Page images
PDF
EPUB

SPECIAL SCHOOL MILK PROGRAM

THURSDAY, MAY 12, 1966

U.S. SENATE,

SUBCOMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURAL PRODUCTION, MARKETING, AND STABILIZATION OF PRICES OF THE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE AND FORESTRY, Washington, D.C. The subcommittee met, pursuant to notice, at 10:05 a.m., in room 324, Old Senate Office Building, Senator Spessard L. Holland (chairman of the subcommittee) presiding.

Present: Senators Holland, Mondale, and Young of North Dakota. Senator HOLLAND. The subcommittee will please come to order. The subcommittee is called to order to hear testimony in connection with S. 2921, by Senator Proxmire, of Wisconsin, for himself and other Senators.

I will insert S. 2921 into the record to be made a part of the record at this point.

The staff of our committee has given us a summary of the bill which, I think, gives a clear picture of its contents, and I will ask that summary be incorporated in the record at this point.

And, third, we have from the Secretary of Agriculture, Mr. Freeman, a letter addressed to our chairman, Senator Ellender, chairman of the full committee, giving his comments relative to this bill under date of May 11.

I will ask that this letter, too, be incorporated into the record at this point.

(The documents are as follows:)

[S. 2921, 89th Cong., 1st sess.]

A BILL To provide a special milk program for children

Be it enacted by the Senate and House of Representatives of the United States of America in Congress assembled, That this Act may be cited as the "Children's Special Milk Act."

SEC. 2. The Secretary of Agriculture is hereby authorized and directed, under such rules and regulations as he may deem in the public interest, to encourage the consumption of fluid milk by children in the United States in (1) nonprofit schools of high school grade and under, and (2) nonprofit nursery schools, child-care centers, settlement houses, summer camps, and similar nonprofit institutions devoted to the care and training of children. For the purposes of this Act "United States" means the fifty States, the District of Columbia, the Commonwealth of Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa.

SEC. 3. All sums appropriated under this Act less such amounts as the Secretary shall determine to be reasonable and necessary for his administrative costs and reserves, shall be allocated at the earliest possible date for the use of nonprofit schools and other nonprofit institutions desiring to participate in the program and shall be used to reimburse such nonprofit schools and other nonprofit institutions for fluid milk served to children. Any such allocation, or portion thereof, which the Secretary shall determine will not be fully utilized by any such nonprofit school

1

or other nonprofit institution as then allocated, shall be reallocated by the Secretary so as to accomplish maximum use of such funds.

SEC. 4. For the purpose of carrying out this Act, there is hereby authorized to be appropriated for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1967, not less than $110,000,000; for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1968, not less than $115,000,000; and for the fiscal year ending June 30, 1969, and each succeeding fiscal year thereafter, not less than $120,000,000.

STAFF EXPLANATION OF S. 2921

(SUBCOMMITTEE NO. 3)

This bill extends the duration of the special milk program for children permanently, and extends its coverage to include Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, and American Samoa (sec. 9 of the act of September 6, 1958, extended surplus donations under sec. 32 of the act of August 24, 1935, and sec. 416 of the Agricultural Act of 1949 to those areas and any other areas under the jurisdiction of the United States).

While it does not amend or repeal the existing authority for the special milk program, the bill apparently is intended to supersede it, since it provides for an appropriation for fiscal 1967, the last year of the existing authority.

The existing authority has neither minimum nor maximum limits on appropriations. S. 2921 provides minimum limits of $110 million for fiscal 1967; $115 million for fiscal 1968; and $120 million for each fiscal year thereafter. Unlike the existing authority, which is discretionary, "enabling," legislation, S. 2921 "directs" the Secretary to encourage the consumption of milk by children and requires him to allocate all sums appropriated (except those required for administrative costs and reserves) at the earliest possible date for the use of eligible institutions, and to reallocate any allocation which will not be fully utilized, so as to accomplish maximum use of funds. The bill, therefore, appears to be intended to require a higher level of appropriations than in the past, and to require maximum use of the funds appropriated.

As in the existing authority, the funds would be used to encourage the consumption of fluid milk by children in the United States in nonprofit schools of high school grade and under, nursery schools, child-care centers, settlement houses, summer camps, and similar institutions.

Hon. ALLEN J. ELLENDER,

DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE,
Washington, D.C., May 11, 1966.

Chairman, Committee on Agriculture and Forestry,

U.S. Senate, Washington, D.C.

DEAR MR. CHAIRMAN: This is in reply to your request of March 4, 1966 for a report on S. 2921, a Bill "to provide a Special Milk Program for Children." This Bill would establish a permanent Special Milk Program for children along the lines of the program that is now in operation. The present legislative authorization expires June 30, 1967.

The Department does not recommend enactment of this Bill.

The Department is not opposed to continuation of a milk program. In fact, provision for a Special Milk Program for children in schools and nonprofit institutions is includea in the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 as proposed by the President, and which was recently introduced as H.R. 13361. However, to assure that children in greatest need for improved nutrition will be reached, H.R. 13361 would give priority in the use of funds to schools without a food service and to needy children in schools with a food service and if sufficient funds are available, children in all nonprofit schools and institutious would be included.

The Bill, S. 2921, as now drawn would extend the program to Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam and American Samoa. This would not be practical because of the insufficient supply of fluid milk locally available.

Furthermore, S. 2921 raises some question as to the procedure that would be used in making funds available for reimbursement. It would be wholly impracticable to allocate these funds directly to schools and institutions, as indicated, rather than through a State Agency as is the current administrative practice. The Bureau of the Budget advises that there is no objection to the presentation of this report from the standpoint of the Administration's program.

Sincerely yours,

ORVILLE L. FREEMAN, Secretary.

Mr. YOUNG. I am going to have to leave soon for another meeting, but before I do, I want to say the dairy farmers of Wisconsin and Minnesota are ably represented by Senator Proxmire and Senator Mondale. Their problems are fully understood by these two Senators, who not only represent them but champion their cause in the best possible way. They are to be congratulated on sponsoring this legislation and bringing the importance of the school milk program to the attention of the public. I am glad to work with them on getting early action on the bill.

Senator HOLLAND. I know that we have present our colleague, Senator Proxmire, the principal sponsor of this bill, and I will ask, first, that he testify in support of this bill.

Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you very much, Senator, Senator Young and Senator Mondale.

Senator HOLLAND. I will have to leave because of another com

mittee meeting very soon. I do not think that there is any doubt where these two witnesses stand. I do not know that there are any better advocates for this entire program. You may proceed.

STATEMENT OF HON. WILLIAM PROXMIRE, A U.S. SENATOR FROM THE STATE OF WISCONSIN

Senator PROXMIRE. Mr. Chairman, it is a great pleasure to appear before your subcommittee today in support of the Children's Special Milk Act which would make the special milk program for schoolchildren permanent and set guidelines for the program's funding.

As you know so well, Mr. Chairman, the special milk program has been an unqualified success over the years. In 1966 the number of participating outlets will increase by nearly 1,000, while half pints of milk distributed under the program will climb by about 50 million. This impressive type of program growth has taken place annually since the program was initiated back in 1954.

The program itself fills a substantial child nutrition need. It helps provide children with milk in midmorning and midafternoon by authorizing the Federal Government to share the cost of this milk Iwith the child. At the present time the Federal reimbursement amounts to approximately 3 cents per half pint. The child usually pays the remaining 2 to 4 cents, although in cases of demonstrated need the local school district will pay the additional cost, thus providing the milk to the child free.

I believe the facts will show that this program is essential to the health of our Nation's schoolchildren. Although it supplements in most instances the school lunch program it enables children attending schools, day camps, Headstart nurseries and other institutions to receive vital supplementary nourishment. This is especially important to the child who may be going home to a meager dinner. The sustenance given by Nature's perfect food is particularly helpful to children who have to travel long distances to their classes.

The school milk program has played an important part in relieving the Federal Government of the expense of purchasing and storing surplus milk. Milk not purchased for use in this program simply has to be purchased and stored at Federal expense under our dairy price support program. However, the school milk program is now generally regarded by school administrators and parents alike as

first and foremost a child nutrition aid and only secondarily as a means of holding down dairy surpluses.

The administration has proposed an 80-percent cutback in the school milk program. It would redirect the program to the needy and those children attending schools without a lunch program. The number participating in the program would drop from approximately 18 million to 3 million as a result.

Senator HOLLAND. The effect of the action of the Bureau of the Budget would be to make it a social welfare program and require every child, in order to participate, to show that he is a welfare recipient, would it not?

Senator PROXMIRE. That is, certainly, my impression. I do not know how they could possibly escape that. That is the purpose of it. Senator HOLLAND. And that would be unfair to those children affected and it would be hurtful to the program as a whole, besides being unfair to many children who do not get an adequate supply of milk at home, even though their parents support them.

Senator PROXMIRE. Exactly. In addition to that, it seems to me that even the children who can be properly classified as being in the poverty classification, the way that this program would have to be administered, it seems to me that they will not get the kind of opportunity to drink milk that they get under the regular program now. Senator MONDALE. Will you yield at that point?

Senator HOLLAND. I should have said in the beginning that Senator Mondale, from Minnesota, is a member of this subcommittee and is vitally interested in this program, as is Senator Young from North Dakota, but I hope that the chairman, too, is vitally interested in it. I think that the whole committee is vitally interested in it. I am certainly glad to yield to Senator Mondale.

Senator MONDALE. I want to commend you for your leadership in shaping this legislation and speaking out on behalf of the permanent school milk program. I was proud to join as a sponsor with you in support of this measure.

Is it not possible that if you draw a line on the basis of poverty in the distribution of school milk that some impoverished children might not get the benefit of the program because of the basic insult involved in admitting that "my parents are poor"? They are forced to say, "I get free milk," knowing that some of their playmates. coming from wealthier families would not have to accept free milk. Is it not possible that the embarrassment to a poor child might be such, under this program, that he might not avail himself of it?

Senator PROXMIRE. That is exactly it. There is no question that this kind of thing has worked in that direction in the past.

It is very difficult to know where to draw the line on needy children. After all, if you draw it at $3,000 per family, and the family has an income of $4,000 and more children, these days with the cost of living where it is, the family has to allocate its spending, and the milk expenditures is one that is likely to be the casualty. Family after family finds this to be true. These judgments are very, very hard to make. This kind of cutback is just as certain to deprive needy children of milk regardless of its intention.

Senator MONDALE. This would create a distinction which would cause a division in the classroom of young children on the basis of poor parents and rich parents. I do not think that is the kind of distinction that we want to draw.

Senator PROXMIRE. I think that is very important, because there is a difference of opinion between those of us who advocate this program and the Department of Agriculture. The Department of Agriculture argues that that situation will not develop, that nurses and teachers and so forth can handle this and do it in a discreet and diplomatic way, but we have had enough experience under the school lunch program to know that it cannot be handled that way. There is not any question that there has to be some kind of formal discrimination, and some kind of test like that will be very difficult. Senator MONDALE. I think that even if they tried to be as subtle and delicate about this as possible, there would still be some children who would get milk free and some who would not, and that will be known. I think that if we were dealing with a multibillion-dollar program these distinctions might be more relevant, but this is one of the less expensive and more desirable programs in the Government today. I have never heard a complaint about the program, only praise. And it seems to me that the modest appropriation involved here is very deserving, contributing as it does to the health of 19 million children.

Senator PROXMIRE. It is 18 million.

Senator MONDALE. Yes, you are correct. This is a minimum and decent national effort to contribute to the nutrition of our children. Senator PROXMIRE. Thank you very much for that statement. Senator YOUNG of North Dakota. I would like to add this comment. Under the proposed budget for fiscal year 1967, the State of North Dakota would get only $81,000, which would mean something less than $1 per child per year. You would have to draw the line pretty sharply between poor children and other children in order to spread the $81,000 through the whole school system of North Dakota. I think that if you have that small amount you might just as well not have any program at all.

Senator PROXMIRE. I think that would be the attitude on the part of the school administrators. That is an excellent point. That would be true among them throughout the country, rather than going through the trouble of this, the turmoil of trying to make the parents understand. Many of them would be unhappy with this kind of discrimination, whether excluded or included; many administrators might very well conclude that, rather than put the burden on the teachers, they would reject the whole program.

Senator HOLLAND. What is the degree of cooperation required of the State and local authorities under your bill as contrasted or compared with the present situation?

Senator PROXMIRE. It was my understanding on this that it would be the same. I understand from this letter which the Secretary of Agriculture wrote this morning, that there may be a difference. I certainly want to find out about that. I just saw the letter a few minutes ago, and I have not had a chance to examine it in detail. certainly tried to draft this legislation to carry on the established program without any significant change. The program has been so successful and has proved itself.

We

Senator HOLLAND. Your intention was to make permanent the present temporary program, and to make it mandatory, rather than simply permissive, is that correct?

Senator PROXMIRE. Yes, sir.

63-201-66- 2

« PreviousContinue »