent, where the cost of living is well above the national average. 

So given these competing interests, how can we balance protecting the financial solvency of the free and reduced lunch program with the needs of school districts to price meals so that they 

are affordable for all families in a school district, considering the 

variation and the cost of living across this country? 

Secretary VILSACK. Well, you know, we are not—I don’t know 

that there is a great deal of data that will tell us precisely what 

the impact will be if you were to adjust over time a more equitable 

distribution between paid meals and the federal reimbursement. 

In other words, if we ask some of those parents to pay more over 

time, I don’t know that we necessarily know that there will be less 

participation or families will find it difficult to afford it, depending 

upon how we phase this in and how we do it. 

I think at the—on the other end, if we are trying to improve the 

capacity for all of these youngsters to have a better opportunity, 

then there obviously has to be some degree of equity in the system. 

And whether it is competitive foods that are being subsidized by 

the free and reduced program or whether it is the paid meals that 

are being subsidized, I think there needs to be some rebalancing 

here, but doing it in a fair way and doing it in appropriate way and 
38 

making sure that we are sensitive to folks who are sort of on the 

bubble. 

A substantial percentage of the folks—a majority of the folks we 

are talking about are probably at 300 percent or more of poverty 

that would be impacted by this, and they might—that is a—you 

know, a family of four is about $66,000, so they may be able to afford just, you know, a little bit more, but I think we need to be sensitive in terms of how we address this and how we phase it in, if 

this is ultimately the decision you make. 

Ms. CHU. In fact, can you give me a sense of the diversity of 

prices that schools are charging for paid meals, why they are 

charging the different prices, and what that means for the quality 

of food offered? And is there any school district that is charging 100 

percent of the subsidized price that the federal government pays? 

Secretary VILSACK. You know, I don’t know the answer to that 

question. If I can have permission to get you a written response to 

that, I will be happy to. I am sure that there are schools that are 

doing the right thing and have the right balance. Today, as I testify, I can’t give you a school district, but we will find them for you. 

Ms. CHU. Okay, thank you. 

I yield back. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Thank you, Mr. Secretary, for your testimony and for the time 

before the committee and the willingness to respond to members’ 

questions. There may be members who have questions who are not 

able to articulate them in this hearing, but we will submit them 

to you, and we would appreciate you responding to those questions 

that the committee would submit. 

With that, the committee will recess for the purposes of meeting 

these votes on the floor. As soon as we return, we will begin with 

our second panel. 

[Recess.] 

Chairman MILLER. The committee will reconvene, and thank you 

again for your patience. It is a part of our multitasking, voting and 

trying to hold hearings and cover important subjects. 

I want to welcome the second panel. Our first introduction will 

be made by Congresswoman Titus of Nevada. 

Ms. TITUS. It is my pleasure and privilege to introduce and welcome to our committee today Chef Tom Colicchio. Chef Colicchio is 

a world-renowned culinary chef and restaurateur. He has also 

served as the lead judge on the hit television series ‘‘Top Chef,’’ and 

he has cooked at many of the prominent New York restaurants. 

Chef Colicchio’s talents and skills have been recognized with top 

awards in his highly competitive field. These include the James 

Beard Foundation’s Best Chef New York Award, the 2010 Outstanding Chef Award, as well as the Best New Restaurant Award 

for Craft, his restaurant in New York. And I am proud to say that 

we have one of Mr. Colicchio’s restaurant in Las Vegas, Craftsteak 

at MGM Grand. 

Mr. Colicchio’s mother worked in a school cafeteria, so he has 

come by his calling in a very natural way. He also learned at a 

very early age the importance of the school lunch program and 

good nutrition for children. As a result, not only is he known for 

his restaurants and his cooking, but also for his charity. 
39 

He and his restaurants have given back to the community by 

supporting such charities as Share Our Strength, Children of Bellevue, City Meals on Wheels, City Harvest, Pediatric AIDS Foundation, HealthRight International, and Groove with Me. I am curious 

to know more about Groove with Me. 

Mr. Chairman, I and the committee thank Chef Colicchio for all 

his good works and for being here to lend his celebrity to help us 

highlight the need for this important legislation to promote nutrition and fight obesity among our children. 

Thank you, Chef, for being here. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you, Congressman Titus, for that introduction. 

I am going to introduce the rest of the panel, and then we will 

hear from Chef Colicchio as our first witness on this panel. 

And welcome to the committee, Mr. Colicchio. 

Robert Rector is well known to this committee. He is a senior research fellow on welfare and family issues at the Heritage Foundation. Mr. Rector has authored two books and over 100 articles and 

research studies on these topics. He joined Heritage Foundation in 

1984 and previously worked as legislative assistant to the Virginia 

House of Delegates and as a management analyst at the U.S. Office of Personnel Management. Mr. Rector has served as Commissioner on the congressionally mandated Millennial Housing Commission. 

James Weill is the president of the Food Research and Action 

Committee, known on the Hill as FRAC, a leading anti-hunger 

public policy group in America. Prior to joining FRAC, he was at 

Children’s Defense Fund as program director and general counsel. 

Mr. Weill is also the chair of the board of directors of the Alliance 

for Justice Action Council and is a member of the board of OMB 

Watch and the National Center on Youth Law. 

Dr. Eduardo Sanchez is a vice president and chief medical officer 

at Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas. Prior to this, he was the director of the Institute of Health Policy at the University of Texas 

School of Public Health. Dr. Sanchez also chairs the advisory committee to the director—to the director of the Centers for Disease 

Control and Prevention and as chair of the National Commission 

on Prevention Priorities. He has also served on the Institute of 

Medicine Committee on Progress and Preventing Childhood Obesity and currently serves on the Institute of Medicine’s Standing 

Committee on Childhood Obesity. 

Major General Paul D. Monroe, Jr., serves as executive advisory 

council on Mission: Readiness, Military Leaders for Kids, a nonprofit bipartisan organization of more than 100 senior retired military leaders. Mission: Readiness was founded in 2008 to ensure 

continued American security and prosperity into the 21st century 

by calling for smart investments in the upcoming generation of 

American children. 

Mr. Monroe is a retired major general, having served 46 years 

in the U.S. Army and the California Army National Guard. He is 

a distinguished and decorated Army officer who has performed a 

variety of high-level command and staff positions during his career. 

Welcome to the committee. Thank you for taking your time. I am 

sorry for the interruptions and the vote. I think we are going to 
40 

have another vote in a while, but we are going to try to make sure 

we get your testimony in. 

And, Chef Colicchio, we are going to begin with you. As you may 

have heard me explain, when you begin to testify, a green light will 

go on. When you have a minute remaining, an orange light, and 

then you could think about starting to sum up, but do it in a manner in which you convey your thoughts and your topics to the committee. 

Welcome. 

I am going to have you push your microphone, the—— 

STATEMENT OF TOM COLICCHIO, CHEF AND RESTAURATEUR 

Mr. COLICCHIO. There we go. 

Thank you, Chairman Miller. 

And thank you, Representative Titus, for the introduction. 

My restaurant in Las Vegas also supports Three Square in your 

district, as well, so thank you for doing the work that you do there. 

Ladies and gentlemen of the Education and Labor Committee, I 

am here today to express my support for the Improving Nutrition 

for America’s Children Act, sponsored by Chairman Miller, and to 

urge you to follow—urge you and your fellow representatives to do 

everything in your power to find the funds to push this crucial 

piece of legislation through. 

I am wearing a few different hats today at this hearing. First off, 

there is my public one. As host and judge of a popular television 

program, I find myself in the slightly surreal position of being able 

to comment on issues of importance to me and a public willing to 

listen. 

I have decided to use this advantage to the millions of American 

children who rely on school, preschool, after-school, and summer 

feeding programs for adequate nutrition, children who don’t have 

lobbyists with deep pockets at their disposal for advocating on their 

behalf. 

I am also here as a chef. There was a time when my job wasn’t 

public at all. The chef stayed in the kitchen. Early in the next 

morning, they would trawl farmer’s markets and stalls and fish 

markets to choose today’s food, the day’s food. Nobody really cared 

what we had to say, just cared what we did on our plates. 

Today that is changed a bit. Chefs are frequently called upon to 

cook at fundraisers or food pantries, food-based charities to help 

meet the needs of those who struggle with hunger. As a group, 

chefs have never been more active and never raised more money 

than we do now, and yet studies show that more people are hungry 

or food insecure in this country today, more than any other time 

in history. 

It is frustrating, and has spurred me to ask a question, why? 

Why in this great country, where we produce enough food, are children going hungry every day? 

I am also here as a business owner. At my restaurants, I have 

dozens of employees who work long hours, and I understand how 

urgently many of them need to know that their kids receive 

healthy nutrition at schools and daycare centers where they spend 

a large part of each day. 
41 

It is hard enough to make a living in today’s economy. No working parent should have to worry whether their child has enough to 

eat. 

I am encouraged that Chairman Miller’s bill allows for additional 

meals for children who are in daycare longer than 8 hours, as so 

many are, or spending time in after-school settings. 

Chairman Miller’s bill supports working families. I will say that 

again: This bill supports working families. 

In addition, this bill makes important strides to ensure that lowincome children don’t go hungry during summer months when 

school is out. 

I am also here as a father to 17-year-old, Dante, and to an 11- 

month-old, Luka. My children, like children everywhere, are more 

than happy to slurp down junk food with empty calories: pizza, 

sodas, candy, and deep-fried anything. But the fact that they would 

eat this whenever doesn’t give me permission to shrug my shoulders and say, ‘‘Well, that is what they want.’’ It is my job as a parent to make sure that they have a variety of real, nutritious foods 

served to them at every meal so that they grow into robust, healthy 

kids capable of meeting their full potential in life. 

And yet, I hear people say, ‘‘We would like to improve the school 

lunch program, but the kids, all they want to do is eat pizzas and 

burgers. If we give them good food, they won’t eat.’’ 

Come on, people. We are adults here. It is up to us to do better. 

My kids would happily live in front of the Xbox and never take a 

shower for as long as they live, but that is not going to happen, 

either. 

When I give them healthy, delicious food, they eat it with gusto. 

On a recent ‘‘Top Chef’’ episode, we challenged our contestants 

to prepare healthy, nutritious lunch for schoolchildren right here in 

D.C. What do you know? The kids ate it, they asked for seconds, 

they asked for thirds. 

I am also here as the son of a lunch lady. My mother, Beverly 

Colicchio, worked for decades as a cafeteria supervisor in Elizabeth, 

New Jersey, where I was born. Elizabeth is not a wealthy town, 

and at the high school where she worked, almost 70 percent of the 

students qualified for free or reduced-price breakfast and lunch. 

My mother told us that often the meals she served those kids 

was the only food they got to eat all day. It was upsetting to her 

that the budgetary constraints imposed by low federal reimbursements meant that schools couldn’t afford much in the way of fresh 

fruits and vegetables, whole grains, legumes, and high-quality proteins. 

The cheapest food, contracted out to the lowest bidder, was usually the food that was on the menu, and the kids who ate it, and 

they didn’t have a choice or an option of refusing. 

On a diet that may have met the nutritional guidelines without 

being truly healthy and whole, we expect our kids to learn, behave, 

socialize appropriately, and develop into healthy teens and adults, 

and we are quick to label and punish them when they don’t. 

Without regular exposure to real food—made from whole ingredients in a variety of textures, shapes, and colors—these children 

never develop a preference for healthy food and thus perpetuate a 

cycle of poor nutrition that can lead to a lifetime of costly, debili-
42 

tating health problems, like obesity and diabetes, not to mention 

their lost potential as active, healthy citizens. 

Schools today are forced to supplement their meager budgets 

with vending machines that supply empty calories from soft drinks 

and junk food. I ask you: How many of here today—how many of 

you here today would be content to let the bulk of your children’s 

daily calories come from soda, chips, or branded fast food? And yet 

we are sitting by and allowing that to happen for families who are 

struggling and who rely on us to do better. 

As thinking adults, as fellow parents, this is an egregious abdication of our responsibility towards kids. And if it is at all within our 

means to fix it—and I believe it is—I urge you to make it right 

now. 

Let’s fund school lunch programs and breakfast programs at a 

spending level that significantly raises the quality and variety of 

what schools can afford and get rid of the junk food in vending machines once and for all. 

Let’s fund healthy snacks and meals in daycare centers and 

after-school programs. 

Let’s expand access by broadening area eligibility requirements 

for summer feeding programs and expanding direct certifications to 

eliminate redundant paperwork for families and schools. 

There could be no better investment, no better stimulus to our 

economy than feeding this nation’s children healthy and well. If we 

give kids in this country delicious, nutritious food, we will instill 

in them a lifetime preference for eating healthy that will translate 

into vast savings in health care costs down the line. 

Providing the building blocks for millions of children to grow and 

develop as they should, this will mean a population of robust, productive adults and a more competitive America. 

Malnourished kids are not capable of vision and ideas. And without that, we are relegating this great nation to a future of mediocrity and poor health. I think we could do better, and I urge you 

today to get behind Chairman Miller’s bill and make it happen. 

Thank you for the opportunity. 

[The statement of Mr. Colicchio follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Tom Colicchio, Chef and Restaurateur 

LADIES AND GENTLEMEN OF THE EDUCATION AND LABOR COMMITTEE: I am here 

today to express my support for the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act 

sponsored by Chairman Miller, and to urge you and your fellow Representatives to 

do everything in your power to find the funds to push this crucial piece of legislation 

through. 

I’m wearing a few different hats at this hearing today: First off, there is my public 

one; as host and judge of a popular television program, I find myself in the slightly 

surreal position of being able to comment on issues of importance to me to a public 

willing to listen. I’ve decided to use this to the advantage of the millions of American children who rely on school, preschool, after-school and summer feeding programs for adequate nutrition, who don’t have lobbyists with deep pockets at their 

disposal advocating on their behalf. 

I’m also before you as a chef. Once upon a time my job wasn’t public at all—we 

stayed in the kitchen cooking, and then early the next morning we trolled the farmer’s stalls and fish markets to choose the day’s food. Nobody gave a hoot what we 

had to say, just what we sent out on the plate. Today that’s changed a bit, and chefs 

are frequently called upon to cook at fundraisers for food pantries and food-based 

charities to help meet the needs of those who struggle with hunger. As a group, we 

chefs have never been more active and never raised more money than we do now, 

and yet studies show that more people are hungry or food insecure in this country 
43 

today than at any other time in history. It’s frustrating, and has spurred me to ask 

* * * why? 

I’m here, too, as a business owner. At my restaurants, I have dozens of employees 

working long hours, often more than one shift. I understand how urgently many of 

them need to know that their kids are receiving healthy nutrition at the schools and 

day care centers where they spend a big part of each day. It is hard enough to make 

a living in today’s economy; no working parent should also worry whether their 

child has had enough to eat. I am encouraged that Chairman Miller’s bill allows for 

additional meals for children who are in day care longer than 8 hours, as so many 

are, or spending time in after-school settings. In addition, Chairman Miller’s bill 

makes important strides to ensure that low-income kids don’t go hungry during the 

summer months when school is out. 

I’m here before you as a father to 17 year-old Dante and 11 month-old Luka. My 

kids, like kids everywhere, are more than happy to slurp down junk food and empty 

calories—pizza, sodas, candy and deep-fried anything. But the fact that they would 

eat this whenever doesn’t give me permission to shrug my shoulders and say, ‘well, 

that’s what they want!’ It’s my job as a parent to make sure they have a variety 

of real, nutritious foods served to them at every meal so that they grow into robust, 

healthy kids capable of meeting their full potential in life. And yet, I hear people 

say, ‘‘we’d like to improve school lunch, but all the kids want to eat are pizzas and 

burgers. If we give them good food they won’t eat it’’ Come on, people! We’re the 

adults. It’s up to us to do better. My kids would also happily live in front of the 

Xbox and never take another shower as long as they live. Not gonna happen. When 

I give them healthy, delicious food they eat it, with gusto. On a recent Top Chef 

episode, we challenged our contestants to prepare healthy, nutritious lunch for 

schoolchildren here in D.C. that was also delicious. What do you know? The kids 

ate it, happily, and they asked for seconds and thirds. 

I’m also here before you as the son of a ‘‘lunch lady.’’ My mother, Beverly 

Colicchio, worked for decades as a cafeteria supervisor in Elizabeth, NJ, where I 

was born. Elizabeth is not a wealthy town, and at the High School where she 

worked, almost 70% of the students qualified for free or reduced price breakfast and 

lunch. My mother told us that often the meals she served those kids was the only 

food they got all day. It was upsetting to her that the budgetary constraints imposed 

by low federal reimbursements meant that the schools couldn’t afford much in the 

way of fresh fruits and vegetables, whole grains, legumes and high quality proteins. 

The cheapest food, contracted out to the lowest bidder, was usually what was on 

the menu, and the kids who ate it didn’t have the option of refusing. On a diet that 

may have met nutritional guidelines without being truly healthy and whole, we expect our kids to learn, behave, socialize appropriately, and develop into healthy 

teens and adults, and we are quick to label and punish them when they don’t. Without regular exposure to real food—made from whole ingredients in a variety of textures, shapes, and colors—these children never develop a preference for healthy 

food, and thus perpetuate the cycle of poor nutrition that can lead to a lifetime of 

costly and debilitating health problems like obesity and diabetes, not to mention 

their lost potential as active, healthy citizens. Schools today are forced to supplement their meager budgets with vending machines that supply empty calories from 

soft drinks, and junk food. I ask you: how many of you here today would be content 

to let the bulk of your children’s daily calories come from soda, chips, or branded 

fast food? And yet, we are sitting by and allowing that to happen for families who 

are struggling and relying on us to do better. As thinking adults, as fellow parents, 

this is an egregious abdication of our responsibility towards kids, and if it is at all 

within our means to fix it—and I believe it is—than I urge you now to make it right. 

Let’s fund school lunches and breakfasts at a spending level that significantly 

raises the quality and variety of what schools can afford, and get rid of the junk 

food in vending machines once and for all. Let’s fund healthy snacks and meals in 

day care centers and after school programs. Let’s expand access by broadening area 

eligibility requirements for summer feeding programs, and expanding direct certification to eliminate redundant paperwork for families and schools. 

There can be no better investment—no better stimulus to our economy—than 

feeding this nation’s children healthily and well. If we give the kids in this country 

delicious and nutritious food, we will instill in them a lifetime preference for healthy 

eating that will translate into vast savings in health care costs down the line. Providing the building blocks for millions of kids to grow and develop as they should, 

will mean a population of robust and productive adults, and a more competitive 

America. Malnourished kids aren’t capable of vision and ideas, and without that we 

are relegating this great nation to a future of mediocrity and poor health. I think 

we can do better, and I urge you today to get behind Chairman Miller’s bill and 

make it happen. 
44 

Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Rector? 

STATEMENT OF ROBERT RECTOR, SENIOR RESEARCH FELLOW, WELFARE AND FAMILY ISSUES, THE HERITAGE FOUNDATION 

Mr. RECTOR. Thank you for the opportunity to be here. 

This hearing is to examine proposals to expand spending on 

school nutrition programs. However, it is misleading to examine 

spending on one or two government programs in isolation. In fact, 

the federal government creates over 71 and funds 71 different 

means-tested programs assisting low-income families, providing 

cash, food, housing and medical care. 

Most families that receive subsidized school meals and WIC and 

other programs also receive benefits from many other programs. A 

proposal to expand funding on a single program must be examined 

holistically in the context of the overall growth of extraordinary 

government spending. 

It is therefore important to consider school nutrition spending in 

the context of overall means-tested assistance to low-income families with children. In fiscal year 2011, such means-tested aid will 

come to an astonishing $475 billion. This is over $30,000 in assistance for each family with children in the lowest-income third of the 

population. 

I have spent my entire career on this type of population and this 

type of spending, and I can tell you, I have absolutely no idea 

where all that money goes. And before you propose spending even 

more money, you ought to at least have a reasonable accounting of 

where this money is currently going in 70 different programs, all 

of them going effectively to the same population. 

At the same time, the federal budget in fiscal year 2011 will be— 

the deficit will be 1.2 trillion, or 8.3 percent of the gross domestic 

product. As the national debt is now raising very rapidly toward 

100 percent of GDP, it is quite clear that we are marching toward 

natural bankruptcy, and therefore to call for additional permanent 

increases in spending at this time in that budget context is extraordinarily irresponsible. 

A few other points I would like to make. There will be a lot of 

talk here about food insecurity. Food insecurity is a problem, but 

among children, it is relatively limited. 

For example, according to the last data we have, about 1 child 

in 150 will miss even a single meal in a given month because of 

lack of resources within the family. Also, when you go to try to explain why food insecurity is occurring in particular families, you 

have to also explain why other families with even less income during the same period do not have food insecurity, and there really 

has been no effort to try to understand or explain this. 

I would also say that there is considerable evidence that all of 

the federal nutrition programs, food stamps, the school programs, 

WIC and so forth, are actually associated with increased obesity. 

The evidence on this is mixed, but there is a lot of research that 

goes in that direction. 
45 

And even if you were to take the most positive evidence, which 

would be—on school programs, which would be the Mathematica 

study of the school breakfast program, what you find is that that 

program concluded that school breakfast had no effect in reducing 

obesity, school lunch had no effect. School breakfast did have a 

very modest effect in reducing body mass index, but it is equivalent 

to taking maybe three pounds off of a middle school child, and that 

is not a cumulative effect. You have to fund it over and over and 

over again, year after year. 

So what we are talking about there is the most positive effect 

that you could get from that program—and other studies show the 

opposite—but the most positive effect is that you would spend up 

to $4,000 subsidizing school breakfast in a population from kindergarten through high school, and the effect of that would be that 

you would get about three or four pounds reduction in weight each 

year non-cumulative. 

That is an extraordinary rate of spending, and I wonder how 

many middle-class parents would be willing to spend $4,000 over 

the course of life of the childhood in order to just take three or four 

pounds off. 

But we will find that is that that kind of empirical fact that 

shows very low effectiveness in any of these programs will be put 

up against grandiose claims about their effectiveness. 

I would say that, in respect to all of these programs, that the evidentiary base here is extraordinarily flimsy. In particular, in reviewing for this testimony, I was quite shocked to find that there 

are, in fact—even though there are continuing claims that school 

breakfast programs increase academic performance, there are, in 

fact, no studies with control groups that show that whatsoever, 

zero. 

I might contrast that to other programs here in Congress, such 

as the federal abstinence education program, where there are— 

where over 20 studies with control groups, 16 of which showed 

positive effects, and Congress just abolished those programs for 

lack of scientific evidence. 

But here we have a program that has been going for decades, not 

a single scientific study that I could find with a control group, let 

alone with random assignment, showing any kind of effect from 

this program. 

I think that that is not a legitimate basis, and it is irresponsible 

to call for greater spending in these programs without a better evidentiary base. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Rector follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Robert Rector, Senior Research Fellow, 

the Heritage Foundation 

My name is Robert Rector. I am a Senior Research Fellow at The Heritage Foundation. The views I express in this testimony are my own, and should not be construed as representing any official position of The Heritage Foundation. 

This hearing is to examine proposals to expand spending on school nutrition programs. However, it is misleading to examine spending in one or two government 

program in isolation. Most families receiving subsidized school meals also receive 

benefits from many other programs. Proposals to expand spending in a single program must be examined holistically, in the context of overall growth of government 

spending. 
46 

It is therefore important to consider school nutrition spending in the context of 

overall means-tested assistance to low income families with children. In FY 2011, 

such means-tested aid will reach around $475 billion, or roughly $33,000 for each 

family with children in the lowest income third of population. 

At the same time, the federal budget deficit in FY2011 will be $1.2 trillion, or 8.3 

percent of the gross domestic product. As the national debt rises rapidly toward 100 

percent of GDP, it is clear that the current growth of government spending is 

unsustainable. In that context, calls for long-term increases in spending on school 

meal programs are irresponsible. 

Understanding the Means-tested Welfare System 

Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent vast sums on 

welfare or aid to the poor; however, the aggregate cost of this assistance is largely 

unknown because the spending is fragmented into over 70 separate programs. (See 

the table at the end of this testimony for a list of these programs.) 

Even before the present recession, means-tested welfare or aid to poor and lowincome persons was the third most expensive government function. Its cost ranked 

below support for the elderly through Social Security and Medicare and below government expenditures on education, but above spending on national defense. Prior 

to the current recession, one dollar in seven in total federal, state, and local government spending went to means-tested welfare. 

Means-tested welfare spending or aid to the poor consists of government programs 

that provide assistance deliberately and exclusively to poor and lower-income people. By contrast, non-welfare programs provide benefits and services for the general 

population. For example, food stamps, public housing, Medicaid, and Temporary Assistance to Needy Families (TANF), the Women Infants and Children Food program 

(WIC), the Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) and the Summer Food 

Program are means-tested aid programs that provide benefits only to poor and 

lower-income persons. The free meals and reduced price components of the National 

School Lunch Program (NSLP) and the School Breakfast Program (SBP) are also 

means-tested. On the other hand, Social Security, Medicare, police protection, and 

public education are not means-tested; they provide services and benefits to persons 

at all income levels. 

In the typical year, around 71 percent of means-tested spending comes from federal funds and 29 percent from state funds. Nearly all state means-tested welfare 

expenditures are matching contributions to federal welfare programs. Ignoring these 

matching state payments into the federal welfare system results in a serious underestimation of spending on behalf of the poor. 

In FY 2008, 52 percent of total means-tested spending went to medical care for 

poor and lower-income persons, and 37 percent was spent on cash, food, and housing 

aid. The remaining 11 percent was spent on social services, training, child development, targeted federal education aid, and community development for lower-income 

persons and communities. Roughly half of means-tested spending goes to disabled 

or elderly persons. The other half goes to lower-income families with children, most 

of which are headed by single parents. 

Growth of the Welfare State 

Welfare spending has grown enormously since President Lyndon B. Johnson 

launched the War on Poverty. Welfare spending was 13 times greater in FY 2008, 

after adjusting for inflation, than it was when the War on Poverty started in 1964. 

(See chart 1.) Means-tested welfare spending was 1.2 percent of the gross domestic 

product (GDP) when President Johnson began the War on Poverty. In 2008, it 

reached 5 percent of GDP. Over the next decade, total means-tested spending is 

likely to average roughly 6 percent of GDP. 
47 

Annual means-tested welfare spending is more than sufficient to eliminate poverty in the United States. The U.S. Census Bureau, which is in charge of measuring 

poverty and inequality in the nation, defines a family as poor if its annual income 

falls below official poverty income thresholds. If total means-tested welfare spending 

were simply converted into cash benefits, the sum would be nearly four times the 

amount needed to raise the income of all poor families above the official poverty 

line. 

Since the beginning of the War on Poverty, government has spent $15.9 trillion 

(in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars) on means-tested welfare. In comparison, the cost 

of all other wars in U.S. history was $6.4 trillion (in inflation-adjusted 2008 dollars). 

Welfare Spending Increases under the Obama Administration 

Table 1 shows the growth in means-tested spending over recent years. In FY 

2007, total government spending on means-tested welfare or aid to the poor was a 

record high $657 billion. By fiscal year 2011, total government spending on meanstested aid will rise to $953 billion, nearly a fifty percent increase. 

TABLE 1.—GROWTH IN MEANS–TESTED SPENDING 

[In billions of dollars] 

Federal Spending State Spending Total Spending 

FY 2007 ....................................................................................................... $468.7 $189.2 $657.9 

FY 2008 ....................................................................................................... $522.3 $191.6 $714.1 

FY 2009 ....................................................................................................... $612.7 $167.2 $779.9 

FY 2010 ....................................................................................................... $695.3 $192.7 $888.0 

FY 2011 ....................................................................................................... $735.4 $218.0 $953.4 

President Obama’s increase in federal means-tested welfare spending during his 

first two years in office is two and a half times greater than any previous increase 

in federal welfare spending in U.S. history, after adjusting for inflation. 

Supporters of the President’s spending might counter that these spending increases are merely temporary responses to the current recession. But that is not the 

case; most of Obama’s spending increases are permanent expansions of the welfare 

state. According to the long-term spending plans set forth in Obama’s FY 2010 

budget, combined federal and state spending will not drop significantly after the re-
48 

cession ends. In fact, by 2014, welfare spending is likely to equal $1 trillion per 

year. 

According to President Obama’s budget projections, federal and state welfare 

spending will total $10.3 trillion over the next 10 years (FY 2009 to FY 2018). This 

spending will equal over $100,000 for each taxpaying household in the U.S. 

Means-Tested Welfare Spending on Lower-Income Persons 

With more than 70 overlapping means-tested programs serving different low-income populations, it is difficult to determine the average level of benefits received 

by low-income persons. One way of estimating average welfare benefits per recipient 

would be to divide total means-tested spending by the total number of poor persons 

in the United States. According to the Census Bureau, there were 39.8 million poor 

persons in the U.S. in 2008, the most recent year for which data are available. An 

additional 1.5 million persons lived in nursing homes. (These individuals, though 

mostly poor, are not included in the annual Census poverty and population survey.) 

Total means-tested spending in 2008 was $708 billion. If this sum is divided by 41.3 

million poor persons (including residents in nursing homes), the result is $17,100 

in means-tested spending for each poor American. 

However, this simple calculation can be misleading because many persons with 

incomes above the official poverty levels also receive means-tested aid. Although 

programs vary, most means-tested aid is targeted to persons with incomes below 

200 percent of poverty. Thus, a more a accurate sense of average total welfare 

spending per recipient can be obtained, if total welfare aid is divided among all persons within this larger group. Dividing total means-tested aid by all persons with 

incomes below 200 percent of poverty results in average welfare spending of $7,700 

per person, or around $30,000 for a family of four. 

Means-tested Spending on Families with Children 

Another way of examining spending levels is to look at welfare spending on families with children. In FY 2011, total means-tested spending will be $950 billion. 

About half of this spending ($475 billion) will go to families with children. (Around 

one-third of this spending will go to medical care.) 

If the $475 billion in welfare spending were divided equally among the lowest income one third of families with children (around 14 million families), the result 

would be around $33,000 per low income family with children. 

In addition, most of these lower-income families have earned income. Average 

earnings within the whole group are typically about $16,000 per year per family 

(though in the midst of a recession, earnings will be lower). If average welfare aid 

and average earnings are combined, the total resources is likely to come to between 

$40,000 and $46,000 for each lower-income family with children in the U.S. It is 

very difficult to reconcile this level of spending with conventional claims that millions of lower-income families are chronically hungry, malnourished, or ill-housed. 

Food Insecurity in America 

Last November, the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) released its annual 

report on household food security in the United States. According to USDA, some 

17 million households, or 14.6 percent of all households, experienced ‘‘household food 

insecurity’’ at some point in 2008 and some 49 million people lived in households 

with some form of food insecurity.1 Most of these households were low income. 

While these numbers sound ominous, it is important to understand what ‘‘food insecurity’’ means. According to the USDA, ‘‘food insecurity’’ is usually a recurring and 

episodic problem rather than a chronic condition.2 In 2008, around two-thirds of 

food insecure households experienced ‘‘low food security,’’ meaning that these households managed to avoid any disruption or reduction in food intake throughout the 

year but were forced by financial pressures to reduce ‘‘variety in their diets’’ or rely 

on a ‘‘few basic foods’’ at various times in the year.3

According to the USDA, the remaining one-third of food insecure households 

(around 6 percent of all households) experienced ‘‘very low food security,’’ meaning 

that at least once in the year their actual intake of food was temporarily reduced 

due to a lack of funds for food purchase.4 At the extreme, 1.5 percent of all adults 

in the U.S. went an entire day without eating at least once during 2008 due to lack 

of funds for food.5

Poor children are generally shielded from food insecurity. Around one million children, or 1.5 percent of all children experienced ‘‘very low food security’’ and reduced 

food intake at least one time during 2008.6 Around one child in 150 missed at least 

one meal in the preceding month due to food shortages in the household.7 One child 

in a thousand went a whole day without eating at least once during the year because the family lacked funds for food.8
49 

Political advocates proclaim that the USDA reports suggest there is widespread 

chronic hunger in the U.S.9 But the USDA clearly and specifically does not identify 

food insecurity with the more intense condition of ‘‘hunger,’’ which it defines as ‘‘discomfort, illness, weakness, or pain * * * caused by prolonged involuntary lack of 

food.’’ 10

Food Insecurity and Obesity 

While temporary food shortages are a concern, what is rarely discussed is that 

the government’s own data show, paradoxically, that the overwhelming majority of 

food insecure adults are, like most adult Americans, overweight or obese. Among 

adult males experiencing food insecurity, fully 70 percent are overweight or obese.11

Nearly three-quarters of adult women experiencing food insecurity are either overweight or obese, and nearly half (45 percent) are obese. Virtually no food insecure 

adults are underweight. 

Food insecure men are slightly less likely to be overweight or obese than men who 

are food secure (70 percent compared to 75 percent). But food insecure women are 

actually more likely to be obese or overweight than are women who are food secure 

(73 percent compared to 64 percent). 

Thus, the government’s own data show that, even though they may have brief episodes of reduced food intake, most adults in food insecure households actually consume too much, not too little, food, over the long term. To improve health, policies 

must be devised to encourage these individuals to avoid chronic over-consumption 

of calories and to spread their food intake more evenly over the course of each 

month to avoid episodic shortfalls. 

Eating Too Much, Not Too Little 

Yet most proposed policy responses to food insecurity call for giving low-income 

persons more money to purchase food despite the fact that most low-income persons, 

like most Americans, already eat too much. Such policies are likely to make the current situation worse, not better. One commonly proposed policy, for example, is to 

expand participation in the Food Stamp program. Participation in the Food Stamp 

program, however, does not appear to reduce food insecurity. Households receiving 

food stamps do not have improved food security compared to similar households 

with the same non-food stamp income who do not participate in the program.12

Moreover, participation in the Food Stamp program does not appear to increase diet 

quality. Compared to similar households who do not receive food stamps but have 

the same non-food stamp income, households receiving food stamps do not consume 

more fruits and vegetables but do, unfortunately, consume more added sugars and 

fats.13

While the Food Stamp program has little positive effect on food quality, considerable evidence indicates that the program has the counter-productive effect of increasing obesity. For example, a recent study funded by USDA found that low-income women who participate in the Food Stamp program are substantially more 

likely to be obese than women in households with the same non-food stamp income 

who did not receive food stamps. Over the long term, food stamp receipt was found 

to increase obesity in men as well.14 While other research has failed to confirm this 

link between food stamps and obesity, the possibility that this program has harmful 

effects remains quite real.15

Similarly, the research on the relationship between school meal programs and 

obesity is mixed and cautionary. Some research indicates that participation in the 

National School Lunch Program (NSLP) leads to higher obesity among young students in kindergarten and first grade.16 Other studies have found this effect for the 

School Breakfast Program (SBP) but not for the NSLP.17

Dispelling Misconceptions 

Developing a rational policy on nutrition and poor Americans will require dispelling common misconceptions concerning poverty and obesity. For example, one common misconception is that poor people become obese because they are forced, due 

to a lack of financial resources, to eat too many junk foods that are high in fat and 

added sugar. According to this theory, poor persons struggle to obtain sufficient calories to maintain themselves and are forced to rely on junk foods as the cheapest 

source of calories, but because junk foods have high ‘‘energy density’’ (more calories 

per ounce of food content), these foods paradoxically induce a tendency to overeat 

and thereby cause weight gain.18

One problem with this theory is that junk foods are not a particularly cheap 

source of calories. For example, soft drinks are high in added sugar and are generally associated with weight gain, but as a source of calories, brand name soft 

drinks such as Coca-Cola and Pepsi are often more expensive (in terms of calories 

per dollar) than milk. Snack foods such as potato chips and donuts cost two to five 
50 

times more per calorie than healthier staples such as beans, rice, and pasta. Financially strained families truly seeking to maximize calories per dollar of food expenditure would focus not on junk and snack foods but on traditional low-cost staples 

such as beans, rice, flour, pasta, and milk. These foods are not only less expensive 

but actually have below-average energy density and therefore a lower potential to 

promote weight gain.19

In reality, poor people are increasingly becoming overweight for the same reason 

that most Americans are becoming overweight: They eat too much and exercise too 

little. Like the rest of America, the poor appear to eat too many high-fat foods and 

foods with added sugars, but they do this for the same reason the average American 

over-consumes these foods: They are highly palatable. While it would be desirable 

for poor people (like all Americans) to drink fewer soft drinks and eat more broccoli, 

simply expanding the Food Stamp program and other nutrition programs would not 

accomplish that goal. 

Child Nutrition Programs and Childhood Obesity 

As noted, research on the effects of school meal and child nutrition programs on 

children’s weight is mixed, with some studies showing harmful effects. The most 

positive study of the effects of child nutrition programs on children’s weight was 

conducted by Mathematica Policy Research.20 This analysis found that participation 

in the National School Lunch Program had no overall effect on children’s weight, 

but participation in the School Breakfast Program (SBP) did have positive effects. 

The study found that participation in the school breakfast program had no impact 

on obesity per se, but did reduce the average body mass index (BMI) of students. 

The research concluded that the BMI of full time participants in the School Breakfast Program (SBP) was 0.75 lower than the BMI for similar non-participating students. This BMI reduction is equivalent to 3 to 4 pounds for a middle school student. 

Unfortunately, the cost of the SBP (around $325 per student per school year) is 

quite large when compared to the weight loss achieved. This means it costs over 

$300 per student to produce a weight reduction of three to four pounds. Moreover, 

this weight reduction is neither permanent nor cumulative. A student must participate in the SBP in each subsequent year in order to maintain the small effect. 

The full cost for a student to participate in the SBP each year through primary and secondary school would be over $4,000. While the Mathematica study suggests 

that participating students may weigh a few pounds less in each year, $4,000 is a 

high price to pay for that modest impact. One wonders how many middle class parents would pay more than $4,000 so that their child could weigh a few pounds less 

during primary and secondary school. One wonders, as well, whether there are more 

cost effective means to achieve this same result. 

Limiting School Distribution of Low Nutrient Energy Dense Foods 

One promising alternative is simply to limit the amount of low nutrient energy 

dense (LNED) foods, such as soft drinks, candy, chips and french fries that schools 

provide or make available to students. There is accumulating evidence that the consumption of LNED foods may lead to weight gain among children and youth. A logical response is for local schools to limit the amount of LNED food offered to students. (There should be no limit on the choices parents make in providing food for 

their children.) Changing the composition of foods offered by schools may have positive results on children’s weight and would not impose added costs on the taxpayer. 

A great many schools are already adopting this sort of policy. What is needed here 

is flexibility and experimentation. There is, no need for mandatory national standards, nor for the U.S Congress to assume the role of national ‘‘cookie czar’’, dictating 

food policies for local schools. Such a usurpation of power would be unwise and unwarranted. 

Conclusion 

Fiscal policy with respect to the poor must be viewed holistically. It is misleading 

to examine a few nutrition programs in isolation as if no other aid were given to 

low income children. This is particularly important since financial resources are fungible within each household. One extra dollar in government spending on food and 

child nutrition programs for a family will rarely result in one extra dollar of food 

expenditure by the family. Instead, the main effect may be to displace cash spending 

on food within the household. 

The federal government operates 71 different means-tested aid programs, providing cash, food, housing, medical care, and social services to poor and low income 

families. In FY2011, government will spend around $475 billion on means-tested aid 

for families with children. This amounts to over $30,000 for each low income family 

with children. At the same time, the federal budget deficit in FY2011 will be $1.2 
51 

trillion, or 8.3 percent of gross domestic product. The nation simply cannot afford 

the current level of spending. In this context, the call for even more funding for 

school nutrition programs is unsupportable. 

Moreover, there is little or no evidence suggesting that government spending on 

child nutrition programs can be a cost effective means of reducing overweight and 

obesity. Instead, reducing consumption of low nutrient energy dense foods may be 

a promising means to limit weight gain among children. Schools can accomplish this 

by limiting the amount of such food they provide to students. This can be accomplished without added costs to taxpayers. The implementation of such policies 

should be determined by local schools and should not be mandated by the federal 

government. 
52 

ENDNOTES

1Mark Nord, Margaret Andrews, and Steven Carlson, Household Food Security in the United 

States, 2008., ERR-83 U.S Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, November 

2009 2 Ibid., p. 9. 

3 Ibid., p. 4. 

4 Ibid. 

5 Ibid., p.45. 

6 Ibid., p.7. 

7 Ibid., p. 47. 

8 Ibid,p.42. 

9See Food Research Action Council, ‘‘Hunger in the United States,’’ January 17, 2007, at 

www.frac.org/html/hunger—in—the—us. 10 Nord et al., ‘‘Household Food Security in the United States, 2008,’’ p. 52. 11The shares of food secure and food insecure individuals who are underweight, overweight, 

and obese was calculated using body mass index (BMI) data and food security data from the 

2003—2004 National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey (NHANES). The BMI cutoff 
53 

points for underweight, normal weight, overweight, and obese were calculated using the BMI 

ranges for adults as reported by the Centers for Disease Control. Specifically, an adult with a 

BMI of less than 18.5 is underweight; between 18.5 and 24.9 is within the normal weight range; 

between 25 to 29.9 is considered overweight; and at or above 30 is obese. See Centers for Disease Control, ‘‘National Health and Nutrition Examination Survey,’’ November 2007, at 

www.cdc.gov/nchs/nhanes.htm, and Centers for Disease Control, ‘‘About BMI for Adults,’’ May 

22, 2007, at www.cdc.gov/nccdphp/dnpa/bmi/adult—BMI/about—adult—BMI.htm. 12 Craig Gunderson and Victor Oliveira, ‘‘The Food Stamp Program and Food Insufficiency,’’ 

American Journal of Agricultural Economics, November 2001. 13Parke E. Wilde, Paul E. McNamara, and Christine K. Ranney, ‘‘The Effect of Income and 

Food Programs on Dietary Quality: A Seemingly Unrelated Regression Analysis with Error 

Components,’’ American Journal of Agricultural Economics, November 1999. 14 Charles Baum, ‘‘The Effects of Food Stamps on Obesity,’’ U.S. Department of Agriculture, 

Contractor and Cooperator Report No. 34, September 2007. 15Michele Ver Ploeg, Lisa Macino, Biing-Hwan Lin, Food and Nutrition Assistance Programs 

and Obesity:1976-2002, ERR-48, U.S Department of Agriculture, Economic Research Service, 

September 2007. 16Diane Whitmore Schanzenbach, ‘‘Do School Lunches Contribute to Childhood Obesity?’’ Chicago Illinois, Harris School Working Paper 5-13, October 2005. 17D.T. Millimet et al., ‘‘School Nutrition Programs and the Incidence of Childhood Obesity,’’ 

IZA DP:3664, Bonn Germany, August 2008 18 Adam Drewnowski and S.E. Spencer, ‘‘Poverty and Obesity: The Role of Energy Density and 

Energy Costs,’’ American Journal of Clinical Nutrition, January 2004, pp. 6—16. 19 Barbara Rolls and Robert A. Barnett, The Volumetrics Weight-Control Plan (New York: 

HarperCollins, 2000), pp. 124—25. 20Phillip Gleason, et al., School Meal Program Participation and Its Association with Dietary 

Patterns and Childhood Obesity, Final Report, Mathematica Policy Research Inc. July 2009. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Weill? 

STATEMENT OF JAMES D. WEILL, PRESIDENT, 

FOOD RESEARCH & ACTION CENTER (FRAC) 

Mr. WEILL. Yes, good morning. 

Mr. Chairman, Ranking Member Kline, members of the committee, we at the Food Research and Action Center are pleased to 

have been invited to testify here today. We believe that the introduction of H.R. 5504 is a huge step toward getting a strong reauthorization this year, and this hearing today should create more 

momentum to move this important process forward. It is important 

to the nation’s children—and to the nation’s future—to move expeditiously to strengthen the programs. 

Those programs, of course, already are very strong. There is a 

huge research base which I don’t have time to go into this morning 

on the health, early childhood development, and educational impacts of the program. These programs are among the very best 

public investments that this nation has. Study after study has 

shown their positive effects on reducing childhood hunger, but also 

improving health, reducing obesity, and improving school achievement. 

These multifaceted strengths of the program have led to their 

very wide support by the American public and also their bipartisan 

support in Congress, some of which has been discussed this morning. Indeed, both the House and the Senate bills introduced this 

year by the committee chairs have the support of the ranking member of the subcommittee, in the case of the House, and of the full 

committee, in the case of the Senate. 

And in the last reauthorization, then-Chairman Boehner and 

you, Mr. Chairman, as ranking member then, teamed up to 

produce a bill that passed the House unanimously. In this cycle, 

341 members of the House voted in favor of a sense of the House 

resolution supporting the president’s full funding request. 
54 

But as good as the programs are, they need to be strengthened. 

They have to be more effective to address the problem that nearly 

1 in 5 of the nation’s children lives in a household struggling with 

food insecurity. Seventeen million kids in the most recent data live 

in such households, and the evidence is substantial that that has 

negative effects on children’s health, mental health, and learning. 

And the programs have to be strengthened to be more effective, 

because the nation also has a very serious persistent and growing 

childhood obesity problem. A strong bill will reduce childhood hunger and reduce childhood obesity. 

Given the short amount of time I have, I am going to focus on 

the hunger and access and participation side of the equation, but 

I want to note at the outset that getting children participating in 

the programs independently contributes to healthier eating. This 

also has been shown by a raft of research, has been recognized by 

the White House Task Force on Obesity in its report last month, 

and has been pointed out by the Institute of Medicine. 

So for all of these reasons, it is essential to increase participation 

by children in these programs. For example, right now, of every 

100 low-income children who eat school lunch every day, only 47 

eat breakfast, and only 16 children get a summer food program, 

summer food lunch on a typical summer day. 

There are a number of excellent steps in H.R. 5504 that will address these particular problems. I am going to go through a number of them just very, very briefly. 

We applaud the provisions that allow schools in high poverty 

areas to offer free meals to all students without collecting paper applications, that provide competitive grant funds to promote the expansion of school breakfast, that improve direct certification from 

SNAP and Medicaid to school meals, which reduces red tape while 

getting more children who are already eligible participating in the 

programs, provisions that lower the area eligibility tests for summer food to 40 percent in rural areas, letting the schools provide 

meals after school, on weekends, and on school holidays, adding the 

option which hasn’t been mentioned this morning of serving an additional meal or snack to children who are in childcare for more 

than 8 hours a day, strengthening policies to prevent the overt 

identification of low-income children who do participate in the meal 

programs, and reducing paperwork and simplifying program requirements in CACFP and in WIC. 

There also, of course, are a number of nutrition provisions that 

we support that will improve the health and well-being of children 

such as giving the Secretary the authority to establish nutrition 

standards for competitive foods. These all are excellent steps, and 

we do urge that some of them be expanded further. Some of the 

provisions in the bill are authorized only for a limited number of 

states, and we will be seeking as the process goes forward to get 

broader coverage, to reach more states. 

And the summer food area eligibility provision only applies to 

rural areas. We believe that it should be broadened out to suburban and urban areas, as well, as Mr. Courtney discussed earlier 

this morning. 

And one particular priority for us which also is in Secretary 

Vilsack’s written testimony as a priority as the bill moves forward 
55 

is expanding to all states the after-school meal program that currently is available only in 13 states and the District of Columbia. 

Children whose parents are working long or non-traditional 

hours, perhaps in a restaurant, and who are struggling often with 

low wages, need access to nutritious suppers when the children are 

in care late in the day and on weekends and during school holidays. 

But ultimately the key point here is that 5504 is an excellent 

bill, and we applaud your work, Mr. Chairman. We urge you, Mr. 

Chairman and the committee members, to mark up and report out 

the bill and to include the additional program improvements we 

have indicated as soon as possible. This bill will move the nation 

towards the goals we all have of ending childhood hunger and dramatically reducing childhood obesity, and we need it this year. 

Thank you. 

[The statement of Mr. Weill follows:] 

Prepared Statement of James D. Weill, President, 

Food Research and Action Center 

Mr. Chairman and members of the Committee: We at the Food Research and Action Center are pleased to have been invited to testify today on key issues in Child 

Nutrition Reauthorization. The introduction of H.R. 5504, in particular, is a huge 

step toward getting a strong reauthorization this year, and having this hearing at 

this juncture will hopefully create strong momentum to move the process forward 

and finish it with the best possible outcome. 

As the Committee knows, it is important to the nation’s children—and to the nation’s future—to move expeditiously to strengthen the child nutrition programs. 

Those programs, of course, already are very strong, with a range of positive outcomes—they are among the very best public investments in children that this nation 

has. 

Study after study has shown that the programs not only reduce childhood hunger, 

but they improve health, early child development and school achievement. 

• For low-income schoolchildren, the school lunch and breakfast programs reduce 

hunger and obesity, provide a substantial share of the key nutrients children need 

each day, reduce school nurse visits and improve attendance, student behavior, educational achievement, and test scores. 

• The out-of-school time nutrition programs (summer food and afterschool food) 

draw hungry children into school-based and community-based programs that keep 

them safe and engaged, reduce obesity, and provide basic nutrients at key times 

when children can’t get them from school meals programs. Food insecurity among 

families with children increases in the summer, as does children’s weight gain. The 

summer food program helps avert these bad summer outcomes. Afterschool and 

summer food dollars help make out-of-school time programming sustainable. 

• The Child and Adult Care Food Program (CACFP) pays for food for low-income 

children in Head Start, child care centers, and family child care. It improves preschoolers’ nutrition, reduces obesity, strengthens the quality of care, and, in some 

states, is the only monitor of family child care for many children. 

• Participation of women, infants and young children in the WIC program boosts 

rates of prenatal care, reduces low birthweight and infant mortality, reduces childhood anemia and obesity, and saves money in health systems. 

It would take a few days rather than a few minutes to go through the research 

on this, so I will just point to the most recent example—a report last week in the 

Journal of Policy Analysis and Management by Dr. Peter Hinrichs finding that participation in the National School Lunch Program leads to a significant increase in 

educational attainment and opportunity. 

The versatile strengths of the programs have led to their very wide support by 

the American public, as seen most recently in the poll by the Child Nutrition Initiative, which found that 83 percent of Americans support or strongly support expanding the Child Nutrition Act to cover more children and provide healthier food, and 

have led as well to broad bipartisan support among policymakers. Indeed, it is not 

an accident that both the House and the Senate bills introduced this year by the 

committee chairs have the support of the ranking member of the subcommittee (in 

the House) and of the committee (in the Senate). That is a testament to great per-
56 

*Rachel Kimbro and Elizabeth Rigby, ‘‘Federal Food Policy and Childhood Obesity: A Solution 

or Part of the Problem?’’ Health Affairs 29(3), 411-418. 

sonal leadership in both parties, but it is also a manifestation of the importance of 

the reach and positive impact of the programs. 

This bipartisanship is a tradition in child nutrition. Indeed, in the last reauthorization then-Chairman Boehner and then-Ranking Member Miller teamed up to 

produce a bill that passed the House unanimously. In this reauthorization cycle, 341 

members of the House recently voted in favor of an amendment expressing the 

sense of Congress supporting President Obama’s $10 billion over 10 years funding 

request for child nutrition reauthorization. 

But the programs, as good as they are, need to be strengthened further. They 

have their shortcomings, and those problems need to be fixed both because America’s children need stronger programs, and because the existing structural strengths 

give them the potential to do more with extraordinary payoff for the nation. 

America’s children need this first because there is far too much childhood hunger 

and food insecurity. Even before the recession 12.4 million children in the U.S. lived 

in food insecure households, according to the official federal data. In 2008, at the 

front end of the recession, that number rose to 16.7 million. The government hasn’t 

released 2009 data yet, but the Food Research and Action Center’s analysis of a 

large Gallup poll showed that in 2009, 24.1 percent of households with children reported that there have been times in the past twelve months when they did not 

have enough money to buy food that they or their family needed. 

‘‘Reading, Writing and Hungry,’’ a report written by FRAC and Children’s Health 

Watch for the Partnership for America’s Economic Success, points out that ‘‘[f]ood 

insecurity in early childhood can limit a child’s cognitive and socio-emotional development, ultimately impairing school achievement and thus long-term productivity 

and economic potential.’’ The report continues, that ‘‘[d]ata has shown that, by the 

third grade, children who had been food insecure in kindergarten saw a 13% drop 

in their reading and math test scores compared to their food-secure peers. Hungry 

children are also more likely than their non-hungry peers to suffer from hyperactivity, absenteeism, generally poor behavioral, and poor academic functioning.’’ 

In Feeding America’s, ‘‘Child Food Insecurity in the United States: 2005—2007,’’ 

report author John Cook, Boston Medical Center and Boston University School of 

Medicine, states that ‘‘[c]hild hunger is robbing us of the best of America’s imagination and ingenuity.’’ He continues, ‘‘[t]he impact of child hunger is more far reaching 

than one might anticipate. Child food insecurity creates billions of dollars in costs 

to our society. Child hunger affects a child’s health, education and job readiness.’’ 

At the same time that the nation has a serious, persistent and growing child hunger problem, the nation also has a serious, persistent and growing childhood obesity 

problem. Childhood obesity has more than tripled in the past 30 years. About a 

quarter of 2-5 year olds and one-third of school-age children (including adolescents) 

are overweight or obese. Childhood obesity has both immediate and long-term 

health impacts, including increased risk factors for cardiovascular disease, such as 

high cholesterol or high blood pressure, and greater risk for bone and joint problems, sleep apnea, and social and psychological problems such as stigmatization and 

poor self-esteem. 

A strong reauthorization will reduce childhood hunger and reduce childhood obesity. To do that, it is important that Congress both reach many more children with 

the benefits of these programs, and make the nutrition provided through the programs healthier. We strongly support provisions that will reach both of these goals. 

Given the short amount of time I have, I will focus today on the access/participation side of the equation. But at the outset I would point out that getting more children enrolled in the programs independently contributes to healthier eating—greater access means less obesity. • Just this past March, an analysis published in the journal Health Affairs reported that, for young children, ‘‘subsidized meals at school or day care are beneficial for children’s weight status, and we argue [in this paper] that expanding access to subsidized meals may be the most effective tool to use in combating obesity 

in poor children.’’ * • The White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity final report, unveiled by the 

First Lady in May, pointed out that to ‘‘[i]ncrease participation rates in USDA nutrition assistance programs’’ is itself a key aspect of reducing childhood obesity. To 

support the success of this recommendation, the Task Force proposed that action be 

taken to ‘‘ensure ready access to nutrition assistance program benefits, especially for 

children.’’ • The Institute of Medicine’s report, Local Government Actions to Prevent Childhood Obesity, recommendations also included a strategy to ‘‘[i]ncrease participation 
57 

**Food Research and Action Center Issue Briefs for Child Nutrition Reauthorization, Number 

1, February 2010, available at http://frac.org/pdf/CNR01—qualityandaccess.pdf 

in federal, state, and local government nutrition assistance programs (e.g., WIC, 

School Breakfast and Lunch Programs, the Child and Adult Care Food Program, the 

Afterschool Snacks Program, the Summer Food Service Program, SNAP).’’ 

• A FRAC analysis issued earlier this year which reviewed ‘‘How Improving Federal Nutrition Program Access and Quality Work Together to Reduce Hunger and 

Promote Healthy Eating’’ ** summarized the ways in which increasing participation 

in school breakfast and lunch, WIC, the Child and Adult Care Food Program and 

afterschool and summer food can help reduce obesity. 

Given these strengths, it is crucial to boost participation. For every 100 low-income children eating school lunch each day, only 47 eat school breakfast. For every 

100 low-income children eating school lunch each day during the regular school 

year, only 16 get to have a summer lunch on a typical summer day. This past Tuesday FRAC released a new report focusing on the struggles of summer nutrition programs and showing that, scandalously, the nation has been losing ground during the 

recession in feeding children in the summer. When summer food participation needed to be rising, there instead was a dip of 2.5 percent—or 73,000 low-income children—from July 2008 to July 2009. 

So, what are the key ways to increase participation? 

Many of them are embodied in H.R. 5504: 

• Lowering the area eligibility test for Summer Food to 40 percent in rural areas. 

The current 50 percent threshold is higher than it was in the programs’ earlier 

stages and keeps many communities with significant numbers of low-income children from qualifying. 

• Creating a year-round program allowing community-based sponsors to serve 

summer food and afterschool food during the school year through a unitary program 

with a single set of paperwork. The provision will significant reduce administrative 

work and red tape, causing more community organizations to run the program, 

which will increase the number of low-income children who receive nutritious meals 

and snacks after school, on weekends, on school holidays, and during the summer. 

• Allowing schools in high-poverty areas to offer free meals to all students without collecting paper applications. This will increase the number of low-income children who receive the benefits of participating in the School Breakfast and National 

School Lunch Programs, and it will significantly reduce administrative work for the 

schools. 

• Improving direct certification from SNAP to school meals and authorizing direct 

certification from Medicaid. This will allow many more eligible children to receive 

free meals and bypass the paper application process, making the process easier for 

both families and schools. 

• Providing competitive grant funds to promote the expansion of the School 

Breakfast Program. Less than half of the low-income students who eat school lunch 

every day eat school breakfast. The grants will increase school breakfast participation, which boosts academic performance and reduces absenteeism, nurse visits, discipline problems, and obesity. 

• Expanding the afterschool meal program so that schools can provide meals after 

school, on weekends, and school holidays through the National School Lunch Program. The program is needed to ensure that low-income children can access adequate, nutritious food at their afterschool programs which run into the late afternoon and evening in order to provide care while their parents work and commute 

long hours and hold non-traditional jobs. 

• Requiring school food authorities to coordinate with Summer Food sponsors on 

developing and distributing Summer Food outreach materials. This provision will 

help increase summer food outreach so that more children participate. 

• Adding the option of serving an additional meal or snack to children who are 

in child care for more than eight hours/day. This will ensure that young children 

who are spending more of their waking hours in child care on work days as parents 

work longer hours to make ends meet will receive the full complement of meals they 

need while in care. 

• Strengthening policies to prevent overt identification of low-income children in 

school meal programs. This will help ensure that stigma/embarrassment does not 

keep low-income children from receiving the nutritious school meals that their bodies need. 

• Reducing paperwork and simplifying program requirements in CACFP. By reducing red tape in CACFP, more low-income children will have access to the nutritious meals and snacks they need while they are in child care. 
58 

• Allowing state WIC agencies the option to certify children for up to one year. 

This will increase access for children and reduce paperwork for families and WIC 

administrators. 

In addition to the access provisions, there are a number of key nutrition provisions that will improve the health and well-being of children, including: • Granting the Secretary of Agriculture the authority to establish national nutrition standards for all foods sold on the school campus throughout the extended 

school day, including the time before and after school. • Adding a performance-based increase in the federal reimbursement rate for 

school lunches (six cents per meal) to help schools meet new meal standards for 

healthier school meals. • Strengthening Local School Wellness Policies by providing the Secretary authority to oversee local wellness policies to promote improved implementation and transparency, and requiring opportunities for public input. • Revising the nutrition standards for meals, snacks and beverages served 

through CACFP to make them consistent with the most recent U.S. Dietary Guidelines. • Providing education and encouragement to participating child care centers and 

homes to provide children with healthy meals and snacks and daily opportunities 

for physical activity, and to limit screen time. • Increasing USDA training, technical assistance and educational materials available to child care providers, helping them to serve healthier food. 

These are all excellent steps forward. As the Committee knows, because of budget 

constraints, some of these provisions are authorized in the bill only for some states. 

We will be seeking, as the process goes forward, to get broader coverage for these 

key provisions—to reach more states and in some instances, like the summer food 

provision, which only applies to rural areas, to broaden it out to suburban and 

urban areas. And one particular priority for us as the bill moves forward is expanding the Afterschool Meal Program to all states. The program is currently available 

in only 13 states and the District of Columbia. The program helps ensure that children whose parents are working long or non-traditional hours and are struggling 

with low wages can be sure that their children have access to healthy nutritious 

meals, and it helps support high quality educational and enrichment programs after 

school, on the weekends, and during school holidays. 

Moving forward on a reauthorization bill that provides critical support for low-income children can’t wait. We urge you, Mr. Chairman and Committee members, to 

mark up and report out H.R. 5504, and to include the additional program improvements mentioned earlier—and the funding necessary—to strengthen the child nutrition and WIC programs. This will ensure significant movement towards the goals 

we all have of ending child hunger and dramatically reducing childhood obesity. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Dr. Sanchez, welcome. 

STATEMENT OF DR. EDUARDO J. SANCHEZ, VICE PRESIDENT 

AND CHIEF MEDICAL OFFICER, BLUE CROSS AND BLUE 

SHIELD OF TEXAS 

Dr. SANCHEZ. Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, members of the committee, thank you for the opportunity to testify 

today on children’s health, childhood obesity, child nutrition, and 

the importance of passing H.R. 5504. My comments are a summary 

of my written testimony. 

My name is Eduardo Sanchez. I am a father of four. I have practiced medicine in a federally qualified health center. I directed the 

Texas Department of Health and Texas Department of State 

Health Services over a 4-year span, and now I am the chief medical 

officer for Blue Cross Blue Shield of Texas, a division of Health 

Care Service Corporation, a non-investor-owned health insurance 

company that operates plans in Texas, Illinois, New Mexico, and 

Oklahoma. 

Healthy children are key for national security, economic competitiveness, and to bring down the cost of medical care in our nation. 
59 

The prescription for a healthy America is healthy eating and moving more. The Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act is a 

vital part of getting the prescription right. 

There are roughly 10 million obese children and adolescents age 

5 to 19 in the United States. That is more children than there are 

people in 40 of the states in the United States. 

It is 20 million children and adolescents if we include overweight 

and obesity. And the poor and some racial ethnic groups have higher rates of obesity than others. 

Most of these children attend public school. This bill will make 

it possible for more children in school to have access to the healthiest food options possible. 

The economic impact of childhood obesity is unreal and cannot be 

understated. Obese children are more likely to become obese 

adults. Obese adults are more likely to have a whole host of other 

medical conditions. Nationally, obesity-related medical costs are 

nearly 10 percent of all annual spending and are estimated—or 

were estimated to be $147 billion in 2009. The aggregated cost of 

obesity in the United States over the next 10 years will approach, 

if not exceed $2 trillion. 

In Texas, we estimated the cost of adult obesity in 2005 at $10 

billion—that is roughly $500 per Texan per year—and projected 

that the cost would be approximately $40 billion by the year 2040, 

four times the cost, but only two times the population. 

The bill we are talking about today is estimated to cost about $8 

billion over 10 years. That is less than one-tenth of the price of obesity in just the state of Texas over the same 10 years. 

Arkansas has looked at the cost impact of obesity in its Medicaid 

and SCHIP programs and sees higher rates of illness, more doctor 

visits, and higher costs as early as 10 to 14 years old—in fact, 8 

percent higher costs—and among 15-to 19-year-olds, 29 percent 

higher costs. 

The annual cost of childhood obesity in the United States is just 

over $14.3 billion. But with 4,000 children and adolescents who are 

diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes annually. That is something we 

used to call adult-onset diabetes now occurring in children. These 

costs will grow. 

I have painted a bleak picture, and you have a unique opportunity to make a difference. In communities across the country, we 

are seeing the positive results of comprehensive efforts to improve 

the health of children with nutritious food and physical activity, 

but these are isolated success stories that can only be repeated 

with passage of this bill. 

Schools provide a natural setting to promote healthy habits, but 

research shows that schools aren’t as healthy an environment as 

they can be. Children spend a lot of time in school and eat 30 percent to 50 percent of their calories there on school days. 

In medicine, we sometimes talk about lost opportunities, when a 

child or an adult is in the office, for example, is due for a screening 

test or a vaccine, but leaves without that test or vaccination. Not 

providing children healthy food is a lost opportunity. 

The Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act is a strong 

bill that includes a number of important provisions to help shift the 

balance and make it easier for children to make healthy choices at 
60 

school. H.R. 5504 will improve meal quality, update nutrition 

standards for all foods and beverages at school, strengthen local 

wellness policies, and provide needed resources for training, technical assistance, and nutritional education. 

It increases the reimbursable rate for lunches by 6 cents. The bill 

also includes a number of provisions to increase access and make 

it easier for kids to participate in child nutrition programs throughout the year, not just during the school day. 

This is a smart bill that can realize a fairly quick return on investment. I urge you to work with your colleagues in the House to 

secure funding and pass this bill soon, as time is running out and 

our children deserve our attention. The health of America’s children depends on a prescription for healthy food and more physical 

activity. 

This bill will improve the quality and healthfulness of food in 

America’s schools, improve the health of America’s children, reverse the childhood obesity epidemic, reduce the burden of diabetes, heart and other chronic diseases, and therefore demand for 

very expensive medical care, and finally, improve the readiness, 

willingness and ability of our future civilian and military workforce 

to compete for jobs and defend our nation. 

I thank you for your time, and I thank you for your interest. 

[The statement of Dr. Sanchez follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Eduardo Sanchez, Vice President and 

Chief Medical Officer, Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas 

Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, Members of the committee, thank you 

for inviting me to testify today on children’s health, childhood obesity, child nutrition, and the importance of passing H.R 5504 to strengthen child nutrition programs. 

My name is Eduardo Sanchez, Vice President and Chief Medical Officer for Blue 

Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, a Division of Health Care Service Corporation, 

which operates three additional Blue Cross and Blue Shied Plans in Illinois, New 

Mexico, and Oklahoma. HCSC is the nation’s largest non-investor-owned health insurance company serving 12.4 million members. 

I am a physician trained in family medicine and in public health. I practiced medicine for ten years in Austin and served as Commissioner of the Texas Department 

of Health and then the Texas Department of State Health Services from 2001 to 

2006. I have long been interested in childhood obesity and the incredible burden it 

places not only on individual children themselves, but on schools, their families, the 

workplace, governments, and, of course, our health care and economic systems. As 

Commissioner of Health in Texas, I worked closely with my agriculture and education state agency counterparts to address childhood obesity. And because the 

scope of my responsibilities in Texas included oversight of the Women, Infants, and 

Children program, WIC, I have a keen appreciation for the importance of the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act. Although I will be speaking about 

childhood obesity, I want to make clear that childhood hunger and obesity are 

counter-intuitively linked. The access, availability, and affordability of healthy food 

for families are all critical factors for promoting health, preventing hunger, and 

combating obesity. 

You are, no doubt, familiar with the alarming statistics on childhood obesity in 

all of our states and in all of our communities. The recently released F as in Fat 

report from Trust for America’s Health highlights that we have a long way to go 

to comprehensively address and reverse this epidemic. And sadly, wide disparities 

remain among different racial and ethnic groups. There are roughly 10 million obese 

children and adolescents age 5 to 19 in the United States. That is more children 

than there are people in each of 40 states across the country. 

In my home state of Texas, the incidence of obesity is higher than the national 

average—in fact, we rank seventh in obesity rate among 10 to 17 year olds—tipping 

the scales at over 20% compared to the national average of about 16%.1 And, while 

all categories of children are impacted, the poor, African Americans, Hispanics, 
61 

American Indians, and Pacific Islanders are disproportionately more overweight and 

obese than their white counterparts. In a state like Texas, with a dramatically shifting demographic profile and significant numbers of families and children in poverty, 

we feel this burden even more. This has tremendous relevance nationwide, as the 

demographic profile of our communities, our states, and indeed, our nation, shifts. 

Obesity threatens the health of our young people, their future potential, and our 

nation’s global competitiveness. Obese children miss more days of school than their 

healthy-weight peers.2 They’re at increased risk for a variety of serious health conditions, including asthma, heart disease and type 2 diabetes.3 Some experts warn that 

if obesity rates continue to climb, today’s young people may be the first generation 

in American history to live sicker and die younger than their parents’ generation.4

And as we have heard from Major General Monroe, childhood obesity is threatening 

our military readiness. The 27% who are too overweight to serve in our military did 

not become so overnight, and they represent our entry level workforce. Obese children become obese adults. If current trends continue, that 27% cohort of young people becomes more overweight with each passing decade. Childhood obesity challenges local, state, and national budgets and will put U.S. businesses at a competitive disadvantage by reducing worker productivity and increasing health care costs.5

The impact of obesity on public health and children’s well-being is real and bears 

significant cost. From a national perspective, obesity-related medical costs are nearly 10 percent of all annual medical spending6 and were estimated to be $147 million 

in 2009.7 Very conservatively speaking, the aggregated cost of obesity in the United 

States over the next ten years will approach, if not exceed, two trillion dollars. Put 

another way, in the state of Texas, we estimated the cost of obesity in 2005 at $10 

billion (a cost of $500 per Texan per year) and projected that the cost would be approximately $40 billion in 2040—a quadrupling of the cost but only a doubling of 

the population. The bill we are talking about today is estimated to cost about $8 

billion dollars over 10 years—that is less than one tenth the cost of obesity in just 

the state Texas over the same ten years! 

Our sister state, Arkansas has examined the cost of obesity among its own state 

employees—something every employer (including government agencies and large 

corporations) should consider. For the State of Arkansas, the yearly claims cost associated with obesity now exceeds that of tobacco, with obese employees costing over 

50% more than their counterparts who don’t smoke, have a normal BMI, and do 

some exercise.8

These costs start early in life. Arkansas has looked at the cost impact in its Medicaid and SCHIP programs and sees higher rates of illness, more physicians’ visits, 

and increases in costs as early as 10 to 14 years of age.9

For the nation, childhood obesity is associated with annual prescription drug, 

emergency room, and outpatient costs of $14.1 billion, plus inpatient costs of $237.6 

million.10 Given that approximately 4000 children and adolescents are diagnosed 

with type 2 diabetes annually in the United States,as a consequence of childhood 

obesity, these costs will grow significantly.11

I realize that I have painted a bit of a bleak picture of the health of America’s 

children, about child obesity, and the threat it poses not only to children, but to our 

nation’s well being. But I am hopeful. With the nation’s attention on health costs, 

the recent passage of health care reform legislation with an emphasis on prevention 

and wellness, First Lady Michelle Obama’s focus on childhood obesity, the report 

from the White House Task Force on Childhood Obesity and the phenomenal efforts 

of the private sector such as the Robert Wood Johnson Foundation and advocates 

across the country, we have a unique opportunity to make a difference. And we are 

beginning to see the positive results of comprehensive efforts to improve the health 

of children with nutritious food and physical activity in communities and states 

across the country. Of particular interest is research from the Diabetes Prevention 

Project that shows that healthy eating and regular physical activity can reduce the 

likelihood of developing diabetes in adults by over 50%. 

Healthy eating and physical activity promote heart health, bone health, and prevent diabetes in children, and schools provide a natural setting to promote healthy 

habits. Given that kids spend so much time there and eat 30-50% of their calories 

there on school days, we have a captive audience. The research shows that fit kids 

are smart kids—promoting health in children improves academic performance, behavior, and reverses childhood obesity. Having access to healthy food is an important aspect of promoting children’s health. 

Addressing the challenges of poor nutrition and obesity will take action from all 

levels of government, businesses, health care organizations, public health advocates, 

schools, families, and individuals—we all have a stake in making real changes, including hard choices, to improve the health of this generation and generations of 
62 

children to come. The child nutrition and WIC programs are critical tools for making 

this change. 

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas (BCBSTX) is pleased to be a part of the system response to childhood obesity in Texas. BCBSTX and HCSC take the long view 

when making commitments to programs such as those focused on childhood obesity. 

While addressing this problem today may not provide an immediate return on investment in the traditional sense, we fully understand the generational impact of 

action or inaction when it comes to childhood obesity. 

In the school environment, we have supported OrganWise Guys, a program that 

brings science-based nutrition, physical activity, and other lifestyle behavior messages to children in school settings and effects healthy changes, and we are providing modest financial support to the school district in Seguin, Texas to provide 

the Coordinated Approach to Child Health (CATCH) program, another evidencebased coordinated school health program. 

We provide financial support to MarathonKids, a program that encourages physical activity and healthy eating among elementary school children in Texas. It is one 

of the arrows in the quiver to promote health and prevent childhood obesity. More 

than 100,000 children participate in this four month program in Texas. We are supporting MEND, a community-based, family-centered childhood obesity treatment 

program in Dallas, Texas provided through a partnership with the YMCA. We are 

in the second phase of providing the Blue Cross and Blue Shield Association Pediatric Obesity and Diabetes Prevention Toolkit for physicians and their patients in 

Texas. As a health plan, we are addressing adult overweight and obesity in the 

workplace and at home. We understand that the key to better health overall is living healthy by eating smart and moving more. 

So, here we sit today, debating and discussing one of the most important pieces 

of legislation that, if enacted—let me restate that—when enacted, has the potential 

to impact millions of our nation’s children in a positive way. I applaud you, Mr. 

Chairman, your Committee, and your staff for your leadership. The ‘‘Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act’’ (H.R. 5504) is a strong bill that includes a number of important provisions to help shift the balance and make it easier for children 

to make healthy choices at school. 

More than 50 years ago, our nation launched the National School Lunch Program. 

Interestingly, the language that characterized the rationale for the policy and program in 1946 is still quite relevant today:12

‘‘The educational features of a properly chosen diet served at school should not 

be under-emphasized. Not only is the child taught what a good diet consists of, but 

his parents and family likewise are indirectly instructed.’’ 

‘‘It is hereby declared to be the policy of Congress, as a measure of national security, to safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation’s children and to encourage the domestic consumption of nutritious agricultural commodities and other food. 

* * *’’ 

H.R. 5504 will improve meal quality, update nutrition standards for all foods and 

beverages at school, strengthen local wellness policies, and provide needed resources 

for training, technical assistance and nutrition education. The bill also includes a 

number of provisions to increase access and make it easier for kids to participate 

in child nutrition programs throughout the year—not just during the school day. 

And program access goes hand-in-hand with healthy food and beverages choices. For 

example, improving meal quality and reducing unhealthy options in vending machines often results in increased participation in school meal programs—a win-win 

situation. In Texas, Susan Combs, former Commissioner of Agriculture, understood 

that relationship and I know that Jim Weill will talk about important investments 

to improve access. 

Meal Quality 

While schools across the country are working hard to provide nutritious meals to 

children, inadequate reimbursement rates and limited training and technical assistance hamper their efforts. In fact, the majority of meals served in schools today fail 

to meet the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. For example, in the 2004-2005 

school year, nearly one-third of schools served whole milk, one of the largest sources 

of saturated fat in children’s diets. An analysis by USDA of school food service operations across the country found that French fries were one of the most frequently 

offered vegetables to students, regardless of grade. Only 5 percent of schools offered 

whole-grain breads, and a majority of schools offered only a limited variety of fruits 

and vegetables.13 This bill goes a long way in improving meal quality. First and 

foremost, it calls for increasing the reimbursement rate for lunches by 6 cents. It 

also provides much needed training and technical assistance resources to food service operators, replaces high fat milk with healthier low fat options, strengthens ac-
63 

countability and program transparency, and continues efforts to improve commodities. 

National School Nutrition Standards 

This bill grants USDA the ability to update the nutrition standards for all foods 

served and sold—like those in vending machines, school stores, and a la carte in 

the cafeteria—to ensure they are health promoting and consistent with current dietary recommendations and nutrition guidance. The existing standards must be revised. While a number of states and districts have made strides in improving standards for competitive foods, many fall short of current recommendations. 

According to a report by Bridging the Gap, in the 2007—08 school year (the latest 

year for which we have data), 62% of public elementary school students were able 

to purchase competitive foods or beverages through school stores, vending machines 

and a ́ la carte cafeteria lines. Such venues typically offered less-healthy items. The 

picture is worse for middle and high schools.14,15

Training, Technical Assistance and Nutrition Education 

I cannot underscore the importance of training and technical assistance resources, 

as well as nutrition education and promotion priorities outlined in the bill. We all 

get that improving meal quality and providing only healthy options are key—what 

we sometimes forget is the work behind the scenes to make sure that food service 

operators have the skills and knowledge to make needed changes, and that kids are 

given opportunities to fully benefit from healthier options through education and 

promotion. The old saying ‘‘If you build it they will come’’ may work for baseball 

fields but we know it does not work for kids and food. How many times have we 

all tried to get our kids to eat the healthier options only to find it hidden under 

the table or thrown in the trash? It does no good to invest in improving meal quality 

without also investing in the necessary training, technical assistance and nutrition 

education and promotion that go hand-in-hand with increased reimbursement rates 

and meal standards. 

Local Wellness Policies 

H.R. 5504 builds on the local wellness policies introduced in the last reauthorization and calls on school districts to implement their policies in a transparent way 

that involves parents. The bill also ensures there is a wellness committee for each 

school district so that the success of the wellness policies are periodically reviewed 

and updated as necessary. This particular piece is important and consistent with 

our experience in Texas where every independent school system is required by law 

to have a School District Health Advisory Council (SHAC). SHAC’s are often the entity tasked with developing and implementing local wellness policies and provide a 

permanent infrastructure to enhance the effectiveness and sustainability of the policies. This has worked well in Texas and it is important to carry this nation-wide 

as H.R. 5504 proposes.16 The bill further dedicates funding to the USDA to provide 

technical assistance to districts to assist them in overcoming challenges to establishing and implementing effective policies. 

I know you and your colleagues have many pressing issues these days but renewal of the child nutrition programs cannot wait any longer—this has already been 

delayed for more than a year and our children’s health and well-being cannot be 

put on hold. This is a smart bill and I urge you to work with your colleagues in 

the House to secure funding and pass this bill soon—time is running out and our 

children deserve our attention. The health of America’s children depends on a prescription for healthy food and more physical activity. This bill can play a significant 

role in improving the health of America’s children, reversing the childhood obesity 

epidemic, reducing the burden of diabetes, heart and other chronic diseases and demand for expensive medical care, and finally, improving the readiness, willingness, 

and ability of our future civilian and military workforce—to compete and defend our 

nation. 

I thank you for the time and your interest. 

ENDNOTES

1F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America’s Future, June 2010 

2Geier, A, Foster G, Womble L, et al. ‘‘The Relationship Between Relative Weight and School 

Attendance Among Elementary Schoolchildren.’’ Obesity, 15(8): 2157—2161, August 2007. 3Overweight and Obesity, Health Consequences. Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, 

2009. www.cdc.gov/obesity/causes/health.html (accessed June 2009) (No authors given.) 4Olshansky S, Passaro D, Hershow R, et al. ‘‘A Potential Decline in Life Expectancy in the 

United States in the 21st Century.’’ New England Journal of Medicine, 352(11): 1138—1145, 

March 2005. 
64 

5 Christeson W, Taggart AD, Messner-Zidell S. Ready, Willing, and Unable to Serve. Washington, DC: Mission: Readiness, 2009. 6F as in Fat: How Obesity Threatens America’s Future, June 2010 

7Finkelstein E, Trogdon J, Cohen J, Dietz W. ‘‘Annual Medical Spending Attributable to Obesity: Payer- and Service-Specific Estimates.’’ Health Affairs, 28, July 2009. 8 Unpublished data, Arkansas Center for Health Improvement. 

9 Card-Higginson P, Thompson JW, Shaw JL, Lein S. Cost and health impact of childhood obesity among Medicaid/SCHIP enrollees. 2008 AcademyHealth Annual Research Meeting, Washington, DC, June 9, 2008. 10 Cawley J. ‘‘The Economics of Childhood Obesity.’’ Health Affairs, Vol. 29 (No. 3): 364-371, 

2010. 11 Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. National Diabetes Fact Sheet, 2007. Atlanta, 

Ga: US Dept of Health and Human Services; 2007. 12http://www.fns.usda.gov/cnd/lunch/AboutLunch/ProgramHistory.htm 13 Condon E, Crepinsek M, Fox M. School Meals: ‘‘Types of Foods Offered to and Consumed 

by Children at Lunch and Breakfast.’’ Journal of the American Dietetic Association, 109(2): S67- 

S78, February 2009. 14 Chriqui JF, Schneider L, Chaloupka FJ, Ide K and Pugach O. Local Wellness Policies: Assessing School District Strategies for Improving Children’s Health. School Years 2006-07 and 

2007-08. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2009. 15Turner L, Chaloupka FJ, Chriqui JF and Sandoval A. School Policies and Practices to Improve Health and Prevent Obesity: National Elementary School Survey Results: School Years 

2006—07 and 2007—08. Chicago, IL: Bridging the Gap Program, Health Policy Center, Institute 

for Health Research and Policy, University of Illinois at Chicago, 2010. 16http://www.dshs.state.tx.us/schoolhealth/sdhac.shtm 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

General Monroe? 

STATEMENT OF PAUL D. MONROE, MAJOR GENERAL, U.S. 

ARMY (RET.), EXECUTIVE ADVISORY COUNCIL, MISSION: 

READINESS 

MG MONROE. Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, thank 

you for this opportunity. 

My name is Paul Monroe, and I am a retired Major General. I 

served this great nation for over 48 years in the United States 

Army and the California Army National Guard. Currently, I am 

the founder and principal of Monroe Executive Associates, which 

advises developing organizations on leadership and diversity. 

I am testifying today on behalf of Mission: Readiness, a national 

nonprofit organization of over 150 retired admirals and general officers who are dedicated to ensuring our nation’s continued security 

and prosperity through smart investments in the upcoming generation of American children. 

I have written remarks that I would submit for the record. For 

the next few minutes, I would like to tell the committee members 

why more than 150 retired generals and admirals feel so strongly 

about this bill and its importance to our future military readiness. 

Make no mistake: Childhood obesity does threaten our nation’s 

security. When 1 in 4 of our young adults is too overweight to defend our country, then something is seriously wrong. 

A decade ago, only one state had 40 percent or more of its young 

adults overweight or obese. Today, that is true in 39 states, according to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. You can see 

the figures for each state on a chart and a report we recently released with Senator Dick Lugar and Secretary Vilsack, ‘‘Too Fat to 

Fight.’’ 

Military concerns about the health and fitness of our children are 

not new. The National School Lunch Act of 1946 was originally 

passed as a matter of national security. At the time, General Lewis 

Hershey and many of our other military leaders recognized that 
65 

poor nutrition was a significant factor, reducing the pool of qualified candidates for military service. 

In the past, retired admirals and generals stood up to make it 

clear, as Secretary Vilsack said, that America is only as healthy as 

our nation’s children. Now childhood obesity is undermining our 

national security, and we need to start turning it around today. 

The trends are truly alarming in the context of American military readiness. Since 1995, the nonprofit—excuse me, the proportion of recruits rejected during their physical exam because they 

were overweight has increased by nearly 70 percent. Today, otherwise excellent recruit prospects, some of whom may have generations of sterling military service in their family history, are being 

turned away because they are simply too overweight. 

What can we do to address this problem? We cannot and should 

not legitimate the choices that parents make with their children at 

home. It is up to parents to decide what children are fed outside 

of school and in their packed lunches. 

But we can do more to make sure that the food and beverages 

of our schools provided to our children are nutritious. As much as 

40 percent of a child’s daily calorie intake occurs at school. And the 

school setting plays an important role in shaping the eating, exercise habits of our youth. 

Mr. Chairman, Mission: Readiness supports efforts by you and 

members of this committee to get new legislation on the books that 

would achieve three basic goals. 

First, we need to get the junk food out of our schools. Second, 

nourish more children who need access to healthy meals. And, 

three, educate kids and their parents to help them adopt lifelong 

healthy eating and exercise habits. 

You may hear today that the United States military is currently 

meeting its recruitment goals, and that is true, not only because 

of the severity of the recession, but also because of a strong sense 

of patriotism among many of our young people. 

However, if history is any guide, the challenges of finding and recruiting qualified young adults will again become much more challenging when the economy recovers. The truth is, we cannot depend on a weak economy to build a strong military. 

When you look at the long-term scenario, it is clear that too 

many young people are not reaching their full potential, and a 

major factor is what they eat and drink each day. One study found 

that even an extra 130 calories per day make a difference between 

whether a young child grows up—— 

Sorry. The clock is ticking. We urge Congress to take action as 

soon as possible, since the current child nutrition law will expire 

at the end of September. It is a hopeful sign that the House approved a sense of Congress resolution as part of the defense appropriation bill supporting full funding of the child nutrition package, 

in part because it addresses the national security concerns of our 

retired military leaders. 

It is also a hopeful sign to see members here today, because Congress cannot afford to put this off. We cannot afford to raise another generation where 1 in 4 of our young adults is too overweight 

to serve the country. 
66 

This is not just about looking good in uniform. It is about being 

healthy and fit to do the work of the nation. The grim reality is 

that we live in a dangerous world. As long as outside threats to our 

national security exist, we are well served to maintain a high level 

of military readiness. 

The admirals and generals of mission readiness are in strong 

support of H.R. 5504, and we respectful request, in the interests of 

national security, that the distinguished members of this committee work to move this important legislation toward enactment. 

Doing so will help improve the health of our nation’s children and 

ultimately strengthen national security. 

Thank you for this opportunity to speak before the committee 

this morning. 

[The statement of General Monroe follows:] 

Prepared Statement of Paul D. Monroe, Major General, 

U.S. Army (Ret.), on Behalf of Mission: Readiness 

Chairman Miller, Ranking Member Kline, and distinguished members of the Committee, thank you for inviting me to testify at this hearing on H.R. 5504, the ‘‘Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act.’’ I am honored to have the opportunity 

to speak today in support of this historic legislation. 

My name is Paul Monroe and I am a retired Major General. I served this great 

nation for over 46 years in the United States Army and the California Army National Guard. Currently, I am the founder and principle of Monroe Executive Associates, which advises developing organizations on leadership and diversity. 

I am testifying today on behalf of MISSION: READINESS, a national, non-profit 

organization of over 150 retired Admirals and Generals, who are dedicated to ensuring our nation’s continued security and prosperity through smart investments in the 

upcoming generation of American children. We are concerned by recent data from 

the Department of Defense indicating that 75 percent of all young Americans aged 

17 to 24 are unable to join the military primarily because they failed to finish high 

school, have criminal records, or are physically unfit. This disquieting reality threatens to diminish our military strength and put our national security interests at risk. 

Military concerns about the fitness of our children are not new. In fact, the National School Lunch Act of 1946 was originally passed as a matter of national security. At that time, there were legitimate concerns that malnourishment would 

render American youth unfit to defend the nation. Today, it is obesity that threatens 

the overall health of America and the future strength of our military. It is imperative that we act now, as we did in 1946, to ensure that our children grow up fit 

to defend our nation, if need be. 

Obesity is the leading medical reason young adults are not qualified to serve. Obesity rates among children and young adults have increased dramatically in recent 

decades. By now most of us have heard that in the past 30 years, child obesity rates 

have more than tripled. New data from the CDC paints an even starker portrait. 

In the last decade alone, between 1998 and 2008, the number of states reporting 

that 40 percent or more young adults were overweight or obese rose from one state 

to 39. To put this problem into perspective, today’s young Americans between the 

ages of 18 and 24 would have to collectively lose 390 million pounds in order to be 

at a healthy weight. 

As retired Generals and Admirals, my colleagues at MISSION: READINESS and 

I are deeply troubled by the negative effect that obesity is having on our ability to 

recruit qualified candidates for military service. At least 9 million young adults, or 

27 percent of all young Americans ages 17 to 24, are too overweight to enlist. Since 

1995, the proportion of candidates who failed their physical exams due to weight 

problems increased by a staggering 70 percent. This all-too-common disqualifier is 

limiting the pool of available recruits and eroding our military readiness. Make no 

mistake about it; the obesity epidemic poses a genuine threat to our national security. 

Beyond its harmful impact on the overall number of youth who are able to qualify 

for military service, obesity also imposes a great fiscal burden on our nation. Every 

year, the military discharges over 1,200 first-term enlistees before their contracts 

are up because of weight problems; the military must then recruit and train their 

replacements at a cost of $50,000 for each man or woman, thus spending more than 

$60 million a year. 
67 

Turning the tide of obesity in this country is certainly not an easy task. We do 

not pretend there is one single action that we as a nation can take to remedy this 

problem. However, it is crystal clear that one pivotal step we must take is to improve the quality and nutritional value of food and beverages served in our schools. 

The school setting is critical for shaping the lifelong eating and exercise habits 

of our youth. Research published in Health Affairs shows that as much as 40 percent of a child’s daily caloric intake occurs at school. What children eat in school 

can either be part of the problem, or part of the solution. 

Fortunately, this Committee is poised to consider legislation that effectively addresses the issue of nutrition in schools. H.R. 5504 the ‘‘Improving Nutrition for 

America’s Children Act,’’ includes provisions that will raise the quality of all foods 

and beverages served on school grounds. Specifically, it will require the Secretary 

of Agriculture to establish a new set of nutrition standards for foods and beverages 

served through the school breakfast and school lunch programs that are consistent 

with the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. The bill will also require 

the Secretary to establish similar science-based standards for all foods and beverages sold competitively. Further, H.R. 5504 will provide an additional 6 cent per 

meal reimbursement, on a performance basis, to help schools; make necessary 

equipment upgrades; train and hire staff; and purchase fresh fruits, vegetables, lean 

meats, whole-grains and low-fat dairy. 

Current nutrition standards for the school lunch and school breakfast programs 

have been in place since 1995. We are long overdue for an update. 

In addition to making improvements to nutrition standards and overall meal quality, H.R. 5504 also includes provisions to promote nutrition education. The bill will 

direct the Secretary to provide funds, equal to one half cent per reimbursable lunch 

served, to states for nutrition and wellness promotion. It will also instruct the Secretary to award competitive grants for the purpose of supporting community partnerships that are designed to promote wellness. Nutrition education is vital to maintaining a healthful environment for youth. In many cases, the habits that children 

form in their early years persist into adulthood. The journal Health Affairs reports 

that 80 percent of children who were overweight at ages 10-15 were obese at age 

25. Properly managed, nutrition education programs can provide children and their 

families with the knowledge, skills, and motivation needed to make lifelong healthful choices. 

Last, H.R. 5504 includes proposals that will help simplify enrollment and increase 

access to child nutrition programs. Increasing access to nutritious food is equally important as improving the quality of school meals. While it may seem counterintuitive, it is well documented that hunger and food insecurity also contribute to obesity. 

Many children who experience persistent hunger are also obese, because they 

more frequently have access to unhealthy foods or snacks instead of regular, nutritious meals. Recent research by Rachel Tolbert Kimbro of Rice University and Elizabeth Rigby of the University of Texas at Houston, published in Health Affairs has 

shown that subsidized meals can help low-income children maintain a healthy 

weight. 

Increased access to school lunches and breakfasts can help remedy this problem 

by helping to ensure that children regularly get enough food to eat and the food they 

eat will be nutritious enough to help them develop healthy eating habits to avoid 

obesity. 

The grim reality is that we live in a dangerous world. As long as outside threats 

to our national security exist, we are well served to maintain a high level of military 

readiness. The Admirals and Generals of MISSION: READINESS are in strong support of H.R. 5504 and we respectfully request, in the interest of national security, 

that the distinguished members of this Committee work to move this important legislation toward enactment. Doing so will help improve the health of our nation’s 

children and, ultimately, strengthen national security. 

Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much. 

It is the intent of the chair to recognize those who did not have 

an opportunity to ask questions of the Secretary, the previous 

panel. So we will begin with Mr. Scott, then Mr. Platts, Mr. Tierney, Ms. Clarke, Mr. Kildee, and then we will come back around 

to the chair and the ranking member. 

Mr. Scott? 
68 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Dr. Sanchez, a previous question was asked about the relationship of hunger and obesity. Can you explain how the choice of 

healthier foods will not only address hunger, but also reduce obesity? 

Dr. SANCHEZ. First, thank you for the question. Childhood obesity and childhood hunger, in my estimation, are two sides of the 

same coin, and it is the reality for children who are poor or in some 

way disproportionately affected by obesity because of race, ethnicity, other factors that, in those families—sometimes the 

healthier foods are the more expensive foods, and it is not inconceivable that a child who may outwardly look to be overweight or 

obese might go a day or two without having any food. And in America, hunger sometimes looks different than we have thought about 

hunger in the past. 

So those two things are not incompatible, and you can have a 

child who maybe is getting the foods that he or she ought to be getting during the week and perhaps on the weekend, that food is 

more difficult to attain. 

My church is seeing record numbers of families coming to get 

food assistance, and I think that that is the reality across the nation. But healthy—if you had a question, I apologize. 

Mr. SCOTT. No, go ahead. 

Dr. SANCHEZ. Healthy food is—healthful food, nutritious food is 

going to address both the issue of childhood obesity—of childhood 

obesity, because those healthy foods would be the preferred food 

choices. The Blue Cross Blue Shield association is working with pediatricians and family physicians across the nation, providing them 

a toolkit that has a simple 5-2-1-0 message, which incorporates the 

notion of five fruits and vegetables a day for all kids, limited 

sweets, limited amount of screen time, 1 hour of physical activity. 

Those are healthful and healthy food messages that we are delivering that are meant to be the foods that one prioritizes over less 

healthy options. Healthy foods for children who are hungry are 

going to reduce hunger and promote health in the long run. 

Mr. SCOTT. Thank you. 

Mr. Weill, can you talk about the value of automatic enrollment 

to reduced—free or reduced breakfast and lunch and the idea of, 

if you have a high-poverty school, where you spend more in administration than you would save on the few people who actually pay, 

letting everyone have the free or reduced meals? 

Mr. WEILL. On the direct certification question, which is the first 

one, which is taking kids who are currently receiving TANF or food 

stamps or under the bill, also Medicaid, and making sure that they 

are automatically enrolled without the need for a separate application in the school meals program, that the issues here are that 

there are many kids who are eligible under current law, but not 

getting school lunch, school breakfast because the paperwork 

doesn’t get done for any number of reasons. You know, schools put 

it in backpacks, and it doesn’t get home, or whatever, language 

issues. 

So direct certification—the bill tightens up the direct certification 

process, so many—fewer of those kids fall through the cracks, and 
69 

we make sure that these kids who are already eligible are certified 

eligible for the program. 

The paperless proposal, which is also an excellent proposal—like 

the direct certification one—would say that in high-poverty areas, 

we would do away with paper applications altogether and allow 

school districts or bunches of schools to use alternative methods of 

determining what share of the kids should be free and get federal 

reimbursement on that basis, reduced price and pay. 

This has been tried in Philadelphia—it has worked well—where 

they do a household survey, so the use of census data or other survey data—— 

Mr. SCOTT. Do they actually end up saving money in that process? 

Mr. WEILL. I am sorry? 

Mr. SCOTT. Do they end up saving money in that process? 

Mr. WEILL. Yes, it saves money on the paperwork side, and it increases participation in the program among eligible children. 

Mr. SCOTT. And let me ask one last question. Is the reimbursement rate for the meals sufficient? 

Mr. WEILL. No. And the bill, which improves the reimbursement 

rate for lunch in schools that meet IOM standards takes an important step forward there. And as Secretary Vilsack indicated earlier, 

probably the shortfall in reimbursement is greater in breakfast 

than it is in lunch. 

Chairman MILLER. Congressman Platts? 

Mr. PLATTS. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Certainly honored to be a co-sponsor with you of this legislation 

and the reauthorization and appreciate your holding this hearing. 

I thank all of our witnesses for being here. 

I will be fairly brief, and that is just to thank each of you for 

partnering with the committee to share your knowledge and the 

importance of this issue. I mean, we are certainly in extremely difficult financial times, so we have got to do a good job of prioritizing. 

And when it comes to domestic issues, the health and education 

of our nation’s children, I think, is one of our highest priorities here 

on the domestic front, and that is what this legislation that we are 

looking at is all about. 

And I look at it as kind of preventative care. We can pay a little 

now and save a lot later and do right by the kids in the meantime, 

or we can, you know, pay less now and pay a lot more later and 

not do right by the kids. 

And so I hope that, with your assistance and your expertise, to 

help educate us committee members and the full House and Senate 

will be successful in the reauthorization and the advancements 

that are in here. 

And, Dr. Sanchez, I think you in your written testimony highlight what we really are talking about here in the short and long 

term. And I am going to quote just one of your sentences or one 

paragraph here about how many obese children and the huge percentage of our nation’s children that are obese today—and you reference your home state, 20 percent above the national average of 

16, and how they are more likely to miss school. That harms their 

education. 
70 

They are at increased risk of a variety of serious health conditions, including asthma, heart disease, and Type 2 diabetes, and 

that if we don’t change the direction we are heading, that this generation will be the first to live sicker and die younger than their 

parents’ generation. That is not acceptable. 

And I think what we are after here is to change that direction 

and do right by children and ultimately do right by every American 

who is paying taxes into the federal government, that they are getting a better return, that we do better in the meals we are providing. 

As you referenced, eating healthy is more expensive in many instances. And so we have lower income who are buying more processed food, less healthy and more obese, more health care costs, 

less prepared to do well in school. You know, that is a formula that 

is just not acceptable. 

And so my main point here, as I say, thanks for your being here 

and each of you bringing your perspectives, insights, and working 

with the committee as we go forward, and that we acknowledge the 

additional cost of doing right by our children, but also acknowledge 

the benefit to those children and ultimately to our nation, as the 

general reflected, the military readiness benefit, as well as the 

long-term economic benefit in so many ways. 

So with that, Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Mr. Tierney? 

Mr. TIERNEY. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Weill, I was hoping that you might address for me just briefly at least the issue that you testified about, access year round to 

school meals on that, and tell me—well, if you will speak to that. 

You know, how many children are actually currently in the summer school food program? And what are your thoughts about increasing that? 

Mr. WEILL. The summer food program has struggled to reach 

kids, in part because there aren’t enough summer activity and educational programs to serve the meals and in part because there is 

too much paperwork. And the bill starts to address these problems. 

As I said in my testimony, only 16 kids get summer food, summer lunch on an average day in July for every 100 who get school 

meals during the regular school year. And we know from the studies that both food insecurity among kids and obesity spike in the 

summer. In a way, the summer is, in a bad way, a control group 

for what happens if you don’t have a school meal program. 

So the provisions of the bill to increase summer participation are 

important. And the rural provision in particular, as I indicated, we 

would like to see extended to urban and suburban areas. 

Did you also ask about after school or—— 

Mr. TIERNEY. Would have been my next question, so go ahead. 

Mr. WEILL. So many kids now are in after-school programs until 

6:00, 7:00, or later in the evening because of their parents’ work 

and commuting situation that they really need more than the 

snack that the federal government supports now. They need supper 

when programs run that late. 

And the pilot program that does that in 13 states and the District of Columbia we support extending to all states in this legisla-
71 

tion, as well as some other provisions that are in here that reduce 

paperwork and make it easier to do that. 

Mr. TIERNEY. On the summer program, you have mentioned the 

rural aspect of it, but isn’t the suburban area also important, because they have a lower concentration of poverty? 

Mr. WEILL. Absolutely. I should have brought with me, we have 

on our Web site maps of every state which show where changing 

the test from—the area eligibility tests from 50 percent to 40 percent, what areas that would add to coverage in the program, and 

that is predominantly rural and suburban areas, but also some 

urban areas, as well. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Thank you. 

I had a question for the gentleman from the Heritage Foundation. I am sorry. Your name has escaped me at the moment. 

Mr. Rector, if I could, you indicate in your written remarks, at 

least, that the poor people are increasingly becoming overweight 

because they eat too much and they exercise too little and they appear to eat too many high-fat foods and foods with added sugars. 

And then you go on to say that, you know, a promising alternative 

to the situation is to simply limit the amount of low-nutrient, energy-dense foods, such as soft drinks, candy, chips, and French 

fries that schools provide or make available to students. 

So that sounds like you are in favor of having some sort of regulation or law that applies to schools and limits that kind of intake. 

Would that be accurate? 

Mr. RECTOR. No. I think that that is a fairly promising area, although—— 

Chairman MILLER. Hit your microphone, please. 

Mr. RECTOR [continuing]. It can be greatly oversold. But wait. I 

think that this is an issue that clearly can be decided at the local 

school. I don’t think that there is any necessity for this committee 

to jump in and become the soft drink czar for the nation, so I would 

strongly suggest that that is not an appropriate response, because 

we can make mistakes, you know? 

Mr. TIERNEY. Well, share with me what you think might be an 

appropriate response. Should there be any federal dollars at all applied in this direction? If so, how? 

Mr. RECTOR. In the—I am sorry, I didn’t understand. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Toward the issue of nutrition in schoolchildren? 

Mr. RECTOR. Yes, I think that you need to provide some school 

assistance. However, it is very important to put this in an overall 

budget context. 

For the most part, all of these programs are discussed in what 

I call the great charade, which is a pretense that these programs 

are the only thing that stand between children and starvation. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Well, I have—I don’t want to—— 

Mr. RECTOR. There are 70 different programs that we have to 

have. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Excuse me. I have to interrupt you, so what I am 

asking you is, what is your plan? I know what you think the criticism of the existing plans are, but what is your plan going forward? 

I want to give you that opportunity. 

Mr. RECTOR. For school nutrition, I would think that schools 

should have a continuing discussion about the offering of things 
72 

such as soft drinks in the schools. I don’t think you need a federal 

mandate on that. And I also think that you really ought to evaluate 

these programs. 

I think it is astonishing that you spend this money without any 

scientific evaluation whatsoever. 

Mr. TIERNEY. Well, I think it is astonishing—I just gave you an 

opportunity to tell me how you would spend the money, and the 

only thing you can—— 

Mr. RECTOR. I would spend the money on evaluation. I just said 

that. 

Mr. TIERNEY [continuing]. Just evaluation. Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Ms. Clarke? 

Ms. CLARKE. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. 

My question is for Dr. Sanchez and Major General Paul Monroe. 

While our discussion is focused on food and nutrition, I would just 

like to pivot for a moment to focus on fitness and ask a question 

of you. 

Recently, my office participated in a rally in New York City, urging Mayor Bloomberg to keep open our Douglas and DeGraw pool, 

which is affectionately known in our community as the Double-D 

pool. Double-D serves a dual purpose of teaching children to swim 

and is also a safe place for children to exercise. 

Having access to safe places to exercise is especially important 

in minority communities, since 25 percent of African-American and 

Hispanic children are obese. 

Fortunately, because of the community’s efforts, the Double-D 

pool will remain open. However, many communities across America, especially inner-city neighborhoods, lack safe exercise spaces 

for children, and combating the obesity epidemic in our country requires both proper nutrition and exercise. 

So here is my question. I would like you to comment on how a 

lack of safe exercise spaces for our children impacts the obesity crisis facing our nation. 

Dr. SANCHEZ. I had the honor and privilege of serving as chair 

of the Institute of Medicine committee that looked at what actions 

local governments could take to address childhood obesity. And 

there is a compelling evidence base for thinking about policies that 

create safe places for children and their families to be able to move 

their bodies. 

There is evidence there about the value of access to affordable 

foods within a neighborhood. So I believe that the evidence is fairly 

compelling. 

I would say that, in the context of the conversation that we are 

having today, insofar as childhood obesity goes, it will take a comprehensive, concerted effort to move the needle in the direction 

that we would like to move it. 

Food and movement are two elements. They need to be happening in the schools. They need to be happening in the homes. 

And they need to be happening in communities. And that combination is a combination that will begin to make a difference. And, in 

fact, in some communities in the nation, we are seeing the needle 

move. As I mentioned earlier, it is concerted efforts. This bill is an 
73 

important part of the foundation that will help move us in the direction that we need to move. 

If I can make two other points, Congressman Platts, we are paying now because Medicaid costs are increasing because of childhood 

obesity. In Arkansas, we are seeing that. I have no doubt that that 

is the case in other states. 

When it comes to healthy foods being more expensive perhaps 

than not-so-healthy foods, I would say this bill incorporates in it 

some nutrition education that then leads to smarter shopping, because there are times of year where some foods that are fresh are 

very inexpensive to purchase, but you have got to know what you 

are buying and when. 

And then, lastly, poverty links obesity and hunger. What we do 

in our communities and our schools can lead to better performance 

in schools, higher graduation rates, and in the long run, decreased 

poverty. 

MG MONROE. Congresswoman, physical fitness is extremely important. The Army specifically has begun to conduct a pre-basic 

training course because so many of our young people come unprepared, and they experience injuries while they are going through 

basic training. 

Most of us here are concerned about the fiscal responsibility, but 

consider this: 1,200 people a year are discharged because they are 

obese and out of shape. They fail to meet the minimum requirements, and they are discharged in their first term. 

It requires $50,000 to train someone in basic training, so everyone we lose, we have to recruit and spend that much money again, 

so we are talking about $60 million a year in costs there. And that 

pales in comparison to those that Dr. Sanchez just mentioned, the 

obesity that is related to heart disease, diabetes, cancer, and other 

health problems. 

I don’t know what the answer is, as far as physical fitness, but 

that is one of the programs that seems to be dropped, along with 

art, music, when school districts try to make their budget. But they 

are doing not only the military, but the country a disservice by not 

emphasizing physical fitness. 

Chairman MILLER. The gentlewoman’s time has expired. 

Mr. Kildee? 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Mr. Rector, you talked about the temporary or paucity of results 

of certain nutrition programs, the BMI program. Have there been 

any studies of the possible differences of results between different 

socioeconomic groups? 

I say that, because I taught generally 10th grade, and the junior 

highs were 7th, 8th and 9th. And the first day of school, I could 

tell those who came from one feeder school, junior high school, and 

those who came from another. And I was generally always right on 

that, their socioeconomic condition, and that one part of where I 

was raised was much less than the other. 

Is there any study that has been made on nutrition that takes 

place up to that, say, through the 9th grade? 

Mr. RECTOR. You see variations in what children eat at home 

based on the parents’ education, okay, that you I think see wiser 
74 

food choices as education goes up. It doesn’t correlate very well 

with income. 

But what I would say—I appreciate your question, but most of 

the problems that we see with regard to either adult or child obesity are pretty widespread in our society. I mean, we have people 

who are overweight in every income class and increasing, largely 

as a result of the fact that people take in more calories than they 

expend in exercise. 

And so that exercise to caloric balance is at the core of this. And 

I really don’t think it is very socioeconomic in nature. 

One particular thing I would say is that there is a lot of misinformation about this, which is one thing that is very commonly said 

is, well, poor people are overweight because they don’t have enough 

money to buy good foods, and so they are forced to buy junk foods. 

As I said in my testimony, I have researched this. Junk food is 

a very expensive form of calorie. It is not something that you would 

buy if, in fact, you are running out of money. 

I mean, we as—when you are running out of money and food in 

your household, you say, ‘‘Oh, boy, we had better get down to the 

store and get a bunch of Triscuits and Pepsi and some chips so we 

can tide through the end of the month.’’ 

It is, in fact, a very expensive form of calorie. In fact, Pepsi and 

Coke per calorie cost as much as milk. So I think what we have 

there is people overeat those things, and that contributes to obesity, but they do it all up and down the socioeconomic spectrum, 

and it is because those foods are very palatable. 

And I do think that it would be good to have an education system 

that began to show to people, ‘‘These are probably—these are not 

very good food choices.’’ But I don’t really think it is due to the fact 

that people, for example, don’t have enough resources to buy more 

nutritious food. 

In particular, if you really are running out of food, you are running—you don’t have enough to bring bulk food into the home, junk 

food is probably the last thing you would buy. You would buy basic 

staples which used to be more common in all households in the 

United States. 

Mr. KILDEE. Thank you very much. 

Thank you. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you. 

Chef Colicchio, this discussion has sort of gone back and forth 

here. Some of this is—what encourages me about this legislation 

that the committee is—we have been able to put together is that 

it really incorporates a lot of other people into this issue. I mean, 

we didn’t do this without soft drink manufacturers, without food 

processors, without other people looking at this, because they have 

been receiving a message from local school boards and states about 

competitive food sales, about sweets on campus, about vending machines. These decisions are being made locally all the time, and 

they have now come in and said, ‘‘Let’s think about a beverage policy, as opposed to just fighting every day that we can keep a sweetened drink on campus.’’ 

But a lot of this is about presentation. You are in the business 

of presentation. And we see some, you know, small studies done, 

just one on the presentation of the food, where it might be placed 
75 

in the cafeteria in proximity to the students, to the checkout, 

changes in the uptake rates of carrot sticks or celeries or fresh tomatoes or whatever it is that is being offered as opposed to other 

things on that line. 

And I assume in your business, as you try to present food to your 

customers, that is a big part of the decision. 

Mr. COLICCHIO. Sure. I think what is happening is that advertising to kids for fast food and for junk food is—we heard earlier 

testimony, just a tremendous amount of money that goes into it, 

and I think what is happening is that school lunch programs are 

starting to mimic fast food lines. 

And so things that are offered in the school lunch room are based 

on things like chicken nuggets and high-calorie, you know, carbonated drinks. And I think what is going—I mean, there is a sort of 

school of thought saying, well, to get the kids to eat more, you 

know, give them sort of what they want or what they are being told 

is something that they want. 

But, again, I think, as I mentioned in my testimony, we are 

adults, and we need to actually start telling our kids that there is 

a healthier alternative. You know, going to Mister Softee—— 

Chairman MILLER. That is sort of like the automobile industry 

said, ‘‘The reason we are selling all these SUVs is because that is 

what America wants.’’ No, they were selling them because they had 

four or five times the profit per vehicle, and it turned out they got 

trapped in that market, and we—— 

Mr. COLICCHIO. Right, right. They are telling Americans what 

they want—— 

Chairman MILLER. But for the federal government, we lost that 

industry. 

Mr. COLICCHIO. Sure. You know, again, kids will make a good 

choice if they are given the opportunity. You know, we know it 

from—my wife and I mentor a young girl who lives in Brooklyn, 

New York. And halfway through the month, when dollars run out 

from food stamps and from SNAP programs, they are forced to get 

the least expensive food available to them, which is usually sugar 

drinks. There is a sugar drink they sell that will give you calories, 

and they are empty calories, providing no nutrition at all. 

We found that when we took her into our home and fed her 

things like asparagus, she couldn’t believe how good it was. When 

we took her to a farm and had her pick strawberries, she had no 

idea they actually came out of the ground and that they were so 

delicious. 

And these things you don’t find in school lunchrooms. You are 

finding cheap, inexpensive, high-calorie fat and sugar foods. 

Mr. Scott, the question that you asked about how does obesity 

correlate to poverty—I think that was the question—again, when 

you are forced to choose between a Happy Meal that costs a dollar, 

it is cheap, but there is very little nutrition involved, there are a 

lot of calories, empty calories from sugar and starch and fat. 

And so it is affordable, but we are providing our kids no nutrition 

at all and just a tremendous amount of calories. And so kids are 

getting more than a 2,000-calorie, you know, meal. That is what is 

making them fat. 
76 

Chairman MILLER. You know, one of the things we are trying to 

do in this legislation is to really modernize this program. We have 

a program that was really designed to force agricultural products 

through the largest consumer, I guess, outside of the U.S. Army on 

food. 

So you get corn or you get wheat and then you send it out and 

you get back a pizza, you get back a corn dog. You send out a whole 

chicken, you get back a Chicken McNugget. That works really well 

for the farming community. It doesn’t work terribly well for the nutrition of our children. 

But as the Secretary was pointing out, with some equipment 

changes, with some alternatives, those schools now have some alternatives available to them at relatively low cost to provide fresh 

fruits and vegetables or more wholesome products from the programs than what was happening. 

And I think they were—it was easy. You know, you talked about 

your mother working in a school line. That is the program I went 

to. People were behind there making the meals from scratch. That 

is not going to happen today. Many schools don’t have kitchens. 

But that doesn’t mean we then have to surrender to high-calorie, 

high-fat foods in the name of our children. It is just not going to 

work. 

Mr. COLICCHIO. No. And, you know, it is interesting that early 

on Secretary Vilsack talked about the farm bill, because I think 

that that is something—another way to address this. Whole foods 

are more expensive for various reasons, and I think that the key 

to this is trying to get the cost of whole foods down. 

Why is it that processed foods are so cheap and yet whole foods, 

a head of cauliflower is expensive? It shouldn’t be that way, and 

maybe that is a place for discussion in the farm bill. 

But, again, my mother was always frustrated because she 

couldn’t get a hold of fresh vegetables and that she was forced to 

use a lot of processed foods. So, yes, it is—this is a major issue. 

Chairman MILLER. Dr. Sanchez, I just want to thank you for 

your statement. And I think this is what we have been trying to 

do in this legislation. You say that addressing the challenges of 

poor nutrition and obesity will take action from all levels of government, business, health care organizations, public health advocates, 

schools, families, and individuals. 

I know in my area, well, Blue Cross is a big provider, but as is 

Kaiser. And both of these organizations are working with schools, 

working with their covered patients to try to develop this. 

You know, I think it is unfair to stand that we haven’t solved 

obesity on the head of the school lunch program, the child nutrition 

programs. We have got a long ways to go in our community, but 

what we do see is a huge change in attitudes and education and 

receptivity to this message about what this is costing us. 

Again, as we went through this health care debate and as we 

continue to see these figures, the drivers of health care costs that 

you have pointed out, and this is an attempt to take this opportunity, kids are in the class, they are here, they are after school, 

and to see whether or not we can bring that information, we can 

bring some of those foods to this part of the day, but there are 

other parts of the day that families are going to have to take re-
77 

sponsibility for, health providers are going to have to take responsibility for. 

But to put this into that conversation that is now so valuable in 

this country, along with, as many of my colleagues have mentioned, 

exercise and the needs to combine healthy eating and exercising 

and getting kids up out of the thumb exercises on computers or 

games or however they are doing that, as important as much of 

that is. 

Mr. Kline? 

Mr. KLINE. Thank you, Mr. Chairman. Again, thanks to our witnesses. 

I want to pick up on what the chairman just said about there 

being a huge change in attitude. Clearly, we have seen that. Now 

we know that 90 percent of schools have eliminated soft drinks, caloric soft drinks. You get diet soda, you get water, you get sports 

drinks, and that has been a voluntary effort. The beverage association took that on without any federal legislation here. 

I just want to touch on a couple of things, because I don’t have 

a lot of time. Dr. Sanchez mentioned that this bill cost $8 billion. 

We need to keep in mind that this is some $8 billion over and 

above the current about $20 billion baseline. There is a lot of 

money here. 

Mr. Weill, I think your organization is suggesting that we broaden these programs. This bill has numerous so-called pilot programs 

in it where there are 13 states or some number of states and you 

would like to see all states included, as I understand your testimony, and I am sure you realize that that is billions and billions 

of dollars more on top of the $8 billion that is already there, so that 

is something we will be looking at as this bill comes up for markup, 

presumably in a week or 2, whenever it comes up. 

We will, of course, be looking at that, because that is an awful 

lot of money. And one of the problems when you start a pilot program with some number of states—of course, let’s arbitrarily pick 

13 here—that means you have got some 37 states that don’t have 

it, they want it, and that just leads to a whole lot more spending, 

as you go down the line. 

Chef, I mean, I am sure that when you prepare the asparagus 

that your kids, my kids, every kid would love to have the asparagus, and, of course, we are all envious of your skills and we are 

very grateful that you are here today. 

I hear the buzzer buzzing, so I am going to go to Mr. Rector, as 

I run out of my time, because we have had—I have heard a number of the witnesses and others say for some time that things like, 

‘‘We know from the studies,’’ or, ‘‘Studies show us,’’ or, ‘‘The evidence says,’’ and yet in your testimony, you are saying we don’t 

have a study that would really address this issue and show us the 

effectiveness with a control group. 

I would like to give you some time, because I know you were trying to respond to an earlier question by saying that your plan 

would be to know the facts before we start. So can you just take 

this opportunity, the closing minute or 2, and talk about the sort 

of discrepancy, where clearly there are studies—and you are suggesting there aren’t studies with control groups—can you take 

some time to address that? 
78 

Mr. RECTOR. Yes. In most government programs, you have evaluations in which you have a treatment group that receives the program, and then you have a randomly selected control group that 

does not receive the program. There are different ways of doing 

that. 

And then you evaluate the difference between those two groups 

in terms of the outcome. That is the way you would test a drug, 

for example. 

In these programs, that is never done. There is no control group. 

And therefore, there are very sophisticated studies that try to sort 

of synthetically assume what would have happened in the absence 

of the program, and they produce very contradictory results, and 

they are not very reliable. 

What you find is when you do a real evaluation on any kind of 

program, including programs I like, like abstinence education, is 

that a lot of programs don’t have any effect. You do get some effect, 

but the effect is always far less than you thought, okay? So it is 

very easy to say, well, we have got a problem with childhood obesity, and if we just throw this kind of money in here and do this 

here, all these wonderful things are going to happen. 

But, in fact, when you find when you do the evaluation that you 

get either no effect or an effect that is a lot smaller than you had 

hoped it was going to be. And it is very important, before you start 

throwing out billions and billions and billions of dollars, that you 

actually step back and try to figure out what, in fact, doing this 

particular thing is going to do. 

Now, I will go back again to school breakfast. There are always 

claims about, oh, well, this is going to improve academic achievement. I think there is a great theory of why that would be. It 

seems plausible to me. But, in fact, there is not a single evaluation 

with a control group to substantiate that claim. 

And the couple that exist as alleged scientific studies have massive methodological problems with what are called selection bias 

that really make them laughable. And there are only a handful of 

those. 

So before you—you know, we are going bankrupt. We are on the 

path to Greece, okay? And we are spending an astonishing amount 

of money assisting low-income and poor people with children, 

again, over $30,000 per household, cash, food, housing, medical 

care, social services, not general education, amazing amount of 

money. 

And yet somehow we are told that, despite we are spending 

$30,000 for every household with children in the bottom third of 

the population, that we have kids teetering around here that, you 

know, can’t study because they don’t have enough food in their 

stomachs. 

I think that most of those claims are exaggerated. And if you— 

and it is very important before you start piling on more spending 

and going further down the road to Greece that you actually evaluate these things so that you are getting more effect for each dollar 

that you spend. 

Mr. KLINE. All right, thank you. 

I yield back, Mr. Chairman. 

Mrs. MCCARTHY. Thank you again, Chairman Miller. 
79 

You know, again, going through all the hearings that we have 

gone through over the last several years, and basically a large part 

of my subcommittee has been working on obesity. So a lot of the 

things that I am hearing today, we have taken those ideas and put 

them into the bill. I had five standalone bills that we have been 

able to put four of them into the main bill. 

The whole idea about the legislation that we are going through 

is a large part on education, because there has come a point in this 

country where people are not being educated about the food, the 

processed food that they are eating, which goes to the child. 

So this legislation also looks at, how are we going to cut down 

costs? Because there are a lot of duplicative programs and make it 

more streamlined. 

So I think that we are covering almost everything on what the 

debate is, but I will go back and say that the food that these children are eating is certainly raising the health care costs. Again— 

and Chairman Miller had said, that was the whole idea about the 

health care bill, to take the whole thing and look at it holistically. 

We have facts that children in this country, higher rates than 

ever, are Type 2 diabetes. We are seeing as a fact that young children are raising their cholesterol levels way above where they 

should be. So those facts alone, this bill is trying to look at. 

Now, I guess, you know—and we are also looking at very strongly not just for the federal government to be involved in this, but 

to have the partnerships. As you have done, Chef—I am going to 

say this wrong—Colicchio, and also Dr. Sanchez, you know, by the 

partnerships that you have been able to do to bring everybody together, again, more education than an awful lot of other issues. 

So I guess my question to the panel would be—especially to you, 

Tom—how do you describe your establishments, public-private 

partnerships, to make real changes in schools and to improve nutrition? I mean, obviously, that is what you have been doing. It has 

been very responsive. 

I will be honest with you. I am a very bad eater. But I started 

working or looking at the programs that have been challenging for 

schools, and I find it fascinating. And data—we will have data, because many of my schools that are already doing this kind of a 

model are working with hospitals so they have the data. 

And so far, the data is showing kids do better, they are not as 

restless, and they are more attentive, and overall their quality of 

life has improved tremendously. So that data is coming through. 

And, by the way, we are collecting data. 

Chef? 

Mr. COLICCHIO. Yes, thank you. Our First Lady sort of brought 

a group of chefs—1,000, around—to the south lawn and asked us 

to go into schools and to start educating and also working with 

local—creating local community farms. 

We are actually creating a farm in New York right now that will 

bring in probably three local public schools to use it as a classroom, 

primarily to educate. And some of the fruits and vegetables produced on that farm will go into the school lunch system, but it is 

really primarily to educate children on how food is grown and why 

eating—you know, making healthier choices translates into 

healthier children. 
80 

Also, in New York City, there has been some pilot programs 

where they are providing lunches in the classroom in first period, 

not in the lunchroom. A lot of the children—there is a stigmatism 

associated with coming in early. You are a poor kid. And so they 

don’t actually participate in some of the morning programs. 

But we are finding that, when kids come into first period and 

they are getting a lunch, that they are more attentive, there are 

less incidents where they are going to the principal’s office for behavior issues and things like that. 

And so maybe this isn’t an absolute controlled study, but if you 

go into the schoolrooms, you go into the schools and you talk to the 

teachers and talk to the principals, they will tell you it is working. 

Mrs. MCCARTHY. Dr. Sanchez, quickly, because we are running 

out of time—we have a vote—even though we don’t have, quote, 

right now all the information that we need, but would you not 

agree that where we are going and going forward hopefully we can 

deal with—certainly starting from Head Start—that is where I believe we should start so we can prevent some of these kids on going 

to be, by the time they are in the early teens, not to have diabetes 

and not to have high blood pressure and cholesterol problems? 

Dr. SANCHEZ. I wholeheartedly concur. I think that the evidence 

base is growing. I would agree with Mr. Rector that the randomized control trial, which is the gold standard for pharmaceutical 

products, is not necessarily the gold standard for what goes on in 

communities. 

The evidence is building. The methodologies are becoming more 

and more sound. And the evidence is fairly compelling. 

And, again, there are success stories. There are stories of what 

you can do in Head Start that makes a difference. There are stories 

of what you can do in school systems that are moving the needle 

in the direction that we want to move the needle. 

Public-private partnerships, I believe, are essential. In North 

Texas, we are trying to make the case that child obesity is a corporate North Texas issue. And getting corporate North Texas—— 

Chairman MILLER. I am going to intervene here. I am sorry. I 

just—I wanted to get to Mr. Thompson. Thank you. The gentlewoman’s time is expired. Thank you—— 

Mrs. MCCARTHY. Thank you. 

Chairman MILLER [continuing]. Before we leave for a vote. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you, Chairman. 

Major General, thanks for your service to the country and your 

continued service with Mission: Readiness. Very much appreciated. 

Very simply, in your testimony, you explained that there is not 

one single action that we can take to remedy the problem of obesity 

in the nation, and you focused on the role the schools play in child 

nutrition. Just briefly, what is one action, one action, starting with 

the parents can take? 

MG MONROE. Well, going back a little farther than that, parents 

need to be educated, also, and just more nutritious diet and exercise. In the military now, what we have done, there is no—we 

haven’t studied empirically. It is just the reaction of what is happening. We have a lot of broken bones in basic training because a 

lack of exercise and a lack of nutritious meals. 
81 

The military tries to correct that. Unfortunately, we have also allowed fast food restaurants on military bases. And even the dining 

facilities, they have opened up that type of food service, if you will. 

So they have the regular balanced food. Every military organization has a food service officer that pays attention to the balance of 

nutrition in the food. But at the same time, we still have corn dogs 

over at the side, and it is just defeating that purpose. 

But if there was some way we could educate parents, maybe 

through—once a school’s—through PTAs and things like that, that 

this is what is beneficial for your child, and these are some of the 

things that you can expect if they are not eating nutritious foods 

and if they are not exercising. 

Mr. THOMPSON. And what would be one thing, based on your 

work with Mission: Readiness, one thing? If you had a priority of 

what schools should do, what would that one thing be? 

MG MONROE. Well, some of it has begun, is to remove those sugared sodas that they have in the restaurant, and provide more 

healthy lunches, because a lot of kids do eat in the cafeteria. My 

wife is a retired school principal, and she was there when they 

used to cook in the kitchen. They still have a kitchen. And all of 

a sudden, in order to save money, the district contracted and they 

get corn dogs and Cheetos and things of that nature. And it just 

doesn’t help the children. 

Again, as I mentioned earlier, we get rid of physical education 

programs, which we really need in order to keep our people healthy 

and to make sure that we have those folks that are qualified to enlist in the military, because they have had nutritious meals and 

they have had the exercise that they need. 

The first thing I would say that parents can do is get their kids 

moving. 

Mr. THOMPSON. Thank you. 

Mr. Chairman, I yield back. 

Chairman MILLER. Ms. Chu—one question—— 

Ms. CHU. Okay, I will just ask one question, which is research 

has shown that there is a strong connection between well-fed 

healthy students and achievement. And we certainly need to improve our lowest performing schools. And to ensure that our lowest 

performing schools that are at the lowest 5 percent make a turnaround, it seems that it is critical for us to incorporate wraparound 

services, such as free and reduced price meals. 

To that end, do you—what do you think about schools designating the lowest performing schools under ESEA as automatically 

certified for school meal programs? 

Mr. WEILL. I think it would be great to focus, given the limited 

resources, to focus more the expansions in the lowest income 

schools, so I think that is an excellent idea. 

I would just add, related to that, that in the debate, as Dr. Sanchez says, there is more and more compelling evidence of the effect 

of these programs. But also, the other evidentiary base that we 

have that the committee could look to is talking to teachers, because when these programs get into the schools, get into the classrooms, the teachers are the biggest advocates for school breakfast 

and school lunch and better nutrition in these programs. 

Ms. CHU. Thank you. I yield back. 
82 

Chairman MILLER. Thank you very much. 

Thank you for your time and your expertise and bearing with us 

during the set of votes. We are not going to make you do it a second time. 

It is the intent of the committee to mark up this legislation on 

the week that we return after the July 4th break, so just put people on notice of that. And if there are no further comments or questions, the committee will stand adjourned. 

And, again, thank you so much for your time. 

[Additional submission of Mr. Miller follows:] 

Prepared Statement of the Food Research and Action Center 

Chairman Miller, thank you for your work on the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act (HR 5504) and for holding today’s hearing. 

According to the Food Research and Action Center, over 15% of households in 

Washington’s 2nd Congressional District experience food insecurity. We need to do 

more to make sure that every child gets the nutritious food he or she needs to be 

healthy. 

The Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act is a great step forward towards the important goals of reducing childhood hunger and obesity. It provides 

over $8 billion to help school districts, non-profits, and community organizations improve access to food for low-income children while giving the Secretary of Agriculture much-needed authority to strengthen nutritional requirements for food 

served in schools. 

I am particularly pleased that HR 5504 includes provision that will help non-profits and community organizations serve food to low-income children after school and 

during the summer. Specifically, Section 113 of the legislation will allow non-profits 

in 10 states to serve nutritious meals and snacks after school, on weekends, and 

during the summer, ensuring that they can help low-income children access healthy 

food 365 days a year. This expansion of the enormously successful ‘‘Miller Pilot’’ in 

California is a great approach to helping low-income children get nutritious meals 

at times when they are most vulnerable to hunger. 

We have a moral obligation to ensure that all children get enough to eat, and your 

efforts will help us get closer to President Obama’s goal of ending childhood hunger 

in America by 2015. I look forward to working with you to pass the Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act in the coming weeks. 

[Additional submissions of Mr. Kucinich follow:] 
83 
84 
85 
86 
87 
88 
89 
90 
91 
92 

[The article, ‘‘Television viewing, fast-food consumption, and children’s obesity,’’ by Hung-Hao Chang, Rodolofo M. Nayga, Jr., Contemporary Economic Policy, July 2009, may be accessed at the following Internet address:] 

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/20100701hearingarticle.pdf 

[The article, ‘‘Fast-Food Restaurant Advertising on Television 

and Its Influence on Childhood Obesity,’’ by Shin-Yi-Chou, Inas 

Rashad and Michael Gross, Journal of Law and Economics, November 2008, may be accessed at the following Internet address:] 
93 

http://edlabor.house.gov/documents/111/pdf/publications/20100701hearingarticle3.pdf 

[Additional submissions of Mr. Weill follow:] 

Food Research and Action Center’s 

Child Nutrition Reauthorization Materials 

School Nutrition Programs: 

• Providing Grants for Universal and In-Classroom School Breakfast Programs. 

A one pager that outlines the importance of supporting universal and in-classroom 

breakfast. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr—priority—breakfast.pdf 

• How to Expand Participation in School Breakfast. An in-depth policy brief on 

the School Breakfast Program. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR06—breakfast.pdf 

• Eliminating paper applications for free school meals. A one pager that recommends strategies to improve the process for qualifying low-income children for 

free school meals and ways to allow high poverty schools to provide free meals to 

all students. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr—priority—paperless.pdf 

Afterschool and Summer Nutrition Programs: 

• Reaching More Children in Need of Afterschool and Summer Nutrition: Improving the Area Eligibility Test. A one pager that outlines the need to lower the area 

eligibility requirement from 50 percent to 40 percent. Area eligibility is how afterschool and summer programs qualify to participate in the child nutrition programs. 

http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr—priority—area—eligibility.pdf 

• Expand the Afterschool Meal Program Nationwide. A one pager that outlines 

the need to expand the Afterschool Meal Program so that every state can participate. Currently, the program is only available in 13 states and the District of Columbia. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr—priority—afterschool.pdf 

• Increasing Access to Summer Meals. A one pager that outlines ways to improve 

Summer Food so that more children can participate. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr— 

priority—summer.pdf 

• How to Increase Low-Income Children’s Access to Nutritious Meals and Snacks 

After School. An in-depth policy brief on the Afterschool Nutrition Programs. http:// 

www.frac.org/pdf/CNR02—afterschool.pdf 

• How to Increase Low-Income Children’s Access to Nutritious Meals in the Summer. An in-depth policy brief on the Summer Nutrition Programs. http:// 

www.frac.org/pdf/CNR04—summer.pdf 

Child and Adult Care Food Program: 

• Allow child care centers and homes the option of serving a third meal. A one 

pager that outlines the importance of allowing children to receive three meals if 

they are in child care for more than eight hours. Currently, they can only receive 

two meals and a snack. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr—priority—cacfp— 

thirdmeal.pdf 

• Improving the Area Eligibility Test for the Child and Adult Care Food Program. 

A one pager on that outlines the need to lower the area eligibility requirement from 

50 percent to 40 percent. Area eligibility is how child care homes qualify to participate in the Child and Adult Care Food Program. http://www.frac.org/pdf/cnr—priority—area—eligibility—cacfp.pdf 

• How to Promote Access to Good Nutrition in Child Care Settings. An in-depth 

policy brief on ways to increase low-income children’s access to nutritious meals and 

snacks while they are in child care. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR03—CACFP.pdf 

Nutrition Quality: 

• How Improving Federal Nutrition Program Access and Quality Work Together 

to Reduce Hunger and Promote Healthy Eating. An in-depth analysis of how the 

child nutrition programs combat both hunger and obesity. http://www.frac.org/pdf/ 

CNR01—qualityandaccess.pdf 

• How Competitive Foods in Schools Impact Student Health, School Meal Programs, and Students from Low-Income Families. An in-depth policy brief that outlines the impact of competitive foods. http://www.frac.org/pdf/CNR05— 

competitivefoods.pdf 
94 

June 16, 2010. 

Hon. HARRY REID, Majority Leader; Hon. MITCH MCCONNELL, Minority Leader; Hon. 

RICHARD DURBIN, Assistant Majority Leader; Hon. JON KYL, Assistant Minority 

Leader; 

United States Senate, Washington, DC 20510. 

DEAR SENATORS REID, MCCONNELL, DURBIN AND KYL: We the undersigned organizations are writing to ask for your help in achieving passage of a robustly funded 

and comprehensive child nutrition reauthorization bill before the end of the 111th 

Congress that will ensure more low-income children have access to these valuable 

programs and take a strong step forward to meet the challenge of ending childhood 

hunger by 2015. 

According to the USDA nearly one in four children in the United States is food 

insecure: that is, some 17 million children who face hunger. Child nutrition programs offer the healthiest and most nourishing meals that many children receive 

each week. For many poor children, they may be their only fully-balanced meals. 

Moreover, there are many poor children who do not have access to nutrition programs at all. This is particularly true for children living in low-income and rural 

areas where breakfast, child care and after school, or summer and weekend food 

programs are not available to them. 

Data on child nutrition program participation illustrate the point that there are 

millions of low-income children who do not have child nutrition programs available 

to them. In FY2009, 19.5 million low income children received free and reduced 

price school lunches. This compared to only 9.1 million receiving free and reduced 

price breakfasts, and only 2.2 million children in summer food programs. Moreover, 

only 3.1 million children are in child care centers and homes with federally supported child nutrition programs. Clearly these are large gaps in service that must 

be filled quickly if we are to accomplish an end to childhood hunger, and time is 

running out to reach this goal by 2015. 

Our organizations are united in the call for completion of a strong and fully funded child nutrition reauthorization bill before the end of this year. Two hundred 

twenty one members of the House of Representatives have written to Speaker 

Nancy Pelosi, urging her assistance in identifying resources to achieve President 

Barack Obama’s commitment of $10 billion in additional funding for child nutrition 

over 10 years. We therefore respectfully request that you bring S.3307 to the Senate 

floor with the full funding increase proposed by the President, with the right mix 

of funding, and on a schedule that assures that this year this important legislation 

can fill the gaps in access that remain for millions of our nation’s poorest children. 

Respectfully, 

[Signatures as of 6/14/10] 

National Organizations 

9to5, National Association of Working Women 

Action for Children 

Afterschool Alliance 

Alliance to End Hunger 

American Academy of Pediatrics 

American Baptist Home Mission Societies 

American Commodity Distribution Association 

American Community Gardening Association 

American Federation of State, County, and Municipal Employees 

American Federation of Teachers 

American School Health Association 

Americans for Democratic Action, Inc. 

Association of Nutrition Services Agencies 

Bread for the World 

Catholic Charities USA 

Center for Law and Social Policy 

Child Care Network 

Child Welfare League of America 

Children’s Defense Fund 

Children’s Health Watch 

Church Women United 

Christian Reformed Church in North America 

Coalition on Human Needs 

Community Action Partnership 

Community Food Security Coalition 
95 

Conference of Major Superiors of Men 

Congressional Hunger Center 

Disabled Veterans Committee on Housing 

Early Care and Education Consortium 

Easter Seals 

eGovernment Payments Council of the EFTA 

End Hunger Network 

Evangelical Lutheran Church in America 

Feeding America 

First Focus Campaign for Children 

Food Research & Action Center (FRAC) 

Friends Committee on National Legislation 

Half in Ten Campaign 

Human Relief Organization 

Islamic Circle of North America 

Jewish Council for Public Affairs 

Jewish Reconstructionist Federation 

Knowledge Learning Corp. 

Land O’ Lakes, Inc. 

Leadership Conference of Women Religious 

Learning Care Group 

Lutheran Services in America 

MAZON-A Jewish Response to Hunger 

Meals on Wheels Association of America 

Mennonite Central Committee 

Muslim Public Affairs Council 

National Advocacy Center of the Sisters of the Good Shepherd 

National Association of County Human Services Administrators 

National Association for Family Child Care 

National Association for the Education of Young Children 

National Black Child Development Institute 

National CACFP Forum 

National Collaboration for Youth 

National Council of Churches of Christ, USA 

National Council of Jewish Women 

National Council of La Raza 

National Education Association/ 

National Farmers Union 

National Immigration Law Center 

National Recreation and Park Association 

National Rural Health Association 

National Summer Learning Association 

National WIC Association 

National Women’s Law Center 

NETWORK: A National Catholic Social Justice Lobby 

Presbyterian Church U.S.A. Washington Office 

Progressive National Baptist Convention RESULTS 

Salvation Army 

Sargent Shriver National Center on Poverty Law 

Save the Children 

School Food FOCUS 

School Gardens Across America 

School Nutrition Association 

Service Employees International Union 

Share Our Strength 

Single Stop USA 

Sodexo 

Sodexo Foundation 

Sojourners 

The Episcopal Church 

The Jewish Federations of North America 

The Leadership Conference on Civil and Human Rights 

The National Center for Children and Families 

The National Policy and Advocacy Council on Homelessness 

The Society of St. Andrew 

The Sponsors Association 

The United Methodist Church-General Board of Church and Society 

Union for Reform Judaism 
96 

United Church of Christ 

United Fresh Produce Association 

Universities Fighting World Hunger 

USAction 

Voices for America’s Children 

WhyHunger 

Women of Reform Judaism 

YMCA of the USA 

YWCA 

Zero to Three 

State/Local Organizations 

Alabama 

Auburn University 

Bay Area Food Bank 

Food Bank of North Alabama 

Jefferson County Child Development Council Inc. 

Legion of Mary 

Alaska 

Alaska Center for Public Policy 

Food Bank of Alaska 

Arizona 

Arizona Association of Family Day Care Providers 

Arizona Child Care Association 

Arizona Community Action Association 

Arizona Council of Human Services Providers 

Association of Arizona Food Banks 

Boys and Girls Clubs of Metropolitan Phoenix 

Community Food Bank, Inc. 

Desert Mission Food Bank 

Grand Canyon Synod—ELCA 

St. Mary’s Food Bank Alliance 

United Food Bank 

Yuma Community Food Bank 

WHEAT 

Arkansas 

Arkansas Action for Peace 

Arkansas Advocates for Children and Families 

Arkansas Affiliate American Association of Family and Consumer Services 

Arkansas Health Care Access Foundation 

Arkansas Homeless Coalition 

Arkansas Hunger Alliance 

Arkansas Public Policy Panel 

Arkansas United Methodist Church Hunger Action Task Force 

Black River Area Development Corporation 

Carroll County Community Foundation 

Catholic Adoption Services 

Catholic Charities of Arkansas 

Christ Episcopal Church 

City Connections, Inc. 

Community Crisis Intervention Services, Inc. 

Family Resource Service of Lonoke 

Feed the Children 

First United Methodist Church-Russellville 

First United Methodist Church-Springdale 

Flint Street Fellowship Food Pantry 

Food Bank of Northeast Arkansas 

FPC Food Pantry 

Great Beginnings 

Hill’s Community Learning Center 

Kids 1st Inc. 

Manna from Heaven Food Pantry 

Melbourne-Bethesda-Cushman UMS 

Methodist Federation for Social Action 

Neighbor to Neighbor 
97 

North Little Rock Mayor’s Youth Council 

Project HOPE Food Bank 

Southeast District Arkansas Conference United Methodist Women 

Saint Paul’s Episcopal Church 

South West Arkansas Food Bank 

The Vine and The Branches, Inc. 

Total Deliverance Cathedral Church 

California 

9to5 Bay Area 

9to5 Los Angeles 

A World Fit For Kids 

ACT for Women and Girls 

Alameda County Community Food Bank 

Auburn Adventist Community Services 

Auburn Interfaith Food Closet 

Breastfeeding Task Force of Greater Los Angeles 

California Association for the Education of Young Children 

California Association of Food Banks 

California Breastfeeding Coalition 

California Emergency Foodlink 

California/Nevada Community Action Partnership State Association 

California Roundtable 

California School-Age Consortium 

California School Nutrition Association 

Central Valley Association for the Education of Young Children 

Child Care Food Program Roundtable 

Child Development Centers 

Child Nutrition Program of Southern California 

CHILDS-PACE 

Christian Church (Disciples of Christ) 

Community Child Care Council (4Cs) 

Community Food Bank of San Benito County 

Continuing Development Inc. 

Contra Costa Child Care Council 

Family Resource & Referral Center 

FCEOC Head Start 

FIND Food Bank, Inc. 

Food Bank of Contra Costa and Solano 

Food Bank of the Rockies 

FOOD Share 

Fresno County EOC Head Start and Early Head Start 

Full Circle 

Genesis House, Inc. 

Good Samaritan Baptist Church 

Greater Richmond Interfaith Program 

Imperial Valley Food bank 

Interfaith Food Bank 

International Institute of Los Angeles 

Islamic Information Service 

Libreria del Pueblo 

Los Angeles Coalition to End Hunger & Homelessness 

Los Angeles Regional Foodbank 

Lord’s Pantry 

Napa ValleyFood Bank/CANV 

National Association of Social Workers-California Chapter 

National Council of Jewish Women, California State Public Affair 

Newport-Mesa Federation of Teachers 

North Coast Opportunities Rural Communities Child Care 

Orange Children & Parents Together, Inc 

Parent Voices El Dorado County 

Partnership for Children and Youth 

Placer Food Bank 

Revolution Foods 

Rose Foundation for Communities and the Environment 

San Francisco Food Bank 

Saint Joseph Center 

Second Harvest Food Bank of Orange County 
98 

Second Harvest Food Bank of Santa Clara and San Mateo Counties 

Second Harvest Food Bank Santa Cruz County 

Sister Evelyn Mourey Center, Inc 

Sisters of Mercy 

Sparrow Project 

St Vincent de Paul, Dixon 

St. Vincent de Paul, Concord 

The Resource Connection Food Bank 

United Ways of California 

Valley Oak Children’s Services 

Ventura County Health Care Agency 

Western Center on Law and Poverty 

Wu Yee Children’s Services 

Youth Leadership Institute 

Colorado 

9to5 Colorado 

ACS Community LIFT 

Arvada Community Food Bank 

Care and Share Food Bank 

Cherry Creek Schools Food and Nutrition Services 

Colorado Children’s Campaign 

Colorado Coalition to End Hunger 

Colorado Community Action Association 

Colorado Legacy Foundation 

Colorado Office of Professional Development 

Colorado Progressive Coalition 

Colorado Social Legislation Committee 

Colorado Statewide Parent Coalition 

Congregation B’nai Chaim 

Daniels Fund 

Denver Urban Ministries 

Early Childhood Education Association of Colorado 

Family to Family 

Feeding Colorado 

Food Bank for Larimer County 

Food Bank of the Rockies 

GreenLeaf 

Hope Morrison, Inc. 

Hunger Free Colorado 

Inter-Faith Community Services 

Lutheran Advocacy Ministry—Colorado 

Luv In Action 

Metro CareRing 

Metro Denver Health and Wellness Commission 

Mountain Family Center 

OUR Center 

Overstreet & Associates 

Share Our Strength-Colorado 

Sisters of Charity of Leavenworth 

Weld Food Bank 

Connecticut 

Community Health Network 

Connecticut Association for Human Services 

Connecticut Food Policy Council 

Connecticut Public Health Association 

Connecticut Voices for Children 

Collaborative Center for Justice 

End Hunger Connecticut! 

Foodshare 

Jewish Federation of Eastern Fairfield County 

MACC Charities 

Poor People’s Alliance 

Delaware 

Food Bank of Delaware 

District of Columbia 

Ample Harvest 
99 

Capital Area Food Bank 

D.C. Hunger Solutions 

Mary’s Center for Maternal and Child Care 

Summit Health Institute for Research and Education, Inc. 

Florida 

Academy 2000, Inc. 

AME Missionary Society 

Association of Early Learning Coalitions 

Boca Helping Hands 

CCB/CSC Million Meals Committee 

Caring For Others Ministries 

Central Florida Teen Challenge 

CharityExpressInc. 

Children’s Services Council of Broward County 

Circle of Life 

Community Crusaders 

Community Foundation for Palm Beach and Martin Counties 

Community Partnership Group 

CROS Ministries-United Methodist Church 

Easter Seals of S. Florida 

EBPrest 

ECHO (Emergency Care Help Organization) 

Episcopal Charities of Southeast Florida 

Evangelical Christian Bible Ministries International 

Family Assistance Coalition, Inc. 

Family Central.org 

Farmworker Association of Florida, Inc. 

Florida Conference AMEC Women’s Missionary Society 

Florida Impact 

Florida Organic Growers 

Gainesville Commission on the Status of Women 

Gulfstream Goodwill 

Harry Chapin Food Bank of SW Florida 

Holy Name of Jesus Food Pantry 

Hope International Church 

Housing Partnership 

IBEW #728 AFL-CIO 

ISF Group, Inc. 

Jesus Loves You Outreach Ministries, Inc. 

Lutheran Social Services of Northeast Florida Inc 

Million Meals Committee 

Mt. Sinai M.B. Church 

New Hope Charities 

Okeechobee County School District 

Palm Beach County Community Food Alliance 

Rescue Outreach Mission 

Safe Earth Alliance 

Second Harvest Food Bank of Central Florida 

Second Harvest North Florida 

South Brevard Sharing Center 

St. George’s Center, Inc. 

St. Luke’s United Methodist Church 

St. Paul A.M.E. Church, Tallahassee 

Strong WoMen Network 

Tampa Jewish Federation 

The Blue Foundation for a Healthy Florida 

The Children’s Forum, Inc. 

The Children’s Trust 

The Christian Sharing Center 

The First Community Christian Pentecostal Church of God 

The Jewish Community Relations Council of the Greater Miami Jewish Federation 

The Sharing Center-Sanford 

Treasure Coast Food Bank 

True Tabernacle of Jesus Christ Ministries, Inc 

Tuskawilla United Methodist Church 

United Methodist Women 

Zoe Ministries 
100 

Georgia 

9to5 Atlanta Working Women 

Atlanta Community Food Bank 

Chatham County Nutrition Program 

Feeding the Valley, Inc. 

Georgia School Nutrition 

Macon Bibb County Economic Opportunity Council 

The West End Center, Inc. 

Hawaii 

Aunty Jill’s Playgroup 

Child Care Business Coalition of Hawaii 

Family Support Hawaii 

Hawaii Breastfeeding Coalition 

It’s A Small World Daycare 

Kimberley Limasa’s Day Care 

Knight’s Day Care 

Little Learners Preschool, LLC 

Maui Economic Opportunity, Inc. 

PATCH 

Saint Joseph Preschool 

Seagull Schools 

Shen’s Daycare 

Waiokeola Congregational Church 

Wesley Children’s Programs 

Idaho 

Idaho Interfaith Roundtable Against Hunger 

Monastery of St. Gertrude 

Sandpoint Food Group 

Tables of Hope 

Illinois 

Arcola Food Pantry 

Chicago Lights Elam Davies Social Service Center 

Chosen Tabernacle Ministries 

Clifton Community Food Pantry 

Coalition on Human Needs 

Community Service Center 

Corner Stone Food Pantry 

Dominican Sisters of Sinsinawa 

Eastern Illinois Foodbank 

Feeding Illinois 

Generations of Hope 

Grassroots Collaborative 

Greater Chicago Food Depository 

Illinois Action for Children 

Illinois Hunger Coalition 

Illinois Maternal and Child Health Coalition 

Lutheran Advocacy—Illinois 

Lutheran Church of St. John 

Marillac Food Pantry 

National Council of Jewish Women, Illinois State Public Affairs 

Northern Illinois Food Bank 

Northside Anti-Hunger Network 

Oak Park River Forest Food Pantry 

Palestine Food Pantry 

Respond Now 

River Bend Foodbank 

Rural Grace Pantry 

SAM Food Pantry 

Salt and Light 

Sixth Grace Presbyterian Church 

St. Cletus Food Pantry 

Vital Bridges NFP, Inc. 

Voices for Illinois Children 

YWCA-Illinois 
101 

Indiana 

Catholic Charities Archdiocese of Indianapolis 

Catholic Charities Terre Haute 

Children’s Bureau, Inc. 

Church Women United in Indiana 

Coalition on Human Needs 

Community Harvest Food Bank of Northeast Indiana, Inc. 

Disciples Home Mission 

Feeding Indiana’s Hungry, Inc. 

Food Bank of Northwest Indiana 

Food Finders Food Bank 

Freestore Food Bank-Cincinnati 

Hoosier Hills Food Bank 

Indiana Coalition for Human Services 

Jewish Community Relations Council-Indiana 

KALP NETWORK, INC. 

Lafayette Urban Ministry 

Second Harvest Food Bank of East Central Indiana 

Terre Haute Deanery Pastoral Center 

The Madison Literacy Coalition 

UAW Local 287 

Iowa 

Child and Family Policy Center 

Environmental Nutrition Solutions 

Food Bank of Iowa 

Food Bank of Siouxland 

Iowa Food Bank Association 

Northeast Iowa Food Bank 

River Bend Foodbank 

Sisters of St. Francis 

Kansas 

Children’s Mercy Family Health Partners 

Church 

Church World Service-Great Plains Office 

Communities In Schools of Kansas 

Douglas County Child Development Association 

El Centro, Inc. 

Family Resource Center, Inc. 

First Lutheran Early Education Center 

First Street Church of God 

GraceMed Health Clinic, Inc. 

Harvesters—The Community Food Network 

Heart of Kansas Family Health Care 

Heritage Preschool 

Hillview Christian Children’s Center 

Jewish Community Center 

Jewish Community Relations Bureau of Kansas City 

Kansas Action for Children 

Kansas Association for the Medically Underserved 

Kansas Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics 

Kansas Children’s Service League 

Kansas City Kansas Community College Campus Child Care Center 

Kansas Food Security Task Force 

Kansas Health Consumer Coalition 

Kansas National Education Association 

Open Arms Lutheran Child Development Center 

Partnership for Children 

Rawlins County Dental Clinic 

Salina Health Education Foundation 

Salina RESULTS Group 

Society of Saint Andrew 

Tender Hearts 

The Family Resource Center 

Tri-County Smart Start 

United Way of Wyandotte County 

Winter Center for Restorative Justice, Inc. 
102 

Women’s Community Y, Leavenworth 

Kentucky 

Calvary Baptist Food Pantry 

Community Farm Alliance 

Jewish Community Relations Council of Louisville 

Family and Children First 

God’s Pantry Food Bank 

Kentucky Council of Churches 

Kentucky Equal Justice Center 

Kentucky Out-of-School Alliance 

Kentucky Task Force on Hunger 

Kentucky Youth Advocates 

Louisville District United Methodist Women 

Northern Kentucky Community Action Head Start 

Saint Paul’s Food Pantry 

Sisters of Charity of Nazareth 

Louisiana 

Agenda for Children 

Avoyelles Coalition 

Children’s Coalition of Greater Baton Rouge 

Food Bank of Central Louisiana 

Food Bank of Northeast Louisiana 

Food Bank of Northwest Louisiana 

Louisiana Food Bank Association 

LUNCH Program 

National Council of Jewish Women, Louisiana State Public Affairs 

Second Harvest Food Bank of Greater New Orleans and Acadiana 

The Edible Schoolyard New Orleans 

Maine 

Campaign to Promote Food Security 

Catholic Charities Maine 

Cultivating Community 

Every Child Matters in Maine 

Maine Alliance for Children’s Care 

Maine Children’s Alliance 

Maine Equal Justice 

Preble Street 

Maryland 

Advocates for Children and Youth 

Disciples Justice Action Network 

Hillcrest School-Based Health Center 

Interfaith Works, Inc. 

Maryland Hunger Solutions 

Mary’s Center for Maternal and Child Care, Inc. 

PeterCares House 

Public Justice Center 

RKM Direct 

The Family League of Baltimore City, Inc. 

The National Center for Children and Families 

Massachusetts 

ABCD, Inc. 

Associated Early Care and Education of Boston 

Boston Collaborative for Food and Fitness 

Cape Cod Child Development Program 

Catholic Charities, Archdiocese of Boston 

CitySprouts Inc. 

Community Action 

Community Day Care of Lawrence 

Daily Bread Food Pantry Inc. 

Ellis Memorial of Boston 

Guild of St. Agnes Child Care Program of Worcester 

Harvard Prevention Research Center on Nutrition and Physical Activity 

Massachusetts Association of Early Education and Care 

Massachusetts Citizens for Children 
103 

Massachusetts Law Reform Institute 

Massachusetts Nutrition Board 

New England Farmers Union 

Newton Community Service Centers 

North Star Learning Programs of New Bedford 

Pathways for Children of Gloucester 

Project Bread-The Walk for Hunger 

Promise the Children 

The Food Bank of Western Massachusetts 

The Greater Boston Food Bank 

United South End Settlement of Boston 

Valley Opportunity Council of Holyoke 

Worcester Advisory Food Policy Council 

Worcester Comprehensive Child Care Services 

Worcester County Food Bank 

Michigan 

Center for Civil Justice 

Center for Food Safety 

Christian Reformed World Relief Committee 

Congregation of St. Joseph 

Feeding America West Michigan Food Bank 

Focus: HOPE 

Food Bank of Eastern Michigan 

Good Samaritan Family Services 

Joy Community Association 

Legal Services of Eastern Michigan 

Mid Michigan Child Care 

National Council of Jewish Women, Michigan State Public Affairs 

Saint Christine Christian Service 

Sisters of Mercy 

Sprout Wellness 

United Way for Southeastern Michigan 

Minnesota 

Boys and Girls Club of Northland 

Child Care WORKS 

Copeland Valley Youth Center 

Jewish Community Center of the Greater St. Paul Area 

Jewish Community Relations Council of Minnesota and the Dakotas 

Jewish Family and Children’s Service of Minneapolis 

Jewish Family Service of St. Paul 

Kiddy Karousel Child Care Center 

Kids Against Hunger 

Lowell COMPASS Afterschool, YMCA Program 

Metro Meals on Wheels 

Minnesota Child Care Association 

Minnesota Council of Churches 

Minnesota FoodShare 

Moose Lake Area Food Shelf 

New Horizon Academy 

North Central Food Bank 

Ready 4 K 

Safe Haven Shelter for Battered Women 

Second Harvest Heartland 

Second Harvest North Central Food Bank 

St. Anthony Park Lutheran Church 

Tri-Community Food Shelf 

Mississippi 

Mississippi Food Bank Network 

MS Chapter NASW 

Public Policy Center of Mississippi 

Missouri 

American Jewish Congress-St. Louis Region 

Bread for Life Food Pantry 

Gateway to Hope 

Harvesters—The Community Food Network 

Hawk Point Food Pantry 
104 

Jewish Community Relations Council of St. Louis 

National Council of Jewish Women-Missouri 

State Public Affairs 

Saint Louis Area Foodbank 

Second Harvest Community Food Bank 

Southeast Missouri Food Bank 

Montana 

Big Timber Community Food Bank 

Child Care Partnerships 

Community Food and Agriculture Coalition of Missoula County 

Community Health Partners 

Community Services Fellowship 

Council on Aging 

Family Promise of Gallatin Valley, Inc. 

Family Service, Inc. 

Fergus County Nurses Office 

Libby Food Pantry Inc. 

Livingston Food Pantry 

Missoula Food Bank 

Montana Dietetic Association 

Montana Food Bank Network 

Montana Rescue Mission 

North Missoula Community Development Corp. 

Pantry Partners Food Bank 

Poverello Center, Inc. 

Rocky Mountain Development Council 

Sustainable Living Systems 

The Salvation Army Missoula 

Tobacco Valley Food Pantry 

United Way of Yellowstone County 

Wibaux Food Bank 

Nebraska 

Blue Valley Community Action Partnership 

Food Bank for the Heartland 

Food Bank of Lincoln, Inc. 

Sisters of Mercy West Midwest Justice Team 

Nevada 

Bethel Food Pantry 

Boys and Girls Club Mason Valley 

Boys and Girls Club of Truckee Meadows 

Catholic Charities of Southern Nevada, Las Vegas 

Community Foundation of Western Nevada 

Desert Springs Baptist Church Food Pantry 

Elko Friends in Service Helping 

Eureka County Senior Center and Food Distribution 

Faith Lutheran Church 

Fallon Seventh Day Adventist Food Outreach 

Food Bank of Northern Nevada 

High Sierra Area Health Education Center, Reno 

Inter-Tribal Council of Nevada 

Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Nevada 

Nevada Hispanic Services, Inc., Reno 

Northern Nevada RAVE Family Foundation 

Progressive Leadership Alliance of Nevada 

The Children’s Cabinet, Reno 

Three Square 

New Hampshire 

Children’s Alliance of New Hampshire 

Every Child Matters in New Hampshire 

Food Solutions New England 

New Hampshire Farm to School 

New Hampshire WIC Directors Association 

Seacoast Family Food Pantry, Portsmouth 

Southern New Hampshire Services, Inc. 
105 

New Jersey 

Abundant Life Community Development Corp 

Abundant Life Fellowship Church 

ALPS Daycare & Preschool 

Andres Gautier Ministries 

Association for Children of New Jersey 

Capital Health 

Cathedral Kitchen 

Catholic Charities 

Catholic Charities BECS 

Catholic Charities, Diocese of Trenton 

Catholic Charities, Emergency and Community Services 

Center for Food Action in NJ 

CWA Local 1037 

Collier Youth Services, Wickatunk 

Community FoodBank of NJ/Southern Branch 

Curbing Hunger Inc. 

El Centro Day Care 

Elijah’s Promise 

First Baptist Church Harrisonville 

Food Bank of South Jersey 

Greater Woodbury Cooperative Ministries Food Pantry 

Highland Park Community Food Pantry 

HOPES CAP, Inc. 

ICNA-NJ 

Interfaith Food Pantry 

Jewish Federation of Greater Middlesex County 

Koinonia Family Life, Inc. 

Living Hope Christian Center 

Meeting Emergency Needs with Dignity 

Mercer Street Friends Food Bank 

Mobile Meals of Trenton 

Mt. Calvary Baptist Church 

My Brother’s Keeper 

National Council of Jewish Women, State Public Affairs Network 

New Jersey Anti-Hunger Coalition 

New Jersey Farm To School Network 

Outreach Ministry of Cecil Deliverance Tabernacle 

Park Avenue Community Church 

Puerto Rican Action Committee of Southern New Jersey, Inc. 

Regional Office, Church World Service / CROP Hunger Walks 

Society of St. Vincent de Paul 

Spoken Word Evangelistic Church Food Pantry 

St. Mary Street United Methodist Church 

St. Paul’s Food Basket 

St. Vincent De Paul OLMC Conference 

St. Vincent De Paul Society 

The Apostles’ House 

Touch New Jersey Inc. 

Wiley Church food pantry 

New Mexico 

Bread for the World-New Mexico 

Lutheran Office of Governmental Ministry-New Mexico 

New Mexico Appleseed 

New Mexico Collaboration to End Hunger 

New Mexico Community Foundation 

New Mexico Voices for Children 

NM Center on Law and Poverty 

Pegasus Legal Services for Children 

New York 

Bethlehem Neighbors for Peace 

Brooklyn Food Coalition 

Brooklyn-Queens NOW 

Broome-Tioga BOCES 

Caroline Food Pantry 

Catholic Charities-Brooklyn and Queens 
106 

Catholic Charities Diocese of Albany 

Catholic Charities-New York 

Center for Children’s Initiatives 

Child Care Council of Nassau 

Child Development Council 

Church Women United-New York 

Citizens’ Committee for Children of New York, Inc. 

City Harvest 

Colesville Community Pantry 

Colonie Senior Center Services 

Community Action Agency of Franklin County 

E S Foods 

Early Care and Learning Council 

Eveline’s Food and Health Connection 

Family Enrichment Network 

Federation of Protestant Welfare Agencies 

Food Bank of Central New York 

Food Bank of the Southern Tier 

Food Bank of Western New York 

Food for All 

Foodlink 

Got Breakfast? Foundation 

Gray Panthers of Suffolk County 

Harpursville United Methodist Church 

Health and Welfare Council of Long Island 

Healthy Kids Initiative 

Infant Jesus Church 

Island Harvest 

Just Food 

JustFaith 

Long Island Cares, Inc. 

MNYS Russian Mission 

Muslim Women’s Institute for Research and Development 

New York City Alliance for Child Nutrition Reauthorization 

New York City Coalition Against Hunger 

New York School Nutrition Association, Inc. 

New York State Community Action Association 

North Fork Housing Alliance, Inc 

Nutrition Consortium of New York State 

Opportunities for Otsego, Inc. 

Pro Action of Steuben and Yates, Inc. 

Regional Food Bank of Northeastern New York 

Rural Health Network of South Central New York 

Saint Peter Damian Fraternity SFO 

Schenectady Inner City Ministry 

School Food FOCUS 

Schuyler Center for Analysis and Advocacy 

SER of Westchester Inc. 

Single Stop USA 

Springs Union Free School District 

The POINT Community Development Corporation 

Tioga Central School District 

West Side Campaign Against Hunger 

North Carolina 

Action for Children NC 

Children First 

MANNA Food Bank 

St. Brendan Social Action 

North Dakota 

SENDCAA 

United Way of Grand Forks, East Grand Forks and Area 

Ohio 

Akron Canton Regional Food Bank 

Attica Community Food Pantry 

Banquet Table Food Pantry Trinity Friends Church 

Bellevue Fish and Loaves Food Pantry 
107 

Butler County Educational Service Center 

CALL Food Pantry 

Camp Aldersgate 

CareSource 

Catholic Charities 

Children’s Advocacy Center of Portage County 

Children’s Hunger Alliance 

Christ’s Community in College Hill 

Christian Corner Community Center 

Church Women United 

Churches United Pantry 

Cleveland Foodbank 

Community Resource Services 

Episcopal Diocese of Southern Ohio 

Faith Food Pantry 

Faith House Academy 

Faith Ministries Christian Center Emergency Assistance Pantry 

Felicity Community Missions 

Freestore Foodbank 

Greater Victory Christian Ministries 

Heartbest of Sandusky: Pregnancy Center and Maternity Home 

Help Open Peoples Eyes Ministries 

Hope Center 

H.O.P.E. Ministries, Akron 

Humility of Mary Health Partners 

Hunger Network in Ohio 

Jewish Community Relations Council of the Jewish Federation of Cincinnati 

KinderNest Child Development Center 

KinShip 

Lighthouse Food Pantry 

Local Matters 

Lorain County Alcohol and Drug Abuse Services 

Mahoning Country Bridges Out of Poverty 

Malvern Christian Care Center, Inc. 

Mid-Ohio FoodBank 

Miller Avenue United Church of Christ 

Miriam House-Catholic Charities 

Mother Cabrini’s Cupboard Food Pantry 

Mount Healthy Alliance, Inc. 

Mount Olivet Alliance Church 

Neighborhood Ministries 

Nevels Temple Mission 

Oberlin Community Services 

Ohio Association of Child Care Providers 

Ohio Association of School Nurses 

Ohio Association of Second Harvest Foodbanks 

Ohio Catholic Social Services 

Ohio Chapter, American Academy of Pediatrics 

Ohio Council of Churches 

Ohio School Based Health Care Association 

Open Door Community Church 

Orrville Area Boys and Girls Club 

Pentecostal Tabernacle Food Pantry 

Philippians 4:19 Food Ministry 

Pike County Outreach Council of Churches, Inc. 

Positive Education Program 

Prince of Peace Lutheran Church 

Second Harvest Food Bank Clark, Champaign, Logan Counties 

Second Harvest Food Bank of the Mahoning Valley 

Second Harvest Food Bank of North Central Ohio 

Shared Harvest Foodbank 

Sisters of Charity 

Sisters Helping Sisters Food Pantry 

St. John Lutheran Church 

St. Patrick Catholic Church Food Pantry 

Upper Room Cultural Development Corp. 

Talbert House 

TAPP House/TC, Inc. 
108 

The Center for Community Solutions 

The Counseling Center 

The Elyria Hospitality Center Pantry 

The Helping Hands Network 

The Lord’s Pantry 

The Love Center Food Cupboard 

The Potter’s House Ministries, Inc. 

The Salvation Army-Hamilton Corps. 

The Village Network-Canton 

Union Baptist Church Food Pantry 

United Way of Ashtabula County 

Upper Room Cultural Development Corporation, Ravenna 

Washington Food Pantry 

West Alexandria Day Care Center, Inc. 

West Ohio Food Bank 

Word of Life Church, New Philadelphia 

Young Adult Community Development, Inc. 

Oklahoma 

Bethel Baptist Church Food Program 

Bristow Social Services 

Christ Cupboard 

Christ’s Food Center, Inc. 

Circle of Care 

Community Food Bank of Eastern Oklahoma 

Community Outreach Centers, Inc. 

Deep Fork Community Action Foundation Inc. 

Family and Children’s Services 

First United Methodist Church, Depew 

Food4Kids Backpack Program 

Food4Kids Owasso 

Gatesway Foundation 

Grand Lake Community Ministry 

Integrated Concepts, Inc. 

Inter-Tribal Council, Inc of Northeast Oklahoma 

Locust Grove Ministerial Alliance 

MCM Food Pantry-Muskogee 

Moon Church of God Pantry 

MoveOn Tulsa 

Oaks Indian Mission 

Open Table UCC 

Osage Nation Prevention Program 

Regional Food Bank of Oklahoma 

State of Change 

Sugarloaf Christian Fellowship Food Pantry 

The Salvation Army 

Trinity Full Gospel Church Food Bank 

Victory Park Baptist Church Soup Kitchen 

Wagoner Area Neighbors, Inc. 

Youth Services of Osage County, Inc. 

Oregon 

Adelante Mujeres 

CARE Connections 

Change Takes Action 

Child Care Development Services Inc 

Children First for Oregon 

Children’s Institute 

Church Women United 

Eat Think Grow 

Florence Food Share 

Half-Pint Daycare and Preschool 

Human Services Coalition of Oregon 

Jackson-Josephine 4-C Council 

Lane Workforce Partnership 

Lutheran Advocacy Ministry of Oregon 

Mid-Willamette Valley Community Action Agency 

Montavilla Farmers Market 
109 

Neighbors For Kids 

North by Northeast Community Health Center 

Nutrition First CACFP—Community Action 

Oregon Food Bank 

Oregon Hunger Task Force 

Oregon Pediatric Society 

Organic Fresh Fingers, Inc. 

Our Savior’s Lutheran Church Summer Lunch Program 

Portland Chapter of Hadassah 

Portland Dietetic Association 

Rogue Valley Farm to School 

Society of St. Vincent de Paul 

Soroptimist International of Florence 

Southern Oregon Child and Family Council 

St. Pius X Catholic Church/Faith Cafe ́

St. Vincent de Paul Portland Council 

Take Action Now 

West Linn Lutheran Church 

Willamette Farm and Food Coalition 

Pennsylvania 

Adagio Health 

Ashley Food Bank 

Bernardine Center 

Boys and Girls Club, Plymouth Extension 

Brashear Association 

Bread for the World-Pennsylvania 

Bread of Life Food Pantry 

Brightside Academy 

Care Net Pregnancy Center 

Central Pennsylvania Food Bank 

Child Development Council of NEPA, Inc. 

Church of God In Christ 

Church of the Loving Shepherd 

Columbia/Montour Tapestry of Health 

Commission on Economic Opportunity 

Community Food Warehouse of Mercer County 

East Liberty Presbyterian Church 

Faith Assembly of God 

Family and Community Service of Delaware County 

Family Health Council of Central PA 

Family Links 

First Baptist Church, New Castle Food Pantry 

Greater Philadelphia Coalition Against Hunger 

Greater Pittsburgh Community Food Bank 

Greater Washington County Food Bank 

H&J Weinberg Food Bank of NEPA 

Israel Ben Zion Academy 

Jewish Family Services of York 

Jubilee Kitchen 

Just Harvest 

Lincoln Park Community Center, Inc. 

Lutheran Advocacy Ministry in Pennsylvania 

McGlynn Center 

Meadow Lands United Methodist Church 

Mid-Valley Hospital 

National Association of Social Workers-PA Chapter 

National Council of Jewish Women, Pennsylvania State Public Affairs 

PA Association of Regional Food Banks 

Pennsylvania Association for the Education of Young Children 

Pennsylvania Child Care Association 

Pennsylvania Council of Churches 

Pennsylvania Hunger Action Center 

Pennsylvania Partnerships for Children 

Pennsylvania School Nutrition Association 

Pittsburgh Community Services, Inc. 

Pneuma Center Dignity Food Bank 

Presbytery of Philadelphia 
110 

Public Citizens for Children and Youth 

Rainbow Kitchen Community Services 

Salvation Army-Chartiers Valley 

Sarah Heinz House 

Second Harvest Food Bank of NW PA 

Second Harvest of Lehigh Valley & Northeast PA 

Sisters Place, Inc. 

Smithfield United Church of Christ 

St. James Church Social Justice and Peace 

St. Nicholas Food Pantry 

Step by Step, Inc. 

Committee, Wilkinsburg 

Step By Step, Inc. 

TREHAB Food Bank 

Unitarian Society of Germantown Green Sanctuary 

United Way of Beaver County 

Urban League Hunger Services 

Volunteers of America-Pennsylvania 

Westmoreland Community Action 

Westmoreland County Food Bank 

YMCA Hazelwood 

Rhode Island 

CANE Child Development Center 

Connecting for Children and Families 

George Wiley Center 

Ocean State Action 

Parent Support Network of RI 

Rhode Island Children’s Policy Coalition 

Rhode Island Dietetic Association 

Jewish Federation of Rhode Island 

Kids First 

Northern RI AHEC 

Parent Support Network of RI 

Rhode Island Afterschool Plus Alliance 

Rhode Island KIDS COUNT 

Rhode Island Foster Parents Association 

Sister’s of St. Joseph 

The Learning Community 

Tides Family Services 

Washington County Coalition for Children 

South Carolina 

Billie Hardee Home for Boys 

Charleston Area Children’s Garden Project 

Children’s Trust of South Carolina 

Christ Central Columbia 

Christ Central, Inc. 

Focus on Kids 

Harvest Hope Food Bank 

Mental Health America of SC 

SC Campaign to Prevent Teen Pregnancy 

Security Federal Bank 

South Carolina Appleseed Legal Justice Center 

Sumter Citizens Coalition, Inc. 

United Way Association of South Carolina 

Unity Missionary Baptist Church 

South Dakota 

Bread for the World-South Dakota 

Feeding South Dakota-FKA Community Food Banks of South Dakota 

South Dakota Voices for Children 

Tennessee 

Black Children’s Institute of Tennessee 

Catholic Charities of Tennessee 

Community Shares 

Just Faith 

Knoxville County Community Action Committee 
111 

Manna-Food Security Partners 

Second Harvest Food Bank of East Tennessee 

Second Harvest Food Bank of Middle Tennessee 

St. Ann Catholic Social Ministry 

Tennessee Health Care Campaign 

Tennessee Justice Center 

The Who We Are Counts Institute 

Texas 

3T Outreach 

Abiding Love Food Pantry 

AIDS Services of Austin 

Alameda Heights Community Center 

Albeight United Methodist Church 

Amarillo Family YMCA 

Amazing Grace Fellowship Baptist Church Food Pantry 

Angelheart Children’s Shelter 

Austin Faith and Family Magazine 

Austin Food Bank 

Austin RESULTS Domestic Group 

Austin YMBL Sunshine Camps 

Baptist Benevolence of Irving 

Baptist General Convention of Texas 

Bastrop County Emergency Food Pantry 

Bethany Faith Food Pantry 

Blanco Good Samaritan Center 

Blood ’N Fire Foundation 

Boys and Girls Clubs of Central Texas, Inc. 

Boys and Girls Clubs of the Austin Area 

Calvary Baptist Food Pantry 

Capital Area Food Bank of Texas 

Care Center Ministries 

Caritas 

Catholic Charities of Dallas 

Center for Children and Families 

Center for Public Policy Priorities 

Central Dallas Ministries 

Central Texas Area Food Bank 

Central Texas Children’s Home 

Christian Assistance Ministry 

Christian Farms Treehouse, Inc. 

Christian Life Commission 

Community Lifeline Center 

Concord—Food Pantry 

Cove House Emergency Homeless Shelter 

DeSoto Food Pantry 

Driscoll Children’s Hospital 

East Texas Food Bank 

Elgin Community Cupboard 

Family Abuse Center 

Fannin County Community Ministries 

Food Bank of the Golden Crescent 

Food Bank RGV 

Foundation for the Homeless, Inc. 

George Gervin Youth Center 

Girls Inc. of Metropolitan Dallas 

Good Street Baptist Church Child Care, Inc. 

Grace Baptist Church 

Greater Love Ministries 

Greater Zion Food Pantry 

Hands of Mercy 

Hays County Food Bank 

Helping Hands Ministry of Belton, Inc. 

Highland Lakes Family Crisis Center 

Hispanic Religious Partnership for Community Health 

Holy Redeemer Catholic Church 

Hope Center 

Houston Food Bank 
112 

Islamic Center Of Irving 

Joseph’s Storehouse Pantry 

La Fe Policy Research and Education Center 

LACare Food Bank 

Lake Cities Community Food Pantry 

Lamar County Human Resources Council, Inc. 

Loaves and Fishes of Waco 

MASDFW 

Merced Housing Texas 

Methodist Healthcare Ministries 

MetroHaven of Love Inc. 

Midlothian Senior Citizens Center, Inc. 

Montgomery County Food Bank 

Mountain View Church of Christ 

Mt. Sinai Baptist Church Food Ministry 

National Council of Jewish Women, Texas State Public Affairs 

New Hope Compassion Outreach Ministries 

Northeast Texas Opportunities, Inc. 

North Texas Food Bank 

Phi Theta Kappa Food Pantry 

Primera Baptist Church Food Pantry 

Project Transitions, Inc. 

Rosanky Baptist Church Food Pantry 

Rosewood Baptist Church Food Pantry 

Round Rock Area Serving Center 

San Antonio Christian Hope Resource Center, Inc. 

San Antonio Food Bank 

Senior Community Outreach Services, Inc. 

Services of Hope, Inc 

Share Center 

Shared Housing Center 

Shiloh Baptist Church 

Society of St. Martin Parish Food Pantry 

Society of St. Vincent de Paul 

South Plains Food Bank 

St. Louis Catholic Church Food Pantry 

St. Austin Society of St. Vincent DePaul 

Su Casa De Esperanza, Inc. 

Sustainable Food Center 

Taylor’s Valley Baptist Church 

Texas Association of Family and Consumer Sciences 

Texas Baptists (BGCT) 

Texas Baptists Christian Life Commission 

Texas Early Care and Education Coalition 

Texas Food Bank Network 

Texas Hunger Initiative 

The Annunciation Maternity Home 

The Burke Foundation 

The Shepherd’s Storehouse 

The Substance Abuse Council 

Trinity Outreach Center and Storehouse, Lubbock 

Turtle Creek Recovery 

Voices for Children of San Antonio 

Walker Community Church 

Wolfe City Food Pantry 

Utah 

Salt Lake Community Action Program 

Utahans Against Hunger 

Vermont 

AIDS Project of Southern Vermont 

Bennington Coalition for the Homeless 

Brattleboro Sunrise Rotary 

Central Vermont Community Action Council 

Champlain Islands Parent Child Center 

Child Care Resource 

Community Connections 
113 

Community Food Cupboard 

COTS 

Fanny Allen Foundation 

Filkorn Public Relations 

Fitz Vogt and Associates 

Food Works at Two Rivers Center 

Green Mountain Farm-to-School 

Greenpeace USA-Vermont 

Grounds for Health 

Interfaith Council of Northshire 

King Street Center 

Lamoille Family Center 

Mary Johnson Children’s Center 

Neighbor to Neighbor 

Neighborhood Connections Inc. Londonberry 

Northfield Senior Center 

Northfield Summer Lunch Program 

Roxbury Church and Food Shelf 

Rutland County Parent Child Center 

School Nutrition Association-Vermont 

United Way of Lamoille County 

Vermont Campaign to End Childhood Hunger 

Vermont Dietetics Association 

Vermont Foodbank 

Vermont Food Education Every Day 

Voices for Vermont’s Children 

Westminister Afterschool Program 

Windham Child Care Association 

Virginia 

Blue Ridge Area Food Bank 

Dunamis Christian Center 

Elizabeth B. Sherman Childcare and Preschool 

Fauquier Community Food Bank 

Federation of Virginia Food Banks 

Foodbank of Southeastern Virginia 

Foodbank of the Virginia Peninsula 

ICNA Council for Social Justice 

Hampton Baptist Soup Kitchen 

H.E.L.P. Inc. 

Islamic Circle of North America VA 

Little Zion Baptist Church 

Loudoun Interfaith Relief, Inc. 

Office of Family and Children’s Ministries Christian Church 

Open Door Full Gospel Baptist Church 

Skyline Community Action Partnership 

Society of St. Andrew 

Spirit of Truth Christian Ministries 

St. Charles Lwanga House, Williamsburg 

St. Paul Lutheran Child Care Center 

Street Missions and Restoration Team 

Voices for Virginia’s Children 

Washington 

Anti-Hunger and Nutrition Coalition 

Ballard Food Bank 

Camp Fire USA Central Puget Sound Council 

Carol Rowe Food Bank 

Children’s Alliance 

Emerald City Church 

Federal Way Community Caregiving Network 

Food Lifeline 

Forks Abuse Program 

Friends of Youth 

Genesis House 

Lawyers Helping Hungry Children 

Lutheran Public Policy Office of Washington State 

Lynnwood Food Bank 
114 

Marysville Community Food Bank 

North Helpline Foodbank 

Northwest Harvest 

Nutrition First 

Olympic Community Action Program 

Point Roberts Food Bank 

Port Townsend Food Bank 

Quilcene Food Bank 

South King County Food Coalition 

Sultan Food Bank 

The Auburn Food Bank 

United Way of King County 

University District Food Bank 

Washington State Food and Nutrition Council 

White Center Food Bank 

WithinReach 

West Virginia 

Scott’s Run Settlement House 

Wisconsin 

9to5 Milwaukee 

Hunger Task Force 

School Sisters of St. Francis 

Wisconsin Child and Adult Care Food Program Sponsors Forum 

Wisconsin Early Childhood Association 

[Questions submitted for the record and their responses follow:] 

[VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL], 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

Washington, DC, July 12, 2010. 

Hon. THOMAS J. VILSACK, Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave, S.W., Washington, DC 

20250-0002. 

DEAR SECRETARY VILSACK: Thank you for testifying at the Education & Full Committee Hearing on, ‘‘H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act,’’ on 

July 1, 2010. 

Committee Members have additional questions for which they would like a written response from you for the hearing record. 

Representative Marcia Fudge (D-OH) has asked that you respond in writing to 

the following questions: 

1. As you know, the Summer Food Service Program offered through USDA provides low-income children with free, nutritious meals during the summer months 

when school is not in session. However, nationally, in fiscal year 2009, only 1 in 10 

of the more than 19 million low-income children who participated in the free or reduced priced school meal program also received meals during the summer months. 

And, in my home state of Ohio, the situation is no different. Although in fiscal year 

2009, more than 585,000 Ohio children participated in the free or reduced priced 

school meal program, only about 62,000 of those children received summer meals. 

Simply put, as the number of American families struggling to put food on the table 

continues to grow, too many of America’s kids are going hungry in the summer. 

In an effort to address the ongoing concerns about low-income children not having 

sufficient access to food during the summer months, Congress appropriated $85 million in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations for USDA to develop and test alternative 

methods of providing summer food access. 

Can you update the Committee on the status of projects currently being conducted 

using that funding, as well as any additional plans USDA may have to test alternatives during subsequent summers? 

Mr. Secretary, one method I would like to suggest is using the National Youth 

Sports Program. NYSP is a 41 year old sports and nutrition program, created by 

Congress, that was funded by the federal government until 2003. At its height, it 

was serving meals through the Summer Food Service Program to 75,000 children 

from low-income communities on more than 200 college campuses across the country. Due to lack of funding, it now only serves 7,000 children on 24 college campuses 

and most of the programs will cease to exist next summer without federal support. 
115 

Do you have any recommendations for this committee as to how we could improve 

access to summer feeding through legislative improvements to the child nutrition 

laws currently up for reauthorization? 

2. Research shows that starting the day with a nutritious breakfast gives kids the 

energy they need in order to learn. Both H.R.5504 and the Senate bill provide a 6- 

cent addition to lunches that meet performance standards. 

Would the Administration support the same reimbursement increase for school 

breakfasts that meet the same performance standards? 

Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) has asked that you respond in writing to the 

following questions: 

1. In 2004, U.S. Department of Agriculture and Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) released a study of competitive foods in 17 schools and school districts. The study found that 12 of the schools and districts increased revenue after 

improving the nutritional quality of their competitive foods and 4 reported no 

change. In your experience as Secretary, do you find this to be the case? 

2. Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture have set detailed standards 

for foods sold in the school lunch and breakfast programs—from the size of a vegetable serving to what type of milk is served. Every year, the federal government invests $12 billion annually in those programs, and selling low-nutrition foods in 

schools undermine the taxpayer investment. 

How will passage and implementation of this legislation positively impact the 

local school food authority’s effort to produce nutritious meals plans? 

3. We know that providing quality, nutritious meals to students is essential for 

their development, and can affect both their physical health as well as their preparedness for learning. However, that is only half the battle. Even as schools offer 

students the opportunity to select a balanced meal, students don’t always make the 

healthful choice. 

How have competitive foods sold in schools had an impact on the choices students 

make in the lunch line and across the school campus? 

Representative Jared Polis (D-CO) has asked that you respond in writing to the 

following questions: 

1. Today, more than 70% of schools exceed USDA’s maximum saturated fat level 

for school lunches. The newly-released Draft Dietary Guidelines recommend that individuals should ‘‘shift food intake patterns to a more plant-based diet that emphasizes vegetables, cooked dry beans and peas, fruits, whole grains, nuts, and seeds’’ 

and encourages increasing intake of high-quality vegetable protein. 

What will USDA do to implement these new recommendations and ensure that 

all children have a range of healthy choices at school? 

2. How can we ensure healthier options are available and affordable to all schools, 

so that they can reduce fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol by offering these options 

on the lunch line? 

Please send an electronic version of your written response to the questions to the 

Committee staff by close of business on the deadline of July 16, 2010. If you have 

any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Committee. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE MILLER, 

Chairman. 

[VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL], 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

Washington, DC, July 15, 2010. 

Hon. THOMAS J. VILSACK, Secretary, 

U.S. Department of Agriculture, 1400 Independence Ave, S.W., Washington, DC 

20250-0002. 

DEAR SECRETARY VILSACK: Thank you for testifying at the Education & Full Committee Hearing on, ‘‘H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act,’’ on 

July 1, 2010. 

In addition to questions already sent, Committee Members have questions for 

which they would like a written response from you for the hearing record. 

Representative Tom Petri (R-WI) has asked that you respond in writing to the following question: 

1. One issue that I am very concerned about is how the focus on added sugar (as 

opposed to total sugar) in the debate over nutrition standards impacts cranberry 

products. As you know, Wisconsin is the leading producer of cranberries in the U.S. 

Cranberries have a low level of natural sugar and therefore are sweetened to 

make them more appealing. However, my understanding is that even with added 
116 

sugar, many cranberry products, including sweetened dried cranberries and cranberry juice, contain less total sugar than other products such as 100 percent apple 

juice or dried fruits like raisins. It is also my understanding that numerous studies 

have shown that cranberry products provide additional health benefits, primarily related to maintaining urinary tract health. Unfortunately, however, the focus on 

added sugar means that cranberry products are considered unhealthy as a result 

of their added sugar while other products, which may have higher levels of total 

sugar, are considered healthy if consumed in moderation. 

What is your opinion regarding the focus on added sugars (as opposed to total 

sugars) in the discussion over nutrition standards? Additionally, for similar reasons, 

should other standards beyond the 100% juice standard be considered for juice products? 

Representative Cathy McMorris-Rodgers (R-WA) has asked that you respond in 

writing to the following questions: 

1. This past spring, the United States Department of Agriculture promulgated an 

interim final ruling for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children’s (WIC) program excluding white potatoes from the recently revised list of eligible foods under the WIC program. 

As a representative from the second largest potato producing state, I am concerned that the decision to exclude white potatoes was not based on sound nutritional science and will result in a costly and confusing policy that is not in the best 

interest of WIC participants. 

As you know, one of the primary reasons for revising the food list was to make 

it more consistent with the Institute of Medicine’s recommended dietary intakes 

(RDA) for individuals. In particular, the IOM was concerned about the need to increase RDAs for vitamin C and potassium. 

Potatoes are more nutrient dense than many of the vegetables already included 

in the WIC program. In fact, one medium-sized potato provides 45 percent of the 

Recommended Daily Value of vitamin C and 620 mg of potassium. 

Why were potatoes excluded from this interim rule and will USDA reconsider and 

include white potatoes in the list of WIC eligible foods? 

2. In a similar vein, I would like to ask you about the Fruit and Vegetable Snack 

program also implemented by USDA. To date, USDA has treated fruits and vegetables in all forms, fresh, frozen, dried, canned, the same. Moreover, frozen vegetables 

and fruits are often considered to be as nutritionally dense as fresh fruits and vegetables. Would you recommend that Congress include frozen fruits and vegetables in 

the snack program? 

Please send an electronic version of your written response to the questions to the 

Committee staff by close of business on the revised deadline of July 23, 2010. If you 

have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Committee. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE MILLER, 

Chairman. 

Secretary Vilsack’s Responses to Questions Submitted 

REPRESENTATIVE MARCIA FUDGE (D-OH)

1. Q: As you know, the Summer Food Service Program offered through USDA provides low-income children with free, nutritious meals during the summer months 

when school is not in session. However, nationally, in fiscal year 2009, only 1 in 10 

of the more than 19 million low-income children who participated in the free or reduced priced school meal program also received meals during the summer months. 

And, in my home state of Ohio, the situation is no different. Although in fiscal year 

2009, more than 585,000 Ohio children participated in the free or reduced priced 

school meal program, only about 62,000 of those children received summer meals. 

Simply put, as the number of American families struggling to put food on the table 

continues to grow, too many of America’s kids are going hungry in the summer. 

In an effort to address the ongoing concerns about low-income children not having 

sufficient access to food during the summer months, Congress appropriated $85 million in the fiscal year 2010 appropriations for USDA to develop and test alternative 

methods of providing summer food access. 

Can you update the Committee on the status of projects currently being conducted 

using that funding, as well as any additional plans USDA may have to test alternatives during subsequent summers? 

A: I appreciate and share your concerns about food insecurity and hunger in the 

summer months, especially among children. We are moving forward on the Summer 
117 

Food for Children projects, funded with the appropriation you mentioned, to demonstrate improved approaches to summer feeding for low-income children, and to assess their impact on food insecurity. Two projects are already underway to test ways 

to strengthen the existing Summer Food Service Program, one in Arkansas and one 

in Mississippi, and we expect to test additional strategies next year. 

The Department will also test new ways of delivering summer benefits, including 

the electronic benefit transfer (EBT) delivery systems used in the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and Children (WIC) and Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) to give low-income families with children more resources to use at food stores during the summer. We intend to release 

a solicitation in the next few weeks for applications from States to operate these 

projects during the summer of 2011 and beyond. Because these new delivery systems will depend on the cooperation of several agencies of State government, we will 

be urging governors to coordinate across these agencies to help their respective 

States submit strong applications. We will also seek proposals and award a contract 

for an independent, rigorous evaluation of the effectiveness of this approach in preventing or reducing child hunger during the summer. 

In the near-term, the project will provide thousands of low-income children in the 

demonstration communities with enhanced Summer Food Service Program (SFSP) 

services, or with substantial new household food benefits during the summer. More 

importantly, in the longer term it will provide critical knowledge about the impact 

of a cutting-edge nutrition intervention on achieving real improvement in food security among our children during the summer months. 

Q: Mr. Secretary, one method I would like to suggest is using the National Youth 

Sports Program. NYSP is a 41 year old sports and nutrition program, created by 

Congress, that was funded by the federal government until 2003. At its height, it was 

serving meals through the Summer Food Service Program to 75,000 children from 

low-income communities on more than 200 college campuses across the country. Due 

to lack of funding, it now only serves 7,000 children on 24 college campuses and most 

of the programs will cease to exist next summer without federal support. 

Do you have any recommendations for this committee as to how we could improve 

access to summer feeding through legislative improvements to the child nutrition 

laws currently up for reauthorization? 

A: As noted above, USDA is in the process of implementing several projects to test 

innovative approaches for improving access of low-income children to food in the 

summer. This summer, USDA began two statewide, multi-year demonstration 

projects in Arkansas and Mississippi. We plan to conduct rigorous evaluations of the 

impacts of these projects, to provide Congress and the Administration with clear, 

sound, and timely findings to make decisions about potential legislative changes. 

Until the evaluation results are available, we cannot say which enhancements to the 

SFSP structure would be most beneficial at expanding the reach of the program. 

2. Q: Research shows that starting the day with a nutritious breakfast gives kids 

the energy they need in order to learn. Both HR.5504 and the Senate bill provide 

a 6-cent addition to lunches that meet performance standards. 

Would the Administration support the same reimbursement increase for school 

breakfasts that meet the same performance standards? 

A: Yes, we would support the same increase for the School Breakfast Program 

(SBP), provided that such an increase is tied to compliance with new meal pattern 

requirements for the breakfast program, and that funding offsets are available for 

this purpose. 

REPRESENTATIVE LYNN WOOLSEY (D-CA)

1. Q: In 2004, US. Department of Agriculture and Centers for Disease Control and 

Prevention (CDC) released a study of competitive foods in 17 schools and school districts. The study found that 12 of the schools and districts increased revenue after 

improving the nutritional quality of their competitive foods and 4 reported no 

change. In your experience as Secretary, do you find this to be the case? 

A: As noted in your question, USDA partnered with the CDC in 2004 to collect 

success stories that showcase how schools and school districts could improve the nutritional quality of foods sold on the school campus. These stories, which are published in ‘‘Making It Happen: School Nutrition Success Stories’’ at http:// 

www.fns.usda.gov/tn/Resources/makingithappen.html, did show that, of the 17 

schools and school districts reporting revenue information, only one experienced a 

decrease in revenue. 
118 

While USDA has not collected any national data on this question, these stories 

suggest that it is possible for schools to change the types of foods they sell to children without negatively impacting their bottom line and potentially improving it. 

2. Q: Congress and the US. Department of Agriculture have set detailed standards 

for foods sold in the school lunch and breakfast programs-from the size of a vegetable 

serving to what type of milk is served. Every year, the federal government invests $12 

billion annually in those programs, and selling low-nutrition foods in schools undermine the taxpayer investment. 

How will passage and implementation of this legislation positively impact the local 

school food authority’s effort to produce nutritious meals plans? 

A: The National School Lunch Program regulations prohibit the sale of foods of 

minimal nutritional value, such as carbonated beverages, hard candy and water 

ices, in the foodservice area during meal periods. Beyond this, USDA currently does 

not have the authority to regulate the sale of other foods available to students outside of the school meal programs during the regular meal service (competitive 

foods). State agencies or local school districts may choose to set their own requirements for competitive foods. 

Providing USDA with authority to set specific standards for the types of foods offered in both school meals and competitive foods will support local school food authorities in their efforts to assure that all foods available to students are nutritious 

and healthful. In addition, increasing the levels of reimbursement for meals and 

linking that increase to performance standards will also assist in meeting the goals 

of the Dietary Guidelines for Americans and other nutritional standards. 

If given authority to regulate all competitive foods, USDA would consult with key 

stakeholders (including schools and industry representatives) to seek their input. 

Subsequently, based on statutory direction, stakeholders’ input and science-based 

nutrition standards, we would issue a proposed regulation that would establish 

baseline nutrition standards to define the foods that could be sold outside of the 

school meal programs. Stakeholders and the public would have ample opportunity 

to comment on any proposed regulation. 

3. Q: We know that providing quality, nutritious meals to students is essential for 

their development, and can affect both their physical health as well as their preparedness for learning. However, that is only half the battle. Even as schools offer 

students the opportunity to select a balanced meal, students don’t always make the 

healthful choice. 

How have competitive foods sold in schools had an impact on the choices students 

make in the lunch line and across the school campus? 

A: The evidence is clear that competitive foods have a substantial impact on the 

choices that students make at school. USDA’s third School Nutrition Dietary Assessment from school year 2004-2005 shows that about two in five school children consumed one or more competitive foods in the course of the day. The most commonly 

consumed foods include desserts and snacks (e.g., ice cream, cookies, cakes, brownies, candy, and potato chips), beverages other than milk, and bread products such 

as crackers and pretzels, corn/tortilla chips, breads and rolls, muffins, doughnuts, 

sweet rolls, and toaster pastries. 

Children in elementary schools consume fewer calories from competitive foods 

than do middle and high school children. Elementary school children tend to consume competitive foods outside of a meal; whereas 75 percent of middle school children’s competitive food calorie intake is from the lunch meal. 

On average, children who consumed one or more competitive foods obtained over 

150 calories per day from low-nutrient, energy-dense foods. National School Lunch 

Program (NSLP) participants were less likely to consume competitive foods than 

those not participating in the NSLP, and participants who did tended to consume 

less than nonparticipants. 

REPRESENTATIVE JARED POLIS (D-CO)

1. Q: Today, more than 70% of schools exceed USDA’s maximum saturated fat level 

for school lunches. The newly released Draft Dietary Guidelines recommend that individuals should ‘‘shift food intake patterns to a more plant-based diet that emphasizes vegetables, cooked dry beans and peas, fruits, whole grains, nuts, and seeds’’ 

and encourages increasing intake of high-quality vegetable protein. 

What will USDA do to implement these new recommendations and ensure that all 

children have a range of healthy choices at school? 

A: On October 20, 2009, IOM released ‘‘School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy 

Children,’’ a comprehensive final report with eight recommendations addressing new 

nutrient targets and meal requirements for the NSLP and SBP, implementation and 
119 

monitoring of the new requirements, and evaluation and research activities to guide 

future program improvement. FNS is developing a proposed regulation to update 

the school meal patterns and nutrition requirements based on the IOM report. 

In collaboration with the Department of Health and Human Services, USDA’s 

Center for Nutrition Policy and Promotion (CNPP) is carefully reviewing the new 

recommendations from the Dietary Guidelines Advisory Committee and will consider these recommendations as it works towards issuing the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans at the end of this year. FNS will also consider recommendations 

to incorporate into the proposed regulation for school meals as appropriate. 

Stakeholders and the public will have the opportunity to submit comments on the 

proposed regulation for school meals. In the interim, FNS has issued practical guidance and technical assistance to help schools move in the direction of the Dietary 

Guidelines. 

2. Q: How can we ensure healthier options are available and affordable to all 

schools, so that they can reduce fat, saturated fat, and cholesterol by offering these 

options on the lunch line? 

A: Reauthorization of the Child Nutrition Programs provides us with many opportunities to improve the nutrition requirements and quality of the food provided by 

the National School Lunch Program (NSLP). Increased funding for school meals, as 

well as our continued development of enhanced technical assistance resources available to states and school food service professionals, can result in great improvements in the nutritional quality of the meals provided by these programs. 

In February 2008, USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service (FNS) contracted with the 

National Academy of Sciences’ Institute of Medicine (IOM) to independently review 

and provide recommendations to update the meal patterns and nutrition standards 

for the National School Lunch Program (NSLP) and School Breakfast Program 

(SBP) consistent with the 2005 Dietary Guidelines for Americans. 

On October 20, 2009, IOM released ‘‘School Meals: Building Blocks for Healthy 

Children,’’ a comprehensive final report with eight recommendations addressing new 

nutrient targets and meal requirements for the NSLP and SBP, implementation and 

monitoring of the new requirements, and evaluation and research activities to guide 

future program improvement. FNS is developing a proposed regulation to update 

the school meal patterns and nutrition requirements based on the IOM report. 

With the development of the 2010 Dietary Guidelines for Americans later this 

year, FNS will consider how such recommendations apply to meal pattern requirements for school meals and incorporate recommendations into the proposed rule, as 

appropriate. Stakeholders and the public will have the opportunity to submit comments on the proposed regulation for school meals. 

The HealthierUS School Challenge (HUSSC) is a voluntary certification for 

schools participating in the NSLP and is implemented under USDA’s Team Nutrition initiative. USDA has established the HUSSC to recognize schools that create 

healthier school environments by providing nutrition education, nutritious food and 

beverage choices, physical education and opportunities for physical activity. The 

awards recognize schools that have gone above and beyond minimum school meal 

program requirements and have met specific criteria established for Bronze, Silver, 

Gold or Gold of Distinction awards—depending on levels of criteria met. Schools 

that become certified maintain the certification for four years from the date they 

receive the Award. 

The HUSSC is a means by which schools involve children in nutrition education 

activities, taste testing opportunities, and more. As of June 30, 2010, we had 732 

schools in 35 States certified as HUSSC schools. With the support of the First Lady, 

we are committed to seeing the number of HUSSC schools double over the next 

school year to 1250 by June 2011, with an additional 1,000 schools per year for two 

years after that, with over 3,000 awards by June 2013. 

FNS continues to offer a wide variety of technical assistance to make school meals 

more healthy, appealing and enjoyable. Several resources that address menu planning and ways to encourage children to consume fruits, vegetables and whole grains 

are available on our Team Nutrition Web site (www.teamnutrition.usda.gov/library.html). The National Food Service Management Institute also offers a wide 

range of training opportunities for child nutrition program professionals working in 

school nutrition and child care settings. These training sessions may be customized 

for State agencies and school food service professionals. 

USDA is also exploring ways that insights from the discipline of behavioral economics can help to improve food selection and consumption by students. USDA has 

already conducted some research that suggests that school cafeteria managers may 

be able to control many of the elements shown to influence food choice, such as how 

foods are presented. Identifying how these elements could be used to cue healthier 
120 

choices may help improve students’ diets without sacrificing freedom of choice. (See 

‘‘When Nudging in the Lunch Line Might Be a Good Thing,’’ from Amber Waves, 

Economic Research Service, March 2009, http://www.ers.usda.gov/AmberWaves/ 

March09/Features/LunchLine.htm.) USDA is also developing an ongoing research 

program to develop practical approaches to put behavioral economics to work in 

school cafeterias. 

USDA is focused on ways to better connect children to their food and create opportunities for local farmers to provide their harvest to schools in their communities. 

USDA is supporting Farm to School efforts through a number of initiatives, and continues to look for ways to help facilitate this important connection. We recognize the 

growing interest among school districts and communities to incorporate regionally 

and locally produced farm foods into the school nutrition programs. 

I am also happy to report that all USDA Foods provided to schools consist of commodity products that represent healthy choices. Those products have undergone a 

significant transformation. USDA Foods, which represent 15 to 20 percent of the 

food in school nutrition programs, include fruits, vegetables, whole grains and 

healthy sources of protein. States and school districts can choose from over 180 

available foods. A few specific improvements to USDA Foods include decreasing the 

sodium levels in all USDA canned vegetables, and requiring that all USDA canned 

fruits are packed in light syrup, water, or natural juices. Additionally, we offer fresh 

fruits and vegetables, a variety of lean meat choices, and a wide range of whole 

grain products to schools. We will continue to work to make sure schools and states 

are aware that USDA Foods represent a variety of the healthy options that are 

available. 

REPRESENTATIVE BOBBY SCOTT (D-VA)

1. Q: What steps will the Department take to ensure the participation of minority 

and women-owned farms in the Farm to School program? 

A: As part of its general mission to increase and support Farm to School efforts 

under the National School Lunch Program, USDA includes outreach efforts to reach 

minority and women-owned farmers through various networking opportunities, such 

as the Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative, Farm to School related 

webinars, and various conference attendance. 

As part of USDA’s Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food initiative, the Food and 

Nutrition Service (FNS) and Agricultural Marketing Service (AMS) formed a Farm 

to School Team. The purpose of the Farm to School Team is to support local and 

regional food systems by facilitating linkages between schools and their local food 

producers. While still in the exploratory phase, a key mission of the Farm to School 

Team is to provide technical assistance and guidance concerning procurement in the 

area of farm to school. 

The Team has been inquiring and gathering information about how the procurement requirements are being followed by school food authorities in their farm to 

school efforts, including steps made by school districts to utilize small businesses, 

minority-owned firms, and women’s business enterprises, whenever possible, as described in Program regulations. 

Upon conclusion of the Farm to School Team’s site visits in the fall of 2010, FNS 

will develop technical assistance and/or guidance materials. Such materials will pay 

careful consideration to encouraging the participation of minority and women-owned 

firms. As a result of this guidance, FNS anticipates that both State Departments 

of Education and Agriculture will be able to assist school systems on what exemptions to the bidding processes schools can apply, particularly those pertaining to minority-owned, women-owned, small, and socially disadvantaged businesses. 

And, finally, as mandated by the 2008 Farm Bill, USDA has created an Office of 

Advocacy and Outreach (OAO). OAO’s mission is to increase access to programs of 

the Department, and increase the viability and profitability of small farms and 

ranches, beginning farmers or ranchers, and socially disadvantaged farmers or 

ranchers. The office’s focus on improving access to USDA programs for historically 

underserved groups’—including minority and women-owned farms and businesses— 

is demonstrative of the Department’s commitment to ensuring that all of our constituents have the opportunity to participate in and benefit from our programs. 

REPRESENTATIVE TOM PETRI (R-WI)

1. Q: One issue that I am very concerned about is how the focus on added sugar 

(as opposed to total sugar) in the debate over nutrition standards impacts cranberry 

products. As you know, Wisconsin is the leading producer of cranberries in the US. 

Cranberries have a low level of natural sugar and therefore are sweetened to make 

them more appealing. However, my understanding is that even with added sugar, 
121 

many cranberry products, including sweetened dried cranberries and cranberry juice, 

contain less total sugar than other products such as 100 percent apple juice or dried 

fruits like raisins. It is also my understanding that numerous studies have shown 

that cranberry products provide additional health benefits, primarily related to 

maintaining urinary tract health. Unfortunately, however, the focus on added sugar 

means that cranberry products are considered unhealthy as a result of their added 

sugar while other products, which may have higher levels of total sugar, are considered healthy if consumed in moderation. 

What is your opinion regarding the focus on added sugars (as opposed to total sugars) in the discussion over nutrition standards? Additionally, for similar reasons, 

should other standards beyond the 100% juice standard be considered for juice products? 

A: The consumption of added sugars in the typical American diet comes largely 

from food products that are low in nutrients, meaning products such as soft drinks, 

cakes, cookies, and candies. While we recognize that cranberries, lemons and other 

tart fruits may require added sugars to be mixed in with other naturally sweet 

fruits to increase their palatability, we continue to believe that the focus on added 

sugars rather than total sugars is appropriate as we work toward developing dietary 

guidance that will have a positive impact on the health of all Americans and reverse 

the epidemic of obesity which grips the country. 

In addition, many cranberry products are allowed in the school meal programs. 

Any 100% fruit juice containing cranberries may be served as part of a reimbursable 

meal and any juice product with a minimum of 50 percent juice may receive a Child 

Nutrition Label that indicates the contribution that product makes toward the fruit/ 

vegetable requirement for a meal. There are no added sugar limitations in the 

school meal programs. Any changes to our existing policies and standards would require extensive outreach to stakeholders to obtain their collective wisdom on the advisability of any such changes. 

REPRESENTATIVE CATHY MCMORRIS-RODGERS (R-WA)

1. Q: This past spring, the United States Department of Agriculture promulgated 

an interim final ruling for the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, 

Infants, and Children’s (WIC) program excluding white potatoes from the recently revised list of eligible foods under the WIC program. 

As a representative from the second largest potato producing state, I am concerned 

that the decision to exclude white potatoes was not based on sound nutritional 

science and will result in a costly and confusing policy that is not in the best interest 

of WIC participants. 

As you know, one of the primary reasons for revising the food list was to make 

it more consistent with the Institute of Medicine’s recommended dietary intakes 

(RDA) for individuals. In particular, the IOM was concerned about the need to increase RDAs for vitamin C and potassium. 

Potatoes are more nutrient dense than many of the vegetables already included in 

the WIC program. In fact, one medium-sized potato provides 45 percent of the Recommended Daily Value of vitamin C and 620 mg of potassium. 

Why were potatoes excluded from this interim rule and will USDA reconsider and 

include white potatoes in the list of WIC eligible foods? 

A: The changes made to the WIC food packages were based on scientific recommendations from the National Academies’ Institute of Medicine (IOM). The IOM 

was charged with reviewing the nutritional needs of the WIC population—low-income infants, children, and pregnant, breastfeeding and postpartum women who are 

at nutritional risk—and recommending changes to the WIC food packages. The restriction of white potatoes, as recommended by the IOM, is based on food intake 

data showing that white potatoes are the most widely used vegetable. As such, the 

IOM stated that encouraging the intake of potatoes provides no additional nutritional benefit to WIC participants. Additionally, the inclusion of white potatoes does 

not support the goal of expanding the types and varieties of fruits and vegetables 

available to program participants. 

The interim rule revising the WIC food packages was published on December 6, 

2007, with a comment period that closed February 1, 2010. The Food and Nutrition 

Service received over 8,000 comments on the interim rule and is currently reviewing 

and analyzing comments received. Please be assured that after due consideration of 

the submissions, we will carefully review all interim rule provisions during the rulemaking process, and expect to issue a final rule revising the WIC food packages in 

June 2011. 

2. Q: In a similar vein, I would like to ask you about the Fruit and Vegetable 

Snack program also implemented by USDA. To date, USDA has treated fruits and 
122 

vegetables in all forms, fresh, frozen, dried, canned, the same. Moreover, frozen vegetables and fruits are often considered to be as nutritionally dense as fresh fruits and 

vegetables. Would you recommend that Congress include frozen fruits and vegetables 

in the snack program? 

A: As you mention, the National School Lunch and School Breakfast Programs, 

the Child and Adult Care Food Program and the Summer Food Service Program 

allow use of all forms of fruits and vegetables in reimbursable meals. Flexibility in 

the types of products that are offered is important for these programs, given variations in the volume of meals provided as well as logistical constraints. 

However, the Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program (FFVP) is designed not only to 

provide children with needed nutrients, but to encourage children to learn about 

and appreciate fruits and vegetables as fresh produce. While frozen produce may be 

nutritionally equivalent to fresh, the FFVP’s emphasis on fresh produce affords children opportunities to learn how different fruits and vegetables are grown and that 

there are any number of ways they can be offered to support a healthful diet. Therefore, we recommend that the FFVP continue to focus on fresh produce. 

[VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL], 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

Washington, DC, July 12, 2010. 

Mr. TOM COLICCHIO, Chef and Restaurateur, 

Craft, 47 E. 19th St., 5th Floor, New York, NY 10003. 

DEAR MR. COLICCHIO: Thank you for testifying at the Education & Full Committee Hearing on, ‘‘H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act,’’ on 

July 1, 2010. 

A Committee Member has an additional question for which they would like a 

written response from you for the hearing record. 

Representative Marcia Fudge (D-OH) has asked that you respond in writing to 

the following question: 

1. Can you tell us how you believe Congress can support public-private partnerships, like the ones you have established, in order to make real changes in schools 

and to improve nutrition? 

Please send an electronic version of your written response to the questions to the 

Committee staff by close of business on the deadline of July 16, 2010. If you have 

any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Committee. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE MILLER, 

Chairman. 

[EDITOR’S NOTE: A response was not received from Mr. Colicchio 

prior to the closing deadline of the hearing record.] 

[VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL], 

U.S. CONGRESS, 

Washington, DC, July 12, 2010. 

Mr. EDUARDO J. SANCHEZ, M.D., M.PH, FAAFP, Vice President and Chief Medical 

Officer, 

Blue Cross and Blue Shield of Texas, 1001 E. Lookout Drive, Richardson, TX 75082. 

DEAR DR. SANCHEZ: Thank you for testifying at the Education & Full Committee 

Hearing on, ‘‘H.R. 5504, Improving Nutrition for America’s Children Act,’’ on July 

1, 2010. 

Committee Members have additional questions for which they would like a written response from you for the hearing record. 

Representative Marcia Fudge (D-OH) has asked that you respond in writing to 

the following questions: 

1. The Administration and Congress understand that improved nutrition is an indispensable element of health care. This connection between good nutrition and good 

health is most explicit in H.R. 5504’s provision that expands direct certification for 

free school meals by including Medicaid as a source of automatic eligibility. (Currently, only SNAP and TANF enrollment are sources of direct certification.) 

Do you support this expansion of automatic free school meal eligibility? 

2. Do you see other connections between health care and nutrition that the House 

and Senate child nutrition bills currently include—or ought to include? 
123 

Representative Lynn Woolsey (D-CA) has asked that you respond in writing to the 

following questions: 

1. In your testimony, you discussed some of the issues surrounding competitive 

foods. For those of us who haven’t been in a school cafeteria for awhile, can you describe some of the foods and differences in nutritional value of those foods in the 

a ́ la carte and store versus the traditional meal lines? Why is it so critical that the 

Secretary be provided the authority to set nutritional standards for these foods 

being sold in our schools? 

2. One of the key reasons why national school nutrition standards for competitive 

foods is so important to me is that they can lead to stigma within the program, 

where low income children must take the school meal and middle and upper income 

children may purchase the competitive foods. Do you think having national standards will help or hurt low income schools? 

Please send an electronic version of your written response to the questions to the 

Committee staff by close of business on the deadline of July 16, 2010. If you have 

any questions, please do not hesitate to contact the Committee. 

Sincerely, 

GEORGE MILLER, 

Chairman. 
124 
125 
126 

[Whereupon, at 12:41 p.m., the committee was adjourned.] 

Æ