NUTRITION AND HUMAN NEEDS-1972 HEARINGS BEFORE THE SELECT COMMITTEE ON OF THE UNITED STATES SENATE NINETY-SECOND CONGRESS SECOND SESSION ON NUTRITION AND HUMAN NEEDS PART 1-SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM SURVEY WASHINGTON, D.C., APRIL 10, 1972 Printed for the use of the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs For sale by the Superintendent of Documents, U.S. Government Printing Office Washington, D.C. 20402 - Price $1 CONTENTS Irvings, Mark, project coordinator, FRAC, New York, N. Y. Lyng, Hon. Richard, Assistant Secretary, USDA; accompanied by Howard P. Davis, Deputy Administrator, Food and Nutrition Service ___ Agricultural Economic Research: Shifting Direct Government Payments from Agriculture to Poor People: Impacts on Food Consumption and Appendix 2. Material submitted by other than witnesses: From James L. Borough, Department of Education, Lansing, Mich. : Report to Congress pursuant to Public Law 92-153 on funding status of the school breakfast and nonfood assistance programs_ OFFICE OF SENATOR GEORGE MCGOVERN SUNDAY, APRIL 9, 1972 SENATE HUNGER COMMITTEE TO PURSUE USDA ON Senator George McGovern (D-SD) today announced that the Select Committee on Nutrition and Human Needs, of which he is chairman, has rescheduled its hearing on the School Breakfast Program for Monday, April 10, in Room 1202 of the New Senate Office Building, beginning at 11 a.m. The hearing will be chaired by Senator Philip Hart (D-Mich). Senator Hart has, for the last decade, been a leading advocate of child nutrition programs and his interest in the School Breakfast Program dates to its origin. He was among the principal sponsors of the legislation which established this program. At this time, the breakfast program is floundering. It reaches only 940,000 children per day of 55 million schoolchildren in America. Of the number reached, 520,000 children are from poor families. These figures are especially significant when compared to the over-27 million children (of whom nearly 7 million are needy) reached daily by the School Lunch Program. In addition, the program presently operates in only 6,500 of the Nation's 100,000 schools. In spite of this, and in the face of the widely documented need for more breakfast programs in our schools, USDA recently told Congress that it can find only 1,170 schools desiring breakfast programs and that there are no schools seeking programs in 32 States including Michigan, Kentucky, Missouri, Alabama, and South Carolina. Yet, according to Mr. Ronald Pollack, of the Food Research Action Center (FRAC) in New York, the survey he recently conducted shows that the total may be as high as 20 times the USDA estimate. Preliminary results of the FRAC Survey indicate that Texas alone "desires" 1,700 programs-530 more than USDA claims the entire Nation desires. The survey-which USDA relied upon in offering its figures to Congress-was ordered by Congress in Public Law 92-153, which was enacted last November. That legislation required that USDA was to report to Congress the specific number of schools "desiring" a School Breakfast Program. Rather than ascertain that figure, the Department reported the number of schools which had actually applied for the program-a very low number since official applications were discouraged by State and USDA officials on the grounds that application was useless due to a lack of funds for the program. This was the very problem that Congress sought to remedy by learning how many schools “desired" the program. Testifying on the USDA survey will be Senator Clifford Case (R-NJ). Senator Case was one of the first members of Congress to balk at the results of the USDA "survey." Mr. Pollack will be accompanied by Suzanne Vaupel and Mark Irvings of the Food Research Action Center (FRAC). FRAC, in the past year, has been preparing a comprehensive study of the School Breakfast Program. It includes documentation of the need for, desirability of, and the benefits accruing from the program. The FRAC study, entitled "If We Had Ham, We Could Have Ham and Eggs, If We Had Eggs,"* was recently published. They will be followed by Assistant Secretary of Agriculture Richard Lyng who is expected to defend the Department's response. *See Appendix 3, p. 83. (IV) SCHOOL BREAKFAST PROGRAM SURVEY MONDAY, APRIL 10, 1972 U.S. SENATE Washington, D.C. The Select Committee met at 11:05 a.m.. pursuant to call, in room 1202 of the New Senate Office Building, the Honorable Philip Hart, presiding. Present: Senators Hart and Bellmon. Staff members present: Kenneth Schlossberg, staff director; Gerald S. J. Cassidy, general counsel; John Quinn, professional staff; Vernon M. Goetcheus, senior minority professional staff; and Elizabeth P. Hottell, minority professional staff. Senator HART. The committee will be in order. Before welcoming a very distinguished opening witness, permit me just a brief opening statement. OPENING STATEMENT BY SENATOR HART, PRESIDING Senator HART. Our purpose today is to try to find out what sort of progress we are making in the School Breakfast Program across this country; what, if anything, additionally is needed. A few years ago this program was just an idea. In the last few years it has established itself as clearly worthwhile; something that should be taken out of the pilot program category; something to be established as an essential and vital element in the effort to eliminate hunger. With other efforts that the Congress has been making-Food Stamp and School Lunch Programs-we have built a partial wall around hunger; penning it in, eliminating it as a threat to some of our people; but, by far, not all the people. It becomes clearer every day that, as we continue to treat the School Breakfast Program as sort of a stepchild in our nutritional efforts among children, we leave these children-particularly the poor-defenseless against all of the consequences of spending a life in childhood hunger, apathy, pain, and bad health. That describes the fallout for a child who is hungry for at least half of its waking hours. I do not want to seem to be saying that programs like the School Lunch Program are not doing their job, because that program certainly is. All of us seek for the day when all-not just half, or even two-thirds of our poor children receive a daily meal they desperately need. But let us be realistic- These children deserve adequate nutrition if not-as many of us would prefer-very good |