milk program. Has it been your observation that we are wasting or providing unnecessary milk for the needs of our children's health? Senator GRUENING. I have no evidence to that effect. I doubt whether we are wasting any in this area. And if we should be—I think that is one point-one place where possibly we could afford a little waste. I consider the billions of dollars that are being wasted annually in other extravagances, in expenditures overseas, in programs that have no vital importance to the American people but for which they pay, are places where we could drastically cut waste but in this case we might risk a little waste to make sure that no part of the milk program is impaired that is so vital.

Senator MONDALE. So it is your view that we can afford to make this program permanent as a nation. Do you have any views-of course this is beyond the scope of your testimony-with regard to special needs for the very poor?

Senator GRUENING. Well, I think that we should take care of the very poor. Obviously I feel that no child should be deprived of milk. If there are some whose parents can afford it, fine, but in any event we should take no chances to see that any child in our vast and affluent society, as we refer to it in our optimistic moments, is deprived of this essential product. I can imagine no program more essential to maintain.

Senator MONDALE. Thank you very much, Senator Gruening, for your very fine statement and your observations on this important subject.

Senator GRUENING. Thank you.

Senator MONDALE. At this point, I would like to introduce for the record a statement by the distinguished Senator from Oklahoma, Mr. Fred R. Harris, on behalf of S. 2921.

(The statement referred to follows:)

STATEMENT OF HON. FRED R. HARRIS, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF

OKLAHOMA

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, it is indeed a privilege for me to appear before you today to make known my support of a bill which I co-sponsored along with Senator Proxmire and a number of my colleagues to make permanent the special school milk program, and to assure that it will be adequately funded in future years. I feel that the bill we are considering here today, S. 2921, provides the necessary assurance which is a necessity if school administrators throughout the United States are to be able to adequately administer the special school milk program on a yearly basis. The bill we are considering here today would make the special school milk program a permanent program and would fund it at a rate of $110 million for fiscal year 1967, $115 million for fiscal year 1968 and $120 million for fiscal year 1969 and thereafter. By making the special school milk program a permanent program and by assuring school administrators that adequate funds would be provided each year for the program we would guarantee its maximum effectiveness to our school age children. The proposed cutback in the school milk program for fiscal year 1967 would have meant a drastic reduction in funds available to school systems throughout the nation. I am happy that the House has increased the budget request in theAgriculture Appropriations Bill this year. Had the proposed cutback taken effect, it would have meant a drastic reduction in funds available to the Oklahoma schools in the special school milk program.

Oklahoma schools in fiscal year 1966 received $1,059,000 for this program. However, under the proposed reduction, they would have received in fiscal year 1967 only $221,000. There is no question about the fact that this reduction would have denied milk to many of our students who without the program would not receive adequate amounts of milk in their diets. I am not opposed to economy in government; however, I do feel that a reduction in the school milk program and

a reduction in the availability of milk to our school age children is, in fact, false economy. Secondly, I feel that a reduction in the special school milk program would, in fact, affect the children from poor families who are now benefiting most from it. It might be possible for the Department of Agriculture to draw from other sources such as the Anti-Poverty effort to maintain a good school milk program. Special projects at this time provide for only 1 million needy children. Estimates indicate that there are, in fact, around 5 million needy children in our school systems today. I do not feel that it is wise policy to require a means test for our school children to be eligible for milk, and would, therefore, much rather see the program made available to all of our school aged children. Although the House has raised the appropriations for the special school milk program to $103 million for fiscal year 1967, I feel that we are creating a hardship for our school administrators in the future if we do not provide them some assurance that there will be adequate funds in the program from year to year. The bill we are considering here today would provide that assurance and would also guarantee the continuation of a program which has been and should continue to be a very effective tool in assuring appropriate diets to our children. I think we should point out that should the school milk program be cut back this year or at some future date, local districts will have to assume a larger share of the cost or pass them on to the children. This could result in less milk being used in our school systems and would certainly affect our poor children because they would be the first to fall by the wayside if increased costs for milk are passed on. I, therefore, urge that the Committee report this bill favorably in order that we might pass it this year and in so doing assure the continuation of this very worthy program and guarantee adequate funding in years ahead. Thanks very much.

Senator MONDALE. Our next witness is Mr. Gilbert Rohde, president of the Wisconsin Farmers Union, accompanied by Mr. Reuben Johnson, director of legislative services, National Farmers Union.

We are delighted to have you before the committee today, Mr. Rohde. You serve as president of the Wisconsin Farmers Union?

STATEMENT OF GILBERT C. ROHDE, PRESIDENT, WISCONSIN FARMERS UNION, CHIPPEWA FALLS, WIS., REPRESENTING THE NATIONAL FARMERS UNION

Mr. ROHDE. Yes, sir.

Senator MONDALE. As the representative of a dairy State whose dairy industry is almost as impressive as that of Minnesota? Mr. ROHDE. Yes, indeed.

Senator MONDALE. You may proceed.

Mr. ROHDE. Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, for the record I should like to state at the outset that I am appearing in behalf of our national president, Mr. Tony T. Dechant and in behalf of the National Farmers Union. However, before I present a short statement on behalf of our organization I should also like to present for the record a statement of Mr. Edwin Christianson, vice president of the National Farmers Union and president of the Minnesota Farmers Union.

(The statement is on p. 39.)

Senator MONDALE. We are very pleased to receive the statement by Mr. Christianson who is, in addition, president of the Minnesota Farmers Union. He is one of our great agricultural statesmen and, as I noted earlier in the hearings, distributed a petition on which there are now 26,000 signatures, all favoring a permanent special milk program. We are very pleased to have his statement for the record.

Mr. ROHDE. And then we should also like to submit for the record a statement in behalf of our own Wisconsin Farmers Union.

Senator MONDALE. We are very pleased to receive that statement supporting the special milk program introduced by your own Senator William Proxmire, who is providing inspired leadership on this point This will be made a part of the record.

(The statement is on p. 40.)

Mr. ROHDE. I just want to say, Mr. Chairman, that we of the Wisconsin Farmers Union made a special effort to be here today to support our senior Senator and to commend him for the leadership he has taken and the interest he has that will affect all of us at the economic level very much.

I would now like to present Mr. Dechant's statement on behalf of the National Farmers Union [reads]:

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, the congressional support given the special milk program this year is a reflection of widespread public support both for its extension and for increasing the funds to meet the need created by an increasing school enrollment.

Farmers Union is of the firm opinion that the special milk program is in the public interest if the only criteria by which it is measured is its contribution to improving the nutrition and health of our children. This program is recognized on farms and in cities for this important contribution to national objectives of better health and physical fitness.

The special milk program is also of economic importance to dairy farmers. Under the program more than 1.5 billion pounds of fluid milk will be consumed this year in our Nation's schools. Another 1.5 billion pounds of milk will be consumed in the school lunch program in the form of fluid milk, butter, cheese, and other dairy products.

Farmers Union asked Congress in Senate and House Agriculture Appropriations hearings to fund the special milk program in keeping with the increase in school enrollment. The response has been gratifying. The next and logical step, we believe, is to make the program permanent with the progressive steps in funding spelled out in S. 2921. The bill would increase authorized funds by $5 million annually beginning with the 1966 fiscal year in which $105 million would be authorized through fiscal year 1969 when the objective of $120 million would be reached. If, in the interim, these projected annual levels are not sufficient, we urge the Congress to take the necessary steps to increase the annual authorizations to the level needed to keep pace with the school enrollment and further demand. We believe Congress acted wisely in 1958 in extending the special milk program to all children in summer camps. The proviso that only the underprivileged in summer camps would be eligible was found to be impractical and unworkable, during the 2 preceding years, 1956 and 1957. We urge that this recognition by the Congress which in effect decreed that milk be made available to any child in nonprofit summer camps, will be applied accross the board in the future administration of the special milk program.

In closing, Mr. Chairman, we want to stress the importance of expanding as rapidly as possible the special milk program to all eligible schools, summer camps, and other institutions that want the program. We believe that action this year to extend the program on a permanent basis will enable administrators at all levels to make the special milk program contribute more meaningfully to educationalnutritional school and related programs. Thank you.

Senator MONDALE. Thank you very much, Mr. Rohde, for submitting the statement by your president, Mr. Dechant. I was particularly impressed by the fact that it was in the summer camp program originally that they planned to distribute milk to the underprivileged.

Mr. ROHDE. That is correct.

Senator MONDALE. And they found out, in fact, that they could not do it and they had then to proceed to the objective of distributing it to all children.

Mr. ROHDE. Yes.

Mr. JOHNSON. Yes.

Senator MONDALE. You have watched this program work in your State, and I know that it has been exceedingly well received by the schools. Have you noticed any waste of milk in feeding milk to the children?

Mr. ROHDE. No, sir, Mr. Chairman. You might be interested in knowing that I am a dairy farmer in Wisconsin, and while I was actively managing and operating our farm I also served on the school board as school clerk in the school district for about 17 years, and in that capacity was concerned with the program. I know how it was received. I know that all parents and children as well received a great deal of benefit from it.

Additionally, it helped to provide a valuable market for our products. And it also potentially developed a larger market as these children grew up. It gets them into the habit of drinking milk which is certainly something which is desirable.

Senator MONDALE. Thank you very much, Mr. Rohde, for your very fine statement and for the observations which are typical of your organization.

Mr. ROHDE. Thank you.

(The statements referred to above are as follows:)

STATEMENT BY EDWIN CHRISTIANSON, VICE PRESIDENT, NATIONAL FARMERS UNION, AND PRESIDENT, MINNESOTA FARMERS UNION, ST. PAUL, MINN.

We should like to stress the importance of the special milk program as an educational-nutritional program for the Nation's children and as an economic aid to dairy farmers.

The special milk program and the school lunch program each year take up the equivalent of 3 billion pounds of milk production in the form of fluid milk, butter, cheese and other dairy foods. This is equal to about 22% of the total annual milk production on United States farms. Since surplus production in recent years has been in the range of 5 to 6% of total milk production, the market provided in school lunch and special milk programs can be seen as a significant one.

The special milk program was first authorized by the Congress in the Agricultural Act of 1954 and since that time extended for a year or two at a time. We in Farmers Union have strongly supported more adequate appropriations for the program over the years in order to make the special milk program available to more of the Nation's children. This was again reaffirmed at the 1966 National Farmers Union convention which recommended that the program be made permanent and that funds be provided in line with growing enrollment and participation.

We support S. 2921 as drafted and believe that the minimum fund levels stipulated in the bill ought to be approved.

The House of Representatives recently voted to authorize $103 million in funds for fiscal year 1967. We believe that the $110 million figure suggested in S. 2921 is closer to the real need.

The maintenance of at least the current level of federal aid to all the children who wish to participate in the special milk program is essential in our opinion. There is considerable evidence available from several studies to show that milk consumption by children is sharply increased in response to a lowering of the cost to the child-and that consumption is sharply decreased in response to an increase in the cost to the child.

A typical example is shown in the recent University of Illinois Agricultural economics survey which reported a 40% drop in milk consumption in Chicago public schools as a result of an increase from 2 to 3 cents per half-pint in the cost of milk to the children. While milk consumption dropped sharply in Chicago, the remainder of the State of Illinois which did not change the milk price, showed a gain in participation.

In Jefferson County, Colorado, in the Denver suburban area, an increase in milk price of one cent resulted in a per-pupil drop in consumption of 18%.

Farmers Union has appeared before the Agricultural Appropriations Subcommittee in both Senate and House to oppose a change in the emphasis in the special milk program which would have limited its benefits principally to underprivileged children.

We believe that this issue was already once well settled by the Congress when it acted in 1958 to remove the provision which limited milk program assistance to those in summer camps to the underprivileged. This rule which applied when the milk program was first extended to camps in 1956 did not prove workable and Congress wisely decreed that the milk should be available to any child in nonprofit summer camps without discrimination.

The special milk program should be made permanent and assurance of reasonable appropriations should be given so that school districts can make plans ahead. It is not conducive to good budgeting or effective operations when a school district or the school management do not know, as happened in 1965, until well into the school year, what the special milk reimbursement rate would be. The USDA budget, it will be recalled, was not finally approved until very late in the session.

Additionally, we think it is important to recognize that the efficiency of the special milk program is based upon volume participation. Whatever will make possible greater participation will make possible a lower unit operating cost. Whatever tends to reduce participation will result in a higher per unit cost.

In the brief period of 11 years in which the special milk program has been in operation, a good start has been made. But even so, only about one-third of the Nation's school-age children are participating. We believe that it is time to take whatever steps are necessary to expand and extend the program and we regard S. 2921 as an important step in the right direction.

We believe that action should be taken now in this session of Congress, since a delay in extending the program until next year could well leave the Nation's schools and agencies in an uncertain position at the start of the next fiscal and school year.

STATEMENT OF GILBERT C. ROHDE, PRESIDENT, WISCONSIN FARMERS UNION, CHIPPEWA FALLS, WIS.

Mr. Chairman and members of the subcommittee, Wisconsin Farmers Union strongly supports S. 2921, a bill to make permanent the Special Milk Program for school-age children and to increase authorized funds.

The bill, as introduced by Senator William Proxmire (D-Wis.), would firmly establish a program that has since its inception in the 1954-55 school year raised nutritional standards.

Enactment of this bill at the present time will serve notice that the American public, through its elected representatives, disapprove the recent recommendations of the Budget Bureau to curtail this valuable program by cutting back appropriations.

It makes little sense to us to hobble a highly successful milk distribution program at a time when national milk consumption per person continues to decline. Annual consumption of fluid milk has dropped over 23 quarts per person in the past 15 years.

The record is clear that the Special Milk Program has affected, beneficially, milk consumption among school children. Annual fluid milk consumption, under the program, has grown from less than a half billion pounds in 1955 to over 11⁄2 billion pounds currently.