Child nutrition programs and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women,Infants, and Children (the WIC program) are governed by three basic federal laws: (1) The Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act . This law was originallyenacted in 1946 as the National School Lunch Act; it was renamed in 1999. It provides authorityfor the School Lunch program, the Child and Adult Care Food program, the Summer Food Serviceprogram, after-school programs (those run under both the aegis of the School Lunch program andthe Child and Adult Care Food program), food commodity support for child nutrition programs,training and technical assistance (including the Food Service Management Institute), compliance,program integrity, and accountability activities, and an information clearinghouse. It also includesa number of general-purpose provisions governing the operation of multiple child nutrition programs(e.g., income eligibility and inflation indexing rules, nutrition requirements for meals, general rulesparticipating schools must follow). The Child Nutrition Act. This law was originally enacted in 1966. It providesauthority for the School Breakfast program, the WIC program, the Special Milk program, assistancefor state administrative expenses related to child nutrition programs, and nutrition educationactivities. Section 32 of the act of August 24, 1935 (7 U.S.C. 612c). Section 32 authorityprovides funding for cash child nutrition subsidies (permanent appropriations under Section 32 aretransferred to the child nutrition account annually as part of the appropriations process). It alsoincludes additional authority (to that in the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act) andfunding for the acquisition of food commodities for distribution to child nutrition programs (Section32 money is used to buy and distribute surplus commodities). (2) Prior to the 108th Congress, the most recent comprehensive amendments to child nutritionand WIC law were made by the 1998 William F. Goodling Child Nutrition Reauthorization Act ( P.L.105-336 ). (3) And, underthe reauthorization schedule, the next wide-ranging review of child nutrition and WIC programs wasset for 2003. However, a number of significant laws affecting the child nutrition and WIC programswere enacted in the 106th and 107th Congresses (1999 through 2002). These are covered in theimmediate predecessor to this report -- CRS Report RL31578(pdf) , Child Nutrition and WIC Legislationin the 106th and 107th Congresses, by [author name scrubbed]. Information on the programs covered by childnutrition and WIC legislation is contained in CRS Report RL33307 , Child Nutrition and WICPrograms: Background and Recent Funding , by [author name scrubbed]. Only one significant law governing child nutrition programs (e.g., school mealprograms) and the WIC program has been (or is likely to be) enacted in the 108th and 109thCongresses -- the Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 ( P.L. 108-265 ;signed on June 30, 2004). The authorization of appropriations for several child nutrition programs and the WICprogram, as well as authority to carry out certain child nutrition activities, were scheduledto expire September 30, 2003, under the terms of the previous reauthorization law ( P.L.105-336 ). (4) Anticipating renewal of these authorizations, Congress began consideration of childnutrition/WIC reauthorization legislation in the Spring of 2003. However, primarily becauseof budget-related concerns as to how much, if any, new funding might be available to bespent on new or expanded initiatives, no action was taken in 2003 (other than hearings andthe introduction of bills proposing various individual program changes). Instead, ashort-term extension of expiring authorizations ( P.L.108-134 ) was enacted, pushing mostexpiration dates to March 31, 2004, and giving Congress time to act. On March 24, 2004, the House passed an amended version of its child nutrition-WICreauthorization bill (the Child Nutrition Improvement and Integrity Act; H.R. 3873 ; H.Rept. 108-445 ), which included provisions that would have resulted in estimatednet new mandatory spending of $235 million through FY2009. However, with the March31st deadline approaching (and no definitive Senate action), another stopgap law extendingmost expiring authorities through June 30, 2004, was enacted -- P.L. 108-211 . While there was no formal action in the Senate, the House and Senate committees ofjurisdiction (the House Education and the Workforce Committee and the Senate Agriculture,Nutrition, and Forestry Committee), with the Administration's participation, informallydiscussed a potential final bill through March, April, May, and into June 2004. On May 19,2004, the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry Committee ordered reported the ChildNutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 ( S. 2507 ; S.Rept. 108-279 ;reported June 7, 2004). This bill, as amended with unanimous consent on the Senate floor,passed the Senate on June 23, 2004. It reflected agreements that had been reached in theHouse-Senate discussions that had been taking place over the past several months andincluded many House (and Administration) proposals and perspectives. On June 24, 2004,the House passed it without objection. This final measure encompassed changes in lawestimated to result in $232 million in net new mandatory spending (outlays, slightly more inbudget authority) through FY2009 (the end of the reauthorization period). It was enacted asthe Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act of 2004 ( P.L. 108-265 ) on June 30, 2004. Much of the debate over and content of the 2004 reauthorization law was driven bythe availability (or lack of availability) of funding for new initiatives or program expansions. Budget reconciliation agreements offered little new mandatory money (a total of about $230million through FY2009), and, if House and Senate legislators wanted to fund new initiativesor expansions with mandatory dollars beyond these budget constraints, they effectively wereforced to use savings from changes they made within child nutrition programs. (5) In the alternative, theycould (and did) authorize appropriations for new initiatives/expansions or establish pilotprojects rather than create or expand entitlement/mandatory programs. The final productencompassed some $395 million in new gross spending through FY2009; however, this wasfinanced with an estimated $163 million in savings achieved primarily by revisions to thesystem for certifying and verifying eligibility for free and reduced-price school meals (seeimmediately below). Perhaps the biggest issue confronted by Congress was concern over "overcertification" -- the degree to which ineligible children are judged eligible for free orreduced-price school meals. Though estimates and perceptions differed as to the extent andseriousness of the problem, overcertification was widely judged a significant issue andprovoked accompanying questions as to schools' administrative strength and how to ensurethat eligible children were not disadvantaged by any legislative solution. As a result, themost important amendments in the 2004 law dealt with program integrity -- improvementsto rules governing certification and verification of eligibility, new procedures to upgradeadministration of school meal programs, and new technical assistance and training. As to school meal program operations, few changes were made (e.g., expansion ofeligibility for homeless, runaway, and migrant children and youth, loosened rules for higher"severe need" school breakfast subsidies). And, a major (and costly) proposal to phase inhigher income eligibility limits for free school meals was limited to authorization for a smallpilot project. Another major set of issues involved nutrition, health, and nutrition education aspectsof child nutrition programs, particularly childhood obesity trends and the role of childnutrition programs and school environments (like physical activities) in dealing with this, therules governing the offering of milk and milk substitutes, foods sold in competition withschool meals, food safety, and the desire of some to substantially increase fundingcommitments for nutrition education. While a number of federally led options were offered,in the end, the most significant change was a requirement that all schools participating inschool meal programs establish locally designed "wellness policies" to tackle obesity- andnutrition/health-related issues (like competitive foods and students' physical activity), withfederal technical assistance and other support. Nutrition education provisions encompasseda series of authorizations , but no new funding. In related amendments, the program offeringfree fresh fruit and vegetables operating in selected schools in a few states was expanded andmade permanent, and important changes were made to food safety rules. Small changes also were made in the Summer Food Service and Child and Adult CareFood programs -- for example, making permanent and expanding the coverage ofpre-existing "simplified summer program" (so-called "Lugar") rules that make it easier forsummer program sponsors to participate, making permanent and nationally applicable apre-existing rule loosening eligibility requirements for for-profit child care centers wishingto participate in the Child and Adult Care Food program. Finally, a large number of revisions were made to the WIC program, but the mostsignificant were several aimed at strengthening rules containing food costs incurred by theprogram. Of these, the most controversial was a new provision placing substantial limits onvendors receiving the majority of their revenue from WIC vouchers (so-called "WIC-only"stores). The 2004 reauthorization law extended virtually all expiring child nutrition and WICappropriations authorizations and other authorities through FY2009. (6) In addition, it madea wide range of changes to child nutrition and WIC law as described in the followingsections. Program Integrity in School Meal Programs: Certificationand Verification of Eligibility. Role of Local Educational Agencies (LEAs). Stipulates that LEAs areeffectively responsible for certification and verification of eligibility for free andreduced-price school meals -- as opposed to local "school food authorities," which conductschool meal program day-to-day operations and also were in charge of certification andverification under pre-existing law. Descriptive Materials and Communications with Families. Requiresthat descriptive materials provided to parents contain notification that (1) participants incertain other income-tested programs may be eligible for free or reduced-price school mealsand (2) documentation may be requested for verification of eligibility. Also directs that anycommunications with families for eligibility determination or verification purposes be in anunderstandable format in a language that parents can understand (to the extent possible). Grants explicit permission for Internet applications and descriptive materials. Individualapplications for each child in a family are, in most cases, barred. Direct Certification of Eligibility. In order to reduce the number ofpaper applications that need to be reviewed, by relying on verification already conducted inother venues, requires that LEAs use direct certification -- certification of eligibility for freeand reduced-price school meals (without application) by direct communication withappropriate state or local agencies -- for any child who is member of a food stamp household. This direct certification mandate is phased in, beginning with the largest LEAs, through the2007-2008 school year. In addition, permissive authority is granted to employ directcertification for children in Temporary Assistance for Needy Families (TANF) households,homeless children, children served by programs under the Runaway and Homeless YouthAct, and migrant children. [ Note: Under pre-existing law, direct certification was permitted for children in food stamp and TANF households.] Verification of a Sample of Applications. For those not directlycertified eligible for free or reduced-price school meals, mandates that a sample of approvedapplications be selected for verification of their eligibility by directly communicating withthe family (or direct verification, see below). [ Note: Prior to verifying with the family, theapplication must be reviewed by an individual other than the person who approved it.] Therequired sample size for each LEA varies, but, in most cases, the new law calls for it to besignificantly larger than under pre-existing (regulatory) rules. Direct Verification. In conducting eligibility verification of the sampleof approved applications, permits LEAs to first use direct verification -- obtain and useincome and program participation information about the applicant family from certain publicagencies -- before contacting the family. Direct verification is to be evaluated and, if foundto be effective in obtaining adequate information and reducing the number of applicationsthat must be verified by contacting families directly, may be mademandatory. Individual Family Verification. For families not directly certified ordirectly verified, requires LEAs to conduct verification through contact with the family. Thisincludes a written request for information and phone contact if necessary. In the case offamilies not responding to a verification request, LEAs are required to make at least oneadditional attempt to obtain information and may use a third party to assist them in these"follow-up" activities. [ Note: Nonresponse results in disqualification.] Funding. Provides mandatory funding (1) to assist in carrying outdirect certification and verification activities and (2) to evaluate directverification. Program Integrity in School Meal Programs: Administrative Error Reduction. Federal Administrative Support. Provides mandatory funding to theAgriculture Department to (1) provide training and technical assistance and materials relatedto improving program integrity and administrative accuracy in school meal programs and (2)assist state agencies in reviewing the administrative practices of local agencies. Requires thedevelopment and distribution of materials representative of "best management andadministrative practices." Additional Administrative Reviews. Mandates that state agenciesconduct special administrative reviews -- beyond those carried out as part of the regular"Coordinated Review Effort" (CRE) compliance and accountability reviews -- of localagencies that have demonstrated a high level of, or a high risk for, administrative error inapplication, certification, verification, meal counting, and meal claiming procedures. Thoselocal agencies failing to meet performance criteria would be required to develop and carryout corrective action plans (with the state agency's assistance). If they fail to meet the criteriain both initial and follow-up reviews, local agencies could be subject to financial penalties(retention of funds otherwise due them). Training. Requires state agencies to provide training in administrativepractices to local agency administrative personnel. The Agriculture Department may supportthis training or provide it directly. Funds for Administrative Reviews and Training. Provides mandatoryfunding to the Agriculture Department to assist state agencies in carrying out additionaladministrative reviews and training in administrative practices. Technology. Requires that state child nutrition plans submitted forstate administrative expense funding include information as to how technology andinformation management systems will be used to improve program integrity. Also requiresa study of the use of computer technology to reduce eligibility certification errors and other"waste, fraud, and abuse." Authorizes the Agriculture Department to provide competitivegrants to state agencies to award to local agencies to defray the cost of purchasing/upgradingtechnology and information systems. Compliance and Accountability. Increases the appropriationsauthorization for compliance and accountability reviews of local school meal programagencies. (7) School Meal Programs (School Lunches andBreakfasts). (8) Runaway, Homeless, and Migrant Youth. Establishes in law (asopposed to administrative guidance) the automatic (categorical) eligibility of homelesschildren for free school meals. Also makes youth served by grant programs under theRunaway and Homeless Youth Act and migrant children automatically eligible for freeschool meals. Duration of Eligibility. Mandates that eligibility for free orreduced-price school meals remains valid for one year for moststudents. Military Housing Allowances. Makes permanent a rule disregardingmilitary housing allowances for those living in "privatized" housing when judging eligibilityfor free or reduced- price school meals. "Severe Need" School Breakfast Program Subsidies. Removes arequirement that schools document their costs in order to receive higher "severe need" schoolbreakfast subsidies, allowing them to receive the maximum subsidy rather than the lesser ofdocumented costs or the severe need rate. (9) Pilot Expansion of Eligibility for Free School Meals. Authorizes apilot project in all or parts of 5 states under which the income limit for free school mealswould be raised from 130% of the federal poverty income guidelines to 185% of theguidelines (the current limit for reduced-price meals). Evaluation. Authorizes funds for annual national performanceassessments of child nutrition meal service programs. "Best Practices." Authorizes funding for a review of "best practices"in the School Breakfast program so as to assist schools in addressing impediments to thegrowth of the program. Nutrition, Health, and NutritionEducation. Local Wellness Policies. Requires local educational agenciesparticipating in school meal programs to establish local "school wellness" policies, as theydetermine appropriate. These policies would include goals for nutrition education, physicalactivity, and other school-based activities, nutrition guidelines for all foods available oncampus during the school day, a plan for measuring implementation of the policy, andinvolvement of parents, students, school and school meal administrators, and the public. TheAgriculture Department is directed to make available information and technical assistanceto support this initiative and is given mandatory funding to provide it. Nutrition Education/Promotion. Replaces (unfunded) authority fora nutrition education and training program with authorization for grants to states toimplement "team nutrition networks" that support nutrition education through a wide varietyof means, such as the use of nutrition education messages, promotion of active lifestyles,pilot projects, model curricula, data gathering, health and physical activity guidelines. Authorizes funds to promote improved nutrition through the dissemination and use ofnutrition messages and materials developed by the Agriculture Department. Authorizes grants to entities with expertise in health education programs for limited-English-proficientindividuals to enhance obesity prevention activities. Requires the Agriculture Departmentto issue recommendations for the increased consumption of foods in school meal programsbased on the most recent Dietary Guidelines for Americans. Authorizes grants to localeducational agencies to create healthy school nutrition environments, promote healthy eatinghabits, and increase physical activity among elementary and secondary students. In supportof nutrition education goals, authorizes technical assistance and grants to improve the qualityof school meals. Milk. Places into law rules governing the offering of milk and milksubstitutes that differ minimally from pre-existing law and regulations. Schools must offerfluid milk in a variety of fat contents, may offer flavored, unflavored, and lactose-free milk,and must provide a milk substitute for students whose "disability" restricts their diet (onwritten request of a physician). In addition, schools may substitute a non-dairy beverage thatis nutritionally equivalent to milk for students who cannot consume milk because of a"medical or other special dietary need" (on the written request of a medical authority orparent). "Weighted Averages." Reinstates a waiver of a requirement thatschools use "weighted averages" -- that measure the nutrient content of meals according tofood items actually chosen by students -- when doing a nutrient analysis of their school mealprograms. Food Safety. Increases the number of required food safety inspections,requires state and federal audits of the inspections, and mandates that school food safetyprograms comply with any "hazard analysis and critical control point" (HACCP) systemestablished by the Agriculture Department. Irradiated Foods. Requires the Agriculture Department to establishprocedures relating to irradiated food products distributed by the Department to school mealprograms. They must ensure that irradiated foods are provided only on request, that schoolsreceive information about irradiation technology and its relation to safe food handling, thatschools get models for providing information about irradiated foods to parents and students,that irradiated products are appropriately labeled and not commingled with other foods, andthat schools are encouraged to offer alternatives. Technology. Requires state child nutrition plans to contain informationas to how they may use their state administrative expense grant for information managementsystems that monitor the nutrient content of meals and authorizes funds for competitivegrants to defray the cost of purchasing/upgrading technology and information systems doingthis task. Fresh Fruit and Vegetables, WIC Farmers' Markets, andLocally Produced Food. Free Fresh Fruit and Vegetable Program. Requires the AgricultureDepartment to operate a permanent fresh fruit and vegetable program under which free freshfruit and vegetables are made available to students in participating schools. This expands ona pre-existing pilot project available in five states and one Indian reservation and adds threestates and two Indian reservations. In both the pilot and the expanded permanent program,the program is available in only a very small number of schools in each state or Indianreservation. Mandatory annual funding is provided for this permanent program. (10) WIC Farmers' Market Program. Reduces the state match to 30% ofadministrative costs (rather than 30% of total costs), increases the limit on the federal shareof benefits from $20 to $30 per participant per year, and makes roadside stands eligible toparticipate at state option. This program provides vouchers to WIC recipients to buy freshfruit and vegetables at participating farmers' markets. Locally Produced Foods. Authorizes funding for the AgricultureDepartment to encourage schools to purchase locally produced foods, including grants todefray initial infrastructure costs incurred in carrying out this policy. Authorizes theAgriculture Department to provide competitive matching grants and technical assistance forprojects that improve access to local foods through "farm-to-cafeteria" activities,procurement from small- and medium-size farms, support for school garden programs, andfarm-based nutrition education projects. Authorizes the Agriculture Department to providetechnical assistance and grants to improve access to local foods inschools. Fruit and Vegetables in the WIC Program. Authorizes the Secretaryto award grants to evaluate the feasibility of including fresh, frozen, or canned fruit andvegetables as an addition to food items in regular WIC food packages. Summer Food Service Program. Simplified Summer Programs ("Lugar" Rules). Makes permanentrules that allow summer program sponsors to receive the maximum summer program subsidyrates without providing documentation of costs and expands their application to 6 additionalstates (beyond 13 states and Puerto Rico covered under pre-existinglaw). "Seamless Summer Option." Creates, in law (as opposed toadministrative policy), an option that allows schools to administer summer or school vacationfood service using the rules (and subsidy rates) of regular school mealprograms. Pilot Projects. Establishes and funds four pilot projects -- (1) a projectthat, in rural parts of Pennsylvania, makes it easier for the area to qualify for "open-site"summer program status (in which all participating children are served free meals), (2) grantsto increase participation in the summer program through innovative approaches totransportation in rural areas, (3) modification of eligibility criteria for residential summercamps serving low-income children in order to evaluate alternative means of judging camps'eligibility to participate in the summer program, and (4) a project in California whereby localgovernments and private nonprofit organizations could receive summer program subsidyrates for up to 2 meals a day during the summer, school breaks, after-school hours, andweekends (as an alternative to after-school nutrition projects, the regular summer programand the seamless summer option noted above). Child and Adult Care Food Program(CACFP). For-Profit Day Care Centers. Makes permanent (and nationallyapplicable) a pre-existing rule that allows for-profit day care centers to qualify for CACFPassistance if at least 25% of the children they serve are eligible for free or reduced-priceschool meals (have family income below 185% of the federal poverty incomeguidelines). Emergency Homeless Shelters: Age Limit. Allows CACFP subsidiesto be paid for free meals/snacks served by emergency homeless shelters to all children notmore than 18 years old and to children with disabilities -- up from an age limit of 12 years(15 for children of migrant workers). Management Support Initiative. Reinstates and provides mandatoryfunding (in FY2005 and FY2006 only) for an initiative offering training and technicalassistance to aid state agencies in improving their management and oversight of theCACFP. Pilot Project. In rural areas of Nebraska, lowers the eligibilitythreshold applied to family day care homes wishing to qualify for "Tier I" (higher CACFPsubsidy rates) status -- for fiscal years FY2006 and FY2007. Paperwork Reduction. Requires the Agriculture Department toexamine the feasibility of reducing paperwork associated with CACFP regulations andrecordkeeping requirements for state agencies, day care homes and sponsors, and child carecenters. Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (the WIC Program). Eligibility Breastfeeding Women. Increases the potential eligibility period forbreastfeeding women. Physical Presence. Expands authority for state agencies to waive therequirement that each individual seeking WIC benefits be physically present to determineeligibility to cover certain infants under eight weeks of age. Benefits (11) Review of Food Packages. Requires the Agriculture Department toconduct future periodic scientific reviews of foods included in WIC food packages andchange them as necessary. Also requires an update of WIC food packages within 18 monthsafter the most current review (initiated in September 2003) iscompleted. "Rounding Up." Allows state agencies to round up to the next wholecan size of infant formula when issuing WIC vouchers in order to ensure that all infantsreceive the full authorized nutritional benefit specified by regulation. Use of WIC Vouchers. Requires state agencies to permit WICrecipients to transact their vouchers at any authorized store in thestate. Cost Containment Policies "WIC-Only Stores." Substantially revises procedures aimed atcontaining the cost of WIC vouchers by instituting new rules state agencies must follow tocontrol costs charged by vendors whose revenue is derived primarily (50%+) from the saleof WIC food items, effectively constraining (or ending) their participation depending on theprices they charge for WIC items. (12) State Alliances. Limits the size of alliances through which stateagencies join together to solicit sole-source bids from infant formula manufacturers, in orderto bolster competition in the bidding process. "Primary Contract" Infant Formula. Requires state agencies to usethe "primary" infant formula they have contracted with manufacturers to supply, with allother infant formulas issued as an alternative. Uncoupling Milk- and Soy-based Infant Formula Bids. Requires thatlarge state agencies/alliances solicit sole-source bids from infant formula manufacturers usingprocedures under which bids and discounts (rebates) are solicited separately for milk-basedand soy-based formula. "Cent-for-Cent" Adjustments. Mandates a cent-for-cent decrease inrebates received by states from infant formula manufacturers if there is a decrease in thelowest national wholesale price for a full truckload of a particular formula -- just aspre-existing law required cent-for-cent increases when wholesale pricesincrease. WIC Vendors (13) Accelerated Approval. Requires that state agencies have proceduresfor accepting and processing vendor applications outside the agency's normal time-frame ifthere will be inadequate access to the WIC program. Notification of Violations. Directs state agencies to notify vendors ofan initial violation of WIC rules if they are found to have committed a violation that requiresa pattern of occurrences in order to impose a penalty. List of Infant Formula Providers. Requires state agencies to maintainlists of infant formula food wholesalers, distributors, and retailers approved to provide infantformula for the WIC program and mandates that vendors purchase infant formula from thoseon the state agency's list. EBT Costs. Bars the imposition of any costs related to electronicbenefit transfer (EBT) systems on vendors. Use of Funds and Administration Earmarked Funding. Requires the use of $64 million a year (or theamount of WIC funding for the prior year that has not been obligated, if less) for programinfrastructure, special projects to promote breastfeeding or of regional/national significance,management information systems, and special nutrition education activities (such asbreastfeeding peer counselors). "Spend-forward." Increases the limit on the proportion of the nutritionservices and administration component of their WIC grant that state agencies may spend inthe following fiscal year -- from 1% to 3%. Universal Product Codes. Mandates that the Agriculture Departmentestablish and maintain a national universal product code (UPC) database for states' use incarrying out the WIC program. State Administrative Expenses. Minimum State Grants. Increases the minimum state grant for childnutrition program administrative expenses from $100,000 to $200,000 (indexed afterFY2008). Technical Assistance and Training. (14) Food Service Management Institute (FSMI). Adds four areas inwhich the FSMI is required to provide technical assistance and training -- "hazard analysisand critical point plan" (HACCP) implementation by schools carrying out new food safetyrequirements, emergency readiness, responding to food recalls, and food bio-securitytraining. Increases mandatory funding for the FSMI. Technology and School Breakfast Expansion. Adds two newpotential uses for training and technical assistance funding -- (1) aid to states (on acompetitive basis) for the purpose of helping schools with large populations of low-incomechildren in meeting the cost of acquiring/upgrading technology and information managementsystems used for child nutrition programs and (2) assistance to states (on a competitive basis)with low proportions of schools/children participating in the School Breakfast program inmeeting costs associated with initiating/expanding the breakfastprogram. Procurement Training. Authorizes the Agriculture Department toprovide technical assistance and training in the procurement of goods and services for childnutrition programs, including help in ensuring compliance with "Buy American"requirements and procuring safe foods (e.g., model specifications). Information Clearinghouse. Reinstates, extends, and increases theappropriations authorization for a small nongovernmental information clearinghouse thatprovides information to nongovernmental groups that assist low-income individuals andcommunities with food assistance and self-help activities to reduce reliance on governmentagencies. Commodity Support. Permanent Authority. Makes permanent two pre-existing commoditysupport authorities -- (1) the requirement that the Agriculture Department use Section 32 andCommodity Credit Corporation funds to maintain annually programmed levels of commoditysupport for child nutrition programs and (2) permission to use Section 32 funds to removeand dispose of unsafe foods donated to child nutrition programs by the AgricultureDepartment. In addition to the 2004 child nutrition reauthorization (and the two related short-termextensions of expiring authorities noted in the earlier History section), several relativelyminor changes to the laws and policies governing child nutrition and WIC programs havebeen enacted in the 108th and 109th Congresses: P.L. 108-30. Extended the availability of funds for the projectproviding fresh fruit and vegetables in schools through the 2003-2004 school year. (15) P.L. 108-375. Included in the FY2005 National Defense AuthorizationAct was a provision requiring that child nutrition and WIC programs disregard "supplementalsubsistence allowances" received by military families when judgingeligibility. P.L. 108-447. Included in the Agriculture Department component ofthis omnibus FY2005 appropriations measure were two child nutrition/WIC provisions: (1)permission for the Department to reallocate among states unused Child and Adult Care FoodProgram (CACFP) audit funds and (2) a rule barring approval of any new retailers under theWIC program whose major source of revenue is derived from WIC program vouchers("WIC-only" stores). P.L. 109-97. Included in this FY2006 Agriculture Departmentappropriations law were five child nutrition/WIC provisions: (1) continued permission toreallocate CACFP audit funds, (2) continuation of the rule barring approval of any newWIC-only stores, (3) an amendment speeding up the availability of funds to be used by theAgriculture Department to support development of local school "wellness policies" (to beavailable immediately instead of July 2006), (4) expansion of simplified summer program("Lugar") rules to cover seven more states (allowing sponsors to receive maximum subsidyrates without cost documentation), and (5) provision of $6 million to expand the programoffering free fresh fruit and vegetables in selected schools to six additionalstates. A number of bills that would directly affect child nutrition programs have beenintroduced since the enactment of the 2004 Child Nutrition and WIC Reauthorization Act onJune 30,2004, primarily in the 109th Congress. (16) The following listing covers the 109th Congress andincludes notes where the same measure was introduced in the 108th Congress (after June2004). It does not cover legislative proposals made by the Administration in its FY2007budget submission; for details on those, refer to CRS Report RL33412 , Agriculture andRelated Agencies: FY2007 Appropriations , coordinated by [author name scrubbed]. H.R. 203 . Expands the program providing free fresh fruitand vegetables in selected schools to one additional state (New York), and includes HeadStart programs as potential participants. H.R. 204 . Increases the amount of money for CACFPaudits from 1% to 1.5% of CACFP total funding. H.R. 844 . Establishes automatic eligibility for free schoolmeals for children of active duty enlisted members of the Armed Forces and NationalGuard. (17) H.R. 1589 . Family and Workplace Balancing Act. Alongwith changes to programs outside child nutrition programs, establishes a "universal" freebreakfast program, directs grants to schools to create "healthy school nutritionenvironments," and expands the availability of CACFP subsidies for suppers served throughafter-school programs to all states. (18) H.R. 5344 . Summer Food Service Program ImprovementAct of 2006. Lowers the threshold that summer program sponsors must meet to gain"open-site" status (where all meals/snacks are served free in projects located in low-incomeneighborhoods). Extends applicability of "Lugar" rules to all states (see S. 1005 ,below). Establishes a startup grant program to provide assistance to sponsors wishing toinitiate summer food service programs. S. 1005 . Extends applicability of simplified summerprogram ("Lugar") rules to all states; these rules allow summer sponsors to receive maximumsubsidy rates, without cost documentation, in 26 states and PuertoRico. S. 1556 /H.R. 3562 . Authorizes expansionof the program providing free fruit and vegetables in selected schools to all states. (19) S. 1695 . Hurricane Katrina Food Assistance Relief Act. Establishes specific authority in child nutrition law to modify child nutrition programconditions of operation in the case of natural disasters, and provides extra funding for theWIC program in the wake of Hurricanes Katrina and Rita. S. 2592 /H.R. 5167 . Child NutritionPromotion and School Lunch Protection Act. Requires the Secretary of Agriculture to revise(and effectively expand) the definition of "foods of minimal nutritional value" that may notbe offered in competition with school meals. Requires that the expanded definition bar thesefood items from being offered on school campuses at any time. In th 108th Congress, a number of bills were introduced to make changes in childnutrition and WIC programs -- in addition to the omnibus bills reported by the HouseEducation and the Workforce Committee and the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition, and ForestryCommittee ( H.R. 3873 and S. 2507 ), which formed the basis forthe final 2004 reauthorization law, and the two bills that became the laws extending childnutrition and WIC authorizations while Congress considered reauthorization( H.R. 3232 and S. 2241 ). Many of these initiatives (or variations)were included in the House and Senate committee bills and the final law. They are as follows-- H.R. 1551 . Safe School Food Act. Adds to food safetyrequirements for schools participating in school meal programs. H.R. 2227 . Obesity Prevention Act. Establishes grantsfor local school nutrition and physical fitness ("wellness") projects. H.R. 2592 . Healthy America Act. Expands theavailability of fruit and vegetables in child nutrition and WICprograms. H.R. 2626 /S. 1755 . Farm-to-CafeteriaProjects Act. Authorizes grants for farm-to-cafeteria projects. H.R. 2832 . Healthy Nutrition for America's Children Act. Expands the program providing free fresh fruit and vegetables in selected schoolsnationwide. H.R. 2987 /S. 1392 . Establishes "healthyschool nutrition environment" grants and broadens rules regulating the offering of foods incompetition with school meals. H.R. 3022 . School Nutrition Antibiotic Safety Act. Barsthe Agriculture Department from acquiring chickens that have been fed/administeredfluoroquinolone antibiotics for distribution to school meal programs. H.R. 3120 . Right to Know School Nutrition Act. Mandates the provision of information about the irradiation of foods used in school mealprograms. H.R. 3250 /S. 1367 . Child NutritionImprovement Act. Includes provisions to increase milk consumption in schools and supportfor "healthy school environment" projects. H.R. 3416 . Healthy Children Through Better NutritionAct. Omnibus alternative child nutrition/WIC reauthorizationproposal. H.R. 3869 . Pride in the Lunch Line Act. Authorizesgrants to assist schools in upgrading technology and information systems used in operatingschool meal programs. S. 448 /H.R. 936 . Leave No Child LeftBehind Act. Among other provisions, expands the CACFP. S. 995 . Child Nutrition Initiatives Act. Provides for (1)grants to encourage more nutritious school meals and (2) grants for farm-to-cafeteria projects. Increases child nutrition state administrative expense grants for small states and funding forWIC farmers' markets. Provides funding for the Nutrition Education and Training (NET)program. S. 996 . Commodity Distribution Act. Increases federallyprovided commodity support for school meal programs. S. 1007 /H.R. 4519 . Better Nutrition forSchool Children Act. Broadens rules regulating the offering of foods in competition withschool meals. S. 1020 . School Breakfast Improvement Act. IncreasesSchool Breakfast program subsidies; provides for start-up and expansion grants for breakfastprograms; authorizes "universal" free breakfast pilot projects. S. 1021 /H.R. 3930 . Summer Food ServiceImprovement Act. Provides for the expansion of the Summer Food Serviceprogram. S. 1022 . Child and Adult Care Food ProgramImprovement Act. Provides for the expansion of the CACFP. S. 1393 . Expands the program providing free fresh fruitand vegetables in selected schools. S. 1549 /H.R. 3441 . Provides for thephase-out of reduced-price school meals by raising the income eligibility test for free schoolmeals. S. 1750 /S. 1829 . Better Eating for BetterLiving Act. Increases school lunch subsidies; requires periodic reviews of school mealnutrition guidelines; modifies rules regulating milk served in schools; provides funding forthe Nutrition Education and Training (NET) program. S. 2183 . Early Attention to Nutrition Act. Establishes"Team Nutrition Network" grants to promote the nutritional health ofschoolchildren.

Summary: Child nutrition programs (e.g., school meal programs, summer food service, child care foodprograms) and the Special Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants, and Children (theWIC Program) are subject to periodic comprehensive reviews, when appropriations and otherauthorities expire and have to be reauthorized. They were up for reauthorization review in the 108thCongress, and the only substantial child nutrition-WIC legislation in the 108th Congress, and so farin the 109th Congress, has been the 2004 reauthorization law -- the Child Nutrition and WICReauthorization Act of 2004, P.L. 108-265 , enacted June 30, 2004. The 2004 law extended virtually all expiring authorities through FY2009 and containedimportant, but incremental, changes in child nutrition programs and the WIC program; theCongressional Budget Office estimated that it will generate net new spending totaling about $230million through FY2009. Its major feature was a set of amendments aimed at improving the integrityand administration of the school meal programs. Significant changes were made in proceduresrelating to the way children's eligibility for free and reduced-price school meals is certified andverified, and new initiatives to upgrade schools' administration of their meal programs were put inplace. However, minimal revisions were made to the school meal programs themselves -- forexample, expansion of eligibility for homeless, runaway, and migrant children, loosened rules forcertain higher school breakfast subsidies -- and a major proposal to phase in higher income eligibilitylimits for free school meals was limited to an authorization for a pilot project. Relatively minoramendments also affected the Summer Food Service and Child and Adult Care Food programs --for example, making permanent and expanding coverage of "Lugar" rules facilitating participationby summer program sponsors and making permanent and nationally applicable a rule looseningChild and Adult Care Food program eligibility rules for for-profit child care centers. Another area of concern addressed by the reauthorization law was nutrition, health, andnutrition education. Here, the biggest initiative was a requirement that all schools participating inschool meal programs establish locally designed "wellness policies" to set nutrition, physical activity,and other goals and strategies for meeting them. Coupled with it were (1) authorizations for newnutrition education efforts, (2) an expansion of the program offering free fresh fruit and vegetablesin selected schools, and (3) significant changes in food safety rules. Finally, a large number of revisions were made to the law governing the WIC program. Themost important among them were amendments aimed at strengthening rules that help contain foodcosts incurred by the program; these included provisions placing substantial limits on vendorsreceiving the majority of their revenue from WIC vouchers (so-called "WIC-only" stores). This report will be updated as events and legislation warrant.