[Congressional Record Volume 140, Number 112 (Friday, August 12, 1994)]
[Senate]
[Page S]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Printing Office [www.gpo.gov]
[Congressional Record: August 12, 1994]
From the Congressional Record Online via GPO Access [wais.access.gpo.gov]
BETTER NUTRITION AND HEALTH FOR CHILDREN ACT
The Senate continued with the consideration of the bill.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mr. Daschle). The Senator from Vermont is
recognized.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I understand the Chair has before it the
committee amendments. They have been cleared, and I urge their
adoption.
I ask unanimous consent that the time be reserved to me, but they are
to be in order to move now to the consideration of the committee
amendments.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Under the previous order, the Senator from Kentucky is to be
recognized for an amendment.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, have the committee amendments been agreed
to?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The question is on agreeing to the committee
amendments.
The committee amendments were agreed to.
So the committee amendments were agreed to.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I move to reconsider the vote.
Mr. LUGAR. I move to lay that motion on the table.
The motion to lay on the table was agreed to.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Amendment No. 2559
(Purpose: To improve the administration of the WIC Program)
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I send an amendment to the desk on
behalf of myself, Mr. Lugar, Mr. Craig, Mr. Dole, Mr. Cochran, Mr.
Helms, Mr. Coverdell, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Chafee.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will report the amendment.
The bill clerk read as follows:
The Senator from Kentucky [Mr. McConnell] for himself, Mr.
Lugar, Mr. Craig, Mr. Dole, Mr. Cochran, Mr. Helms, Mr.
Coverdell, Mr. Grassley, and Mr. Chafee proposes an amendment
numbered 2559.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the
reading of the amendment be dispensed with.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:
SEC. . IMPROVED ADMINISTRATION OF WIC PROGRAM.
Section 17(f) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1786(f)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(23) No State agency or local agency shall be considered
an office in a State that provides public assistance for
purposes of section 7(a)(2)(A) of Public Law 103-31.''.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask
unanimous consent the time not be charged to either side.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The bill clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the order
for the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, the amendment I have offered is very
simple. It will remove the burden WIC clinics will face after January
1, 1995, of registering WIC recipients to vote. The National Voter
Registration Act, popularly known as the motor-voter bill, requires
States to designate public assistance offices as voter registration
sites. Included in the report language accompanying this bill was a
sentence asserting that ``public assistance offices'' includes WIC, as
well as AFDC, food stamp, and Medicaid offices. Mr. President, I
believe this inclusion of WIC clinics is shortsighted and needs to be
revisited.
Mr. President, at the outset it is important to stress that this
amendment is not about the merits of the motor-voter bill. This Chamber
knows well my views on that legislation. This amendment is about the
WIC Program. It is about burdening one of our most successful programs
with totally unrelated responsibilities. The requirements of motor-
voter will impair the ability of local WIC clinics to meet the needs of
needy pregnant women, infants, and children, and to fulfill the mission
of the program.
The WIC Program was designed specifically for low-income pregnant,
post-partum, and breastfeeding women; infants; and children under age 5
who are at nutritional risk. Benefits participants receive include
vouchers for supplemental foods such as infant formula, iron-fortified
cereal, and vitamin C-rich juices. Equally important, and arguably more
so than the foods provided, are the health screenings, nutrition
education sessions, and one-on-one contacts WIC workers have with moms
to teach them about the nutritional needs of their fetus and/or child.
The potential impact this program has on the health and well-being of
our children is significant. In Kentucky, over half of the babies born
are on WIC, and that figure is similar nationwide. The link between
adequate nutrient intake and the development of a child is clear. Tufts
University researchers have found that undernutrition can have a
detrimental impact on the intellectual and behavioral development of a
child. Iron deficiency, for example, has an adverse effect on a child's
ability to concentrate and retain information. Prolonged
undernourishment can harm a child's social and cognitive development.
Mr. President, WIC is successful in improving the nutritional status
of the participants: studies show that pregnant women on WIC and
Medicaid are less likely to deliver premature or low birth weight
babies, which saves Medicaid expenditures and puts the infant on a
healthy path at the start. Another study found that WIC reduced the
prevalence of anemia, and reduced height and weight abnormalities among
children.
But, the National Voter Registration Act requires public assistance
offices, including WIC, to distribute voter registration application
forms to all applying for public assistance, to assist the applicants
with completing the forms unless the applicant refuses such assistance,
and to accept the completed registration form and forward it to the
appropriate State officials.
Further, the offices can be asked to maintain copies of the forms
applicants sign when declining to register, as well as register non-
program-applicants who walk in off the street.
The administrative burden this imposes on WIC is considerable and
indisputable. In fact, it is specifically recognized in the
congressional reports accompanying the National Voter Registration Act.
Both the House and Senate reported that ``Costs for registration
application assistance for these offices [public assistance offices]
should be considered matchable under the current Federal match rate for
these programs.'' Agencies are interpreting this to mean that offices
can be reimbursed at a Federal match for the additional expenses
incurred by fulfilling the requirements of motor voter.
But, Mr. President, WIC is not a program to which the State
contributes funds to match Federal dollars. WIC is a grant program
under which Federal money is given to the States for both
administrative and food expenses. WIC is a discretionary program, not a
mandatory program.
Every year for the last 6 years at least, a large, bipartisan group
of Senators--including myself--has written to our colleagues on the
Appropriations Committee urging them to continue on the road to fully
funding WIC. And the committee obliges. This year alone, appropriators
have recommended an increase of $260 million to $3.47
billion so that we can continue to increase participation in this
successful program.
Requiring WIC workers to register people to vote detracts from the
primary mission of the WIC program--improving the nutritional health of
our Nation's underprivileged children. Mandating clinics to administer
the motor-voter requirements consumes the scarce Federal dollars that
are appropriated for the important WIC activities such as health
screening, nutrition education, and breastfeeding promotion.
If WIC clinics are subject to the motor-voter mandates, then WIC
workers will have to spend valuable time and money on an activity that
is totally unrelated to the mission of the WIC program. Further, it
could take away from efforts to expand participation in WIC. As we, as
appropriators, continue to increase funds for WIC, I would hope that
those funds go to adding recipients onto this successful program, and
continuing the health and nutrition education efforts.
Mr. President, I want to make one final point before yielding the
floor for the moment. This is not, as will probably be contended, an
assault on the motor-voter bill. It does not eviscerate the motor-voter
bill. It is important to remember that 77 percent of WIC participants
are children under age 5. Now, clearly, 5-year-olds are not going to be
registered voters. Seventy-seven percent of WIC recipients are under 5.
Only 23 percent, or 1.4 million, WIC participants are women--a very
small fraction of the motor-voter universe.
In reporting on the motor-voter bill, CBO estimated that 80 to 90
percent of voters would register through the driver's license system,
while the remaining 10 to 20 percent would register through the mail-in
and agency-based systems. And, WIC is but a small component of the
agency-based system. Is a small fraction-of-a-fraction of the scope of
the motor-voter bill. But for WIC, voter registration is a very
significant burden and certainly unrelated to its purpose.
Mr. President, I think it is important to point out that the National
Association of WIC Directors supports my amendment--exempting WIC from
the burdens of motor-voter is an item on their 1994 legislative agenda.
I ask unanimous consent that a letter, dated June 21, from the
National Association of WIC Directors, Executive Director Douglas A.
Greenaway, be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
National Association
of WIC Directors
June 21, 1994.
Hon. Mitch McConnell,
U.S. Senate, Russell Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator McConnell: The NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF WIC
DIRECTORS, NAWD, applaud your efforts to ensure that the
essential mission of the Special Supplemental Food Program
for Women, Infants and Children, WIC--the provision of
quality nutrition education and breastfeeding
promotion and support services--is maintained and not be
diluted by unrelated activities.
NAWD expressed concern in its broadly distributed 1994
legislative agenda about the negative consequences the
National Voter Registration Act will have upon WIC Clinics.
NAWD urged the Congress to either exempt the WIC Program from
the Act or provide additional monies to perform this new
unrelated task.
NAWD's canvass of state and local agency directors and
nutrition coordinators confirms that the requirements to
implement the Act in WIC clinics will only further reduce the
already stretched time, staff, financial and other resources
available to ensure that WIC participants receive the quality
nutrition services to which they are eligible.
NAWD is dedicated to maximizing WIC Program resources
through effective management practices. Our members--State,
U.S. Territory and Native American Agency Directors, Local
Agency Directors, Nutritionists and others--have made
important contributions toward improving the quality of life
of America's low-income women, infants and children.
NAWD is pleased to learn that you will offer an amendment
to the Child Nutrition Act reauthorizing legislation to
exempt WIC from implementation requirements of the National
Voter Registration Act. NAWD is grateful to you for your
generous and continued support of the WIC Program.
Should you have any questions or if I may provide
additional information, please feel free to contact me on
202-232-5492.
Sincerely,
Douglas A. Greenaway,
Executive Director.
Mr. McCONNELL. In sum, this amendment would relieve WIC clinics--not
any other public assistance office--of the burden of complying with the
motor-voter bill. As the WIC program celebrates it's 20th birthday this
year, let us not stray from the important mission of this program: to
improve the nutritional health and well-being of underprivileged women,
infants, and children. I hope my colleagues to join me in support of
this amendment.
Mr. President, how much time do I have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator has 35 minutes remaining.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I retain the remainder of my time for
the moment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. LUGAR addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Indiana.
Mr. LUGAR. Mr. President, I ask the distinguished Senator from
Kentucky for as many as 7 minutes.
Mr. McCONNELL. I yield 7 minutes to the Senator.
Mr. LUGAR. I thank the Senator.
Mr. President, I commend the distinguished junior Senator from
Kentucky, Senator McConnell, who is the ranking member on the Senate
Nutrition Subcommittee and has done so much to ensure the successful
legislation that we are considering today.
I thank him especially for his amendment to exempt WIC from the
provisions of the National Voter Registration Act. The Senator has made
the case with eloquence and cogency. But let me simply underline some
of the important points that he has raised.
I share his concern that requiring WIC agency staff to offer voter
registration services will detract from the fundamental goal of the
Women, Infants, and Children Program, which is to promote the health of
at-risk, low-income mothers and children through the provision of
nutrition services and nutritious food.
In fact, the time element in these services is important, Mr.
President. I cannot stress enough the diligence with which the staffs
of WIC programs approach these responsibilities and opportunities. But
the women and infants that they serve are fully in need of their total
devotion and concentration. And, in my judgment, the National Voter
Registration Act is extraneous to nutrition and feeding programs. In
fact, a 1994 report by the Urban Institute cited voter registration as
one of the new Federal and State initiatives that, without additional
funding--and I quote from the Urban Institute--``will inevitably reduce
sources devoted to core WIC services.'' That is from an objective
agency, devoted to the urban poor, looking specifically at the
objectives of the WIC Program.
The services provided at WIC clinics are qualitatively different from
those provided by other public assistance agencies. That, certainly, is
the central point of our case today. The WIC services qualitatively are
different. WIC agency staff offer nutrition education. They conduct
nutrition assessments. They make referrals to other health care and
social service providers. They promote breast feeding and tailor food
packages to meet individual needs.
It is these services which have helped WIC to achieve its proven
effectiveness in reducing infant mortality. It is these services which
have led WIC to a special effectiveness, in making certain that the
birth weight of infants was higher and thus the incidence of infant
mortality declined. WIC has been especially effective in lowering the
incidence of iron deficiency anemia for infants.
I just state obvious common sense, that mandating the WIC staff to
spend time on something totally unrelated to these overriding health
goals and nutrition goals is simply not sound public policy. Therefore,
I commend the McConnell amendment to my colleagues. I strongly support
it and have asked to be a cosponsor, and the distinguished Senator from
Kentucky has included me among the cosponsors. I am hopeful it will
have strong support in this body.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time? The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, let me start out by saying I am a strong
supporter of the WIC Program. There is nothing I see out on the horizon
that does better work as it relates to women, infants and children than
the WIC Program. It is a little odd to me, however, that we heard about
the WIC Program here today and how devastating it will be to that
program if the recipients who bring their children in are asked if they
would like to register to vote. That is all. They can say yes or no.
If they say ``no'' it is over. There is no cost. There is no time
lost.
This is just an effort by those who vehemently opposed the motor
voter registration bill. This is not a simple amendment just to prevent
those who are on the WIC Program from being participants in this
program. What it says is ``the office.''
In checking around I find many of our States are combining health
care offices. So when you combine a health care office and WIC is
within that office when they walk through the front door--this
eliminates it. So this is a back-door effort to gut the Motor Voter
Registration Act that we passed here and the President signed into law.
It will not take effect until January. So we do not know whether it is
going to help or hurt.
But if this goes through, then those who have supported the ability
of individuals to be reconnected with their Government--and I do not
believe anybody on the other side will tell me that people are not
riled up, they want to be registered to vote. What we have done is
eliminated the patriotic duty, if you want to call it that, or the
blood-given right, by all of the hurdles that we have placed in front
of an individual wanting to have the opportunity to vote to prevent
them from registering.
You cannot tell me that having the form there and asking the mother,
on the form, if she is registered--if the answer is yes, that ends it;
if you are not registered, do you want to register? If the answer is
no, that ends it.
But do not take my word for it. The motor voter law requires public
employees, like those who administer the WIC Program, to assist
citizens in the voter registration process. Contrary to what the WIC
directors are saying, the process is not a burden. But you do not have
to take my word for it. Listen to the Center on Budget and Policy
Priorities, one of the most respected--and I underscore respected--
advocates for the WIC Program. I think everybody--I think--will agree
to that. But here is what they have to say.
The costs of this procedure are marginal, and whatever
small costs are entailed are treated like any other WIC
administrative costs * * *
In short, these tasks would not add substantial burden. And
they would help achieve a fundamental democratic goal--
increased citizen participation in the affairs of our
democracy.
That is a quote directly from the letter from the Center on Budget
and Policy Priorities. I ask unanimous consent to have that letter
printed in the Record at the conclusion of my remarks.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
(See exhibit 1.)
Mr. FORD. You do not have to take my word for it. Here is something
the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities has clearly stated about the
goal of the motor voter law: We must eliminate the barriers that are
preventing citizens from getting to the ballot box. Voter registration
should be simple, convenient and accessible to all citizens. The
registration of citizens in WIC offices as well as other social service
agencies--motor vehicle license bureaus and other State and local
offices--will achieve that goal. And on election day, those who choose
to vote will be able to do so. And that is democracy in action.
So what we are saying here is that there is no extra effort. How many
times can that mother that is there to get some help in the WIC
Program--how many times can she get to the post office or the
registrar's office? Can she only go Saturday? Or noon, when the office
is closed? Can she only get there Saturday, when the office is closed?
The answer is probably so.
So, with this amendment we deny her, that woman, the opportunity to
register and to vote. She probably has more emotion, probably
understands the problems better than most. What we are saying here in
this amendment, if it passes, is that we want to deny that woman the
ability to register and express her opinion.
So what we are doing is denying the women an easier route to register
and to vote and to express their opinion. Mr. President, this amendment
must be defeated. And the work of implementing the motor voter law must
proceed.
We did not think this up all by ourselves, this procedure.
We went to the State of Pennsylvania and we copied from them. We went
to the State of Minnesota and took it from them. It is something that
has been tried, something that is good.
So now they are saying in this amendment that we can eliminate the
ability of everyone going to a public assistance office, under this
amendment, from having the opportunity to register to vote, because the
amendment says ``office.''
If there is a 10-by-12 space for WIC, is that all this amendment is
going to cover? Or is it the office in which WIC has a portion of the
square feet? When you walk in the front door, you are in the office.
They will say, ``You can't have them over here, but you can have them
all around.'' So if you have them all around, could the WIC mother then
go over and get one from the other office in the building or on the
floor?
Oh, Mr. President, this is just another way to try to use a motion to
stop some people, particularly women, from having the opportunity to
register to vote.
I am one who says that these women have every right to be registered.
We should not prevent them the opportunity that others are given. What
we are seeing here is denying to their infants and children the
facilities and services that they are entitled to, when we have it
refuted by the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, it really is not
going to take up any time; it really is not going to cost any money;
whatever problem there is might be marginal.
So if you want to deny these women who are having trouble with their
children, trying to lead a good life, and trying to make them healthy,
and say to them, ``You can't register to vote as others can register to
vote,'' then I think you are denying a segment of our population the
opportunity that should not be.
Mr. President, I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my
time.
Exhibit 1
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
proposals to exempt wic from the national registration act
It has been suggested that WIC be exempted from the
National Voter Registration Act (also known as the Motor
Voter Act). Such an action would be unwise. It could be the
first step in a process toward unraveling the Motor Voter
Act.
The tasks involved for WIC programs to comply with the
Motor Voter Act are modest. During a certification interview
at a WIC clinic, participants would be given a 5'' 8'' voter
registration card and a short form asking them if they want
to register at the WIC clinic. If a participant checks the
``NO'' box on the form, the WIC clinic has no additional
tasks. If the WIC participant wishes to register at the
clinic, the participant fills out the simple card (with the
caseworker's assistance, if the participant requests it) and
the participant or caseworker drops the card in a box. Once
every 10 days, the clinic would send the cards in the box to
the elections office. The costs of this procedure are
marginal, and whatever small costs are entailed are treated
like other WIC administrative costs and charged against a
state's WIC grant for administrative and nutrition services.
It should be noted that under legislation sought by state WIC
agencies and enacted in 1989, grants to states for
administrative and nutrition services this year reached 25
percent of total WIC funding. This exceeds the percentage for
any prior fiscal year.
In addition, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service has sent a
directive to its regional offices, directing them to work
with states to insure that these procedures are implemented
in the least burdensome ways possible. The FNS directive also
clears up a misunderstanding on the part of a number of
states who mistakenly thought they would be subject to
various additional requirements under the Motor Voter
legislation.
In short, these tasks would not add substantial burden. And
they would help achieve a fundamental democratic goal--
increased citizen participation in the affairs of our
democracy. Citizen participation in elections has been
declining for some time. The National Voter Registration Act
holds promise of helping to stem that trend, and the WIC
program--which is now a mature program--has a role to play
and a contribution to make. It is understandable that some
WIC administrators would not see this task as central to WIC
and urge that they be excluded from it. But from the
standpoint of the well-being of our nation's democratic
values, the National Voter Registration Act--including its
application to WIC--should be maintained.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, I listened very carefully to my
colleague from Kentucky, and I want to commend him for the good work
that he did on this legislation. I was not in favor of it, but he
succeeded through the legislative process and it became law. That is
not really the issue before us today.
My colleague talks about whether or not it is going to inconvenience
the WIC directors. I think they themselves would be the best testimony,
the best evidence of whether this legislation, if applied to them come
January, is going to create a problem.
In the letter that I referred to earlier from the National
Association of WIC Directors, it is rather clear how they feel about
it. In a letter to me dated June 21 from the director, it says:
Dear Senator McConnell: The National Association of WIC
Directors applaud your efforts to ensure that the essential
mission of the Special Supplemental Food Program for Women,
Infants, and Children--the provision of quality nutrition
education and breastfeeding promotion and support services--
is maintained and not diluted by unrelated activities.
Later in the letter, the Director says their,
* * * canvass of State and local agency directors and
nutrition coordinators confirms--
Confirms, these are the people actually working there and dealing
with the WIC clients.
that the requirements to implement the act in WIC clinics
will only further reduce the already stretched time, staff,
financial, and other resources available to ensure that WIC
participants receive the quality nutrition services to which
they are eligible.
Mr. President, how many folks are we talking about here? First, it is
important to remember that 77 percent of the people that come into the
WIC clinic are under age 5--77 percent are under age 5; 23 percent of
the WIC participants are women. But of that group, 12 percent are under
18. So 77 percent of the people who are coming into the clinic are
under age 5, and of the women who are coming in with their children
into the clinic, 23 percent of those women are under age 18.
It is important also to note that two-thirds of the WIC clients go to
other agencies for other services, and those agencies are required to
participate through the National Voter Registration Act.
So it is not like these adults who come into the WIC office are not
going to be dealing with some other agency required to register under
the National Voter Registration Act. Two-thirds of the WIC recipients
are on Medicaid, food stamps, and/or AFDC. This amendment does not
affect those programs. So two-thirds of that six-tenths of 1 percent of
the population will be provided with voter registration options at the
other agencies.
We are talking about a minuscule percentage of the eligible voting-
age population that might--might--miss an opportunity to be registered
through this agency-based effort.
Let us go over that one more time: 77 percent of the WIC clients are
under 5; 23 percent are women, but of that group, 12 percent are under
18, so they are not eligible; and two-thirds of the overall WIC
recipients go to some other agency, such as Medicaid, food stamps, and/
or AFDC. So two-thirds of those folks are going to be exposed to other
agency-based registration efforts.
It could hardly be persuasively argued, Mr. President, that this is
blowing a gaping hole in the National Voter Registration Act. I come at
this as ranking member of the Nutrition Subcommittee. I fully admit I
was not supportive of the Motor-Voter Act, but that is over. The
supporters of that prevailed.
The question is, at this point, on this bill, whether this six-tenths
of 1 percent of the population is going to be affected in this adverse
way.
I am going to retain the remainder of my time, but we are talking
here largely about an agency that serves children who are not eligible
to vote and a reasonable percentage of women who have children who are
under 18, two-thirds of which go to some other agency which is required
to engage in voter registration under the Motor-Voter Act. Clearly,
this is not blowing a gaping hole in the national Motor-Voter Act.
So, Mr. President, I retain the remainder of my time and yield the
floor at this point.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. HATFIELD. Will the Senator yield to me?
Mr. FORD. I yield such time as the Senator from Oregon might use.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator is recognized.
Mr. HATFIELD. Mr. President, I thank my colleague for yielding the
time.
I would like to say from the very beginning that on most things that
involve electoral and political processes, I follow the lead of my
colleague from Kentucky, Senator McConnell. I know few, if any, on my
side of the aisle who have greater expertise or have a better
background in commenting on these matters.
On this one issue, I do take a different position, in part because my
own State of Oregon had proven motor-voter registration to be an
effective instrument by which we expanded participation in government
and brought more people into the voting process.
I might also say, as a former secretary of state from Oregon, meaning
the head of the elections office, I presided over a number of election
cycles where we had, of course, State supervision, State roles, State
involvement. In all of these roles, I must say, Mr. President, that I
feel that the State should be paramount. I think the Federal Government
has a limited role to play in the matter of these basic procedures.
With the mobility of our population and for other reasons, however, I
think that the matter of mail-in registration is a very legitimate kind
of Federal role to create uniformity across the country. I think making
voter registration available at the time of your driver's license
application is another legitimate Federal role. I think also, when you
are at a Federal agency conducting business, a further appropriate role
would be for the agency to supply registration forms.
In the motor-voter bill, which, by the way, has not taken effect
yet--it was postponed until January 1995 to skip this election cycle in
order for the States and the local governments to become involved in
the process--we left it to the States to negotiate as to which Federal
agencies would make available the voter registration system. We did not
designate the agencies in the bill.
This fight today is basically symbolic because this is the first
Federal agency authorization program potentially affected by motor-
voter that has come up in this Congress. I think it is important to
defeat this effort to undermine the motor-voter registration law
because I assume that we could possibly face this same amendment on
each and every other Federal agency program that may come along
subsequent to the one that we are dealing with today.
And so even though there is a small percentage of potential
registrants involved, as cited by the author of the amendment, Senator
McConnell, I think it is very important to set the precedent today that
we are not going to have an erosion of the basic concept of the motor-
voter registration bill which was passed and signed into law to take
effect in January 1995.
A recent study by the Department of Transportation found that almost
50 percent of the people in the low-income families and minorities do
not have drivers' licenses and have annual incomes of less than
$10,000. Five States already offer some form of public agency voter
registration system; Alaska, Iowa, Minnesota, New Jersey, and Ohio.
Again, this idea has already been proven at the State level. We are not
venturing into some strange field of experimentation. All we are saying
in effect is let the Federal agencies that are designated out of State
negotiations be also the source of such registration forms.
A number of my colleagues opposed the original bill that includes
agency registration because of the fear of coercion, fear of coercion
by Federal agencies when a recipient of a Federal program is handed a
check in one hand and a voter registration form in the other. Is it
intimidation? Is it coercion?
As one of the cosponsors of this bill initially, we paid very careful
attention to anticoercion safeguards, to protect against manipulation
or intimidation of public assistance recipients who register.
These safeguards are threefold. One, clients in public agencies will
not be registered unless they specifically indicate they want to be
registered.
Second, registration forms will explain that no action can be taken
against those clients who do not want to register in a Federal agency.
And No. 3, the name and number of the person with whom to file a
complaint--a complaint--if abuse occurs or if the recipient assumes or
feels or considers that there has been some kind of intimidation--must
be given to that recipient.
We do have safeguards against coercion. Should such coercion still
happen and a complaint be filed, and it was found that coercion was a
valid complaint by the recipient, this is now a Federal offense,
including criminal penalties.
I believe that adequate protections are in place to prevent the
manipulation of Americans. Furthermore, I support my colleague, Mr.
Ford, the chairman of our committee, in his view that we have worked
hard to ensure that the agency-based registration aspect of this law
would have a minimal impact on any agency's work. In other words, we
are not imposing an additional great demand for work, for being
registrars, with that fulfilling the basic mission of the agency. In
this specific case, WIC agencies have been asked to make available
registration forms and to provide the same assistance in completing
those forms as they would for their own forms in their agency.
Mr. President, this bill is not rooted in partisanship. This bill is
rooted in democratic philosophy. It stands for the premise that we are
all Americans, first, not Democrats or Republicans. It also has a focus
of providing for the individual and helping the individual to
understand and to involve himself or herself as an individual voice in
an expression of interest in the political process. Its purpose is to
protect the value and integrity of votes, the votes cast through a
strong registration process, not to keep any element of society from
exercising their right to vote.
I urge my colleagues to meet this first attack of what I assume to be
many others to follow, by defeating this amendment offered by my good
friend from Kentucky.
I yield the floor.
Mr. FORD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. FORD. How much time do I have remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky has 25 minutes, both
Senators from Kentucky have 25 minutes remaining.
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I yield 5 minutes to the distinguished
Senator from Vermont.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Vermont is recognized for 5
minutes.
Mr. JEFFORDS. Mr. President, I do not think any of my colleagues are
more knowledgeable and diligent than my colleague from Kentucky on
matters such as that contained in the amendment before us today. He
knows his stuff and he makes a very persuasive argument.
I also have been with him on many of the issues, especially when they
become partisan. However, on this issue, I disagree very strongly with
him. So, too, does a majority of the Senate. We had a full and
exhaustive debate on this issue many months ago. We have fought this
battle, and those of us in favor of encouraging Americans to
participate in the election process prevailed.
Having torn down some of the barriers to voting, I think it is
unfortunate that my friend from Kentucky feels it necessary to try to
resurrect those barriers. All eligible Americans have the right and
responsibility to vote. If we can make it easier for them to fulfill
this responsibility and exercise their rights, we should do so.
I understand that there may be some questions as to whether the
language of the amendment comports with the Senator's intention to
block voter registration in connection with the Women, Infants, and
Children Feeding Program. If there is a problem, I know it was
inadvertent, so I will restrict my few comments to the impact on WIC.
Why should we single out the WIC Program? Of any of the Federal
programs serving low-income Americans, I think it probably has the
strongest bipartisan support. President Bush boosted WIC funding
tremendously with the active help of Republicans in both the Senate and
the House.
And why on Earth should we single out pregnant women and those with
infants? Becoming a parent often has a profound positive impact on an
individual, who is all of a sudden given a much greater stake in our
society by a birth.
But with this amendment, half a million women, who often face many
barriers to voting, would be denied easier access to our political
system. I strongly supported the motor-voter bill, and I just as
strongly oppose the amendment of the Senator from Kentucky to deny its
benefits to some 500,000 women in this country.
I appreciate his concern for the WIC Program, however, and know that
he and those who support the amendment must share my support for the
provisions relating to WIC in the Health Security Act, which we will be
facing sometime later this year.
Mr. President, I hope this amendment is defeated, and urge my
colleagues to do so.
Mr. President, I yield the floor. I yield the remainder of my time to
the Senator from Kentucky.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Who yields time?
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, how much time does the distinguished Senator
from Washington desire?
Mrs. MURRAY. If I could have about 3 minutes.
Mr. FORD. I yield up to 5 minutes to the distinguished Senator from
Washington.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Washington is recognized for
5 minutes.
Mrs. MURRAY. I thank my colleague from Kentucky for his leadership on
this issue and for his consideration in opposing this amendment today.
I rise to oppose this amendment. Mr. President, I remember a little
over a year ago when I was a very proud Member of the U.S. Senate to
vote with the majority in behalf of the motor voter bill. It was a
message that fit all Americans who care about its citizens. We care
about them being involved in our Government, and being part of that
Government. And we were doing everything we could to make it easier for
every American, no matter who they were or where they came from, to be
a part of this democracy by allowing them to vote.
I am simply amazed that we are on the floor of the U.S. Senate today
beginning to try to repeal that act by going after group by group, and
the very first group we are going to make it tougher for is mothers
with young children.
I can think of no one that we should be more accommodating to than
mothers with young children. That is from one of the few people on the
floor who had the experience of being a young mother with children at
one time in my life. I can tell you how difficult it is for these women
to get their kids ready to go out to do anything, grocery shopping or
whatever, much less getting out to register to vote.
I think it would be the worst move, the worst message to send to
these mothers that we are going to exclude them from our democracy by
passing this amendment.
I urge all of my colleagues to vote a resounding ``no'' to this
amendment.
I thank my colleague. I thank the chairman for yielding time.
Mr. LEAHY. Mr. President, the amendment before us brings up an issue
that was decided by the Senate over a year ago.
In passing the National Voter Registration Act, we decided that
access to our electoral system of government should be open to all
Americans, and that voter registration procedures should not be a
barrier to participation.
Motor-voter requires States to provide voter registration services
when people apply for a driver's license and at public assistance
agencies, including AFDC, food stamps, Medicaid, and WIC.
Opponents of motor-voter are making a desperate attempt to chip away
at the edges of the National Voter Registration Act.
They claim voter registration will pose too great a burden on WIC
clinics, but those claims are grossly exaggerated.
Agencies are only required to provide and accept voter registration
applications when clients apply or are recertified for WIC. They are
not required to offer voter registration services in any mailings to
participations, nor at each appointment.
Public assistance agencies, such as WIC, were included in the
National Voter Registration Act to ensure that all citizens have equal
access to voter registration.
WIC applicants should have the same opportunity as people who apply
for driver's licenses to participate in our political process.
When the motor-voter bill was being debated, WIC was recognized as a
program likely to have contact with citizens who do not have driver's
licenses. Estimates are that if WIC were exempt from the mandates of
the National Voter Registration Act, 500,000 poor women will be
excluded from voter registration services because they do not receive
food stamps, Medicaid, or AFDC.
The Clinton administration and the Department of Agriculture stand
firmly behind motor-voter. USDA has told WIC directors that the
Department is committed to the successful implementation of motor-voter
in WIC clinics.
In fact, USDA is allowing any costs associated with voter
registration to be covered by WIC administrative funds.
Since 1974, I have been an outspoken champion of the WIC Program in
Congress, and I am sensitive to concern that WIC is weakened with each
additional demand put on it.
But motor-voter was signed into law with a goal in mind, and I
believe in that goal. WIC is just the first target of opponents of
motor-voter. And if they succeed here, it will be just the first step.
What will be next? Food stamps? Unemployment? Medicaid?
We cannot start tearing apart motor-voter piece by piece.
I see it very simply: The intention of this amendment is to keep poor
women from voting. But poor women have the same rights as rest of us,
and they deserve every change to participate in the political process.
Mr. FORD addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, I think the message is getting through loud
and clear that we are going after young mothers; that we are going
after young mothers who have problems of not being in the mainstream,
who are going for help, and we are trying to deny to those women help.
Let me make two points. Mr. President, I want to make a point again
that the letter that my colleague has that WIC directors do not want
this, they want to maintain the status quo, but the status quo for
voter registration in my opinion is not acceptable.
I go back to the statement I made earlier where the strong advocate
of the WIC Program, the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities, one of
the most respected advocates for the WIC Program, has said, in short,
that these tasks would not add any substantial burden, that they would
help achieve a fundamental democratic goal of increasing citizen
participation in the affairs of our democracy.
Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the statement from the
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in
the Record, as follows:
Center on Budget and Policy Priorities
proposals to exempt wic from the National Registration Act
It has been suggested that WIC be exempted from the
National Voter Registration Act (also known as the Motor
Voter Act). Such an action would be unwise. It could be the
first step in a process toward unraveling the Motor Voter
Act.
The tasks involved for WIC programs to comply with the
Motor Voter Act are modest. During a certification interview
at a WIC clinic, participants would be given a 5" x 8" voter
registration card and a short form asking them if they want
to register at the WIC clinic. If a participant checks the
``NO'' box on the form, the WIC clinic has no additional
tasks. If the WIC participant wishes to register at the
clinic, the participant fills out the simple card (with the
caseworker's assistance, if the participant requests it) and
the participant or caseworker drops the card in a box. Once
every 10 days, the clinic would send the cards in the box to
the elections office. The costs of this procedure are
marginal, and whatever small costs are entailed are treated
like other WIC administrative costs and charged against a
state's WIC grant for administrative and nutrition services.
It should be noted that under legislation sought by state WIC
agencies and enacted in 1989, grants to states for
administrative and nutrition services this year reached 25
percent of total WIC funding. This exceeds the percentage for
any prior fiscal year.
In addition, USDA's Food and Nutrition Service has sent a
directive to its regional offices, directing them to work
with states to insure that these procedures are implemented
in the least burdensome ways possible. The FNS directive also
clears up a misunderstanding on the part of a number of
states who mistakenly thought they would be subject to
various additional requirements under the Motor Voter
legislation.
In short, these tasks would not add substantial burden. And
they would help achieve a fundamental democratic goal--
increased citizen participation in the affairs of our
democracy. Citizen participation in elections has been
declining for some time. The National Voter Registration Act
holds promise of helping to stem that trend, and the WIC
program--which is now a mature program--has a role to play
and a contribution to make. It is understandable that some
WIC administrators would not see this task as central to WIC
and urge that they be excluded from it. But from the
standpoint of the well-being of our nation's democratic
values, the National Voter Registration Act--including its
application to WIC--should be maintained.
Mr. FORD. Mr. President, it has been indicated that this would be a
tremendous burden on the WIC directors. Let me read from the
instructions from the Department of Agriculture Food and Nutrition
Service that says:
Voter registration services are required to be offered by
WIC clinics at every application, reapplication, and change
of address. Such services need not again be offered during
other participant contacts such as voucher pickups, nutrition
education sessions, or other instances where a parent comes
into the clinic. There are no requirements to offer voter
registration services in any mailing to participants.
So it is just one time, the first blush, and that is it. That is the
end of it. They either say ``yes'' or ``no.'' Or they say, ``I am
registered. I don't need to register again.'' Or they say, ``Yes. I
want to register.'' Then they are helped. If they say, ``No. I do not
want to register,'' that ends it.
I do not understand why you want to take on the motor-voter, and you
take on the young mothers of this country with children and try to
prevent them from having an opportunity to register.
I do not know what six-tenths of 1 percent is. I do not know. By my
calculation, we have roughly 250 million people in this country. And
six-tenths of 1 percent of our population does not sound too big. But
when you get into the millions, it sounds pretty good. We are denying
over 1 million, if my calculations are right, and those of the smarter
people in the Chamber when they put the pencil to it, that it is well
over 1 million young mothers, mothers with infant children. So six-
tenths of 1 percent does not sound very big.
Seventy-three percent of those that come for help are with children.
Somebody has to bring them. Their mother brought them. We are saying to
the mother of those children that they are not going to have equal
access.
Where in the world are we going to come out here on the floor and say
we are going to deny young mothers that have real problems, that do not
have equal access to register to vote, to express the voice of those 5-
year olds? Oh, they say 3 percent of them are 5-year olds. So we do not
have to worry about them. But the mother ought to be able to exercise
her voice. And what those children ought to have, as anybody knows what
they need the mother does, and we are saying to her, ``You cannot have
the same access to register to vote that others have.''
Mr. President, we have gone too far in this amendment. If you look at
the amendment, it says ``office.'' What does that mean? When all of the
State governments are trying to combine and have a one-stop health
center, when you walk in the front door, it is the office, and WIC is
back here in the corner. So we deny it to the whole floor, to all the
help. This is a back-door way of trying to gut motor-voter, and I think
it is a dreadful way to start.
I yield the floor. I reserve the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky has 15 minutes. The
junior Senator from Kentucky has 25 minutes.
Mr. McCONNELL addressed the Chair.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky.
Mr. McCONNELL. Mr. President, it is unfortunate that this turned into
a motor-voter debate when it really is about child nutrition. My
interest in this was stimulated, not by my opposition last year to
motor-voter, which I concede and make no apologies for, but my interest
at this point was generated by the National Association of WIC
Directors who wrote, and who asked to be relieved of this
responsibility. It is not just the National Association of WIC
Directors. I have a letter here from the county health department in
Shepherdsville, KY. I will read a couple of paragraphs of that letter
before asking that it be printed in the Record. It says:
Dear Senator McConnell: . . . WIC staff . . . doing voter
registration rather than nutritional education or breast
feeding promotion, then there will be some major disruptions
that deal with WIC clients (most of whom are far too young to
vote yet anyway).
``Most of whom are far to young to vote anyway.''
The lack of reimbursement mechanisms for costs associated
with motor voter tells me that without the McConnell
amendment I am looking at an unfunded mandate to provide
staff and space for voter registration while taking these
same staff away from other clinical duties.
I am quoting, Mr. President, from the people who administer these WIC
clinics on the scene. I did not make this up. This is their view of the
onerous requirement that they participate in registering voters.
Let me repeat here. Seventy-seven percent of the WIC clients are
under age 5. Surely the proponents of this are not suggesting that they
be registered. Twenty-three percent of the WIC participants are women.
Twenty-three percent of the WIC participants are women, but of that
group 12 percent are under 18. They are not eligible to vote. Two-
thirds of the WIC lines go to other agencies which are entitled and
required to register people to vote.
So we are talking about a minuscule percent of the target audience of
the National Voter Registration Act, but a very important group of
soldiers out there in the field trying to adequately feed women,
infants, and children under the WIC Program.
Mr. President, in order for the WIC clinics to comply with motor
voter, they are going to have to utilize administrative funds. WIC has
two pots of money: food and administrative. Unlike food stamps, unlike
AFDC, unlike Medicaid, WIC is not an entitlement program and does not
have a Federal mandate for State matching dollars.
Activities that are funded from the administrative pot of money
include eligibility determination, enrolling new participants, health
screening for nutritional risk, and nutritional education sessions. So
when you have a limited pot of money, Mr. President, it is only logical
that paying for one activity will take away from the efforts on other
projects.
Motor voter would undermine the ability of WIC workers to increase
participation and to focus on nutrition-related activities--the very
activities that have made this program so successful in reducing anemia
and the incidence of premature and low birthweight babies. As local and
State agencies work hard to maximize the use of funds to increase
participation, obviously it would be better if we did not divert those
funds away from it.
I ask unanimous consent that the letter from the Bullitt County
Health Department to me be printed in the Record.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
Bullitt County Health Department
Shepherdsville, KY.
Dear Senator McConnell: I strongly endorse the McConnell
WIC/Motor Voter Amendment to the National Voter Registration
Act. It's wrong that WIC clinics are to be considered as
public assistance offices for purposes of this Act.
WIC has been one of the very few strongly successful
government programs. Simply, put, WIC works. It works because
the WIC Program is very specific about its mission and has
kept focus on it: Improving nutritional status of women and
children at risk.
If WIC staff are doing voter registration rather than
Nutritional Education or Breastfeeding Promotion, then there
were be some major distractions in dealing with WIC clients
(most of whom are far too young to vote yet anyway).
The lack of reimbursement mechanisms for costs associated
with Motor Voter tells me that without the McConnell
Amendment, I am looking at an unfunded mandate to provide
staff and space for voter registration while taking these
same staff away from other clinical duties.
In closing, I would say that without the McConnell
Amendment, the Motor Voter Act penalizes the WIC Program (and
all its participants) for its success by infringing upon it.
That's the wrong way to reward an outstanding program like
WIC.
Consequently, I again state how strongly I support the
McConnell WIC/Motor Voter Amendment.
Sincerely,
Ned Fitzgibbons
Director.
Mr. McCONNELL. I want to make one point, and I will be ready to wrap
up here. I do not know about my senior colleague, but the League of
Women Voters, obviously, was opposed to this amendment. And there has
been some correspondence between the National Association of WIC
Directors and the League of Women Voters. It is interesting that in the
letter to the President of the League of Women Voters, the executive
director of the National Association of WIC Directors points out:
Some nineteen tangentially related programmatic
requirements have been placed on the program in the last
several years. Experience has shown that the time required to
serve the nutrition education and breastfeeding support and
promotion needs of WIC participants has been seriously eroded
by additional requirements placed upon the program by
policymakers.
That is, other things before they get to this.
While these requirements benefit participants, they detract
from WIC's ability to meet its primary mission.
Infrastructure problems (insufficient space, staffing
shortages and constrained MIS systems) combined with added
requirements, often totally unrelated to nutrition education
efforts of the program, e.g. the NVRA, are forcing many
participants to experience delays in appointments and others
to go unserved.
I ask unanimous consent that this letter be printed in the Record as
well.
There being no objection, the letter was ordered to be printed in the
Record, as follows:
National Association of
WIC Directors,
July 25, 1994.
Ms. Becky Cain,
President, The League of Women Voters, Washington, DC.
Dear Ms. Cain: I am in receipt of a copy of your Memorandum
to Members of the U.S. Senate dated 11 July regarding the
National Voter Registration Act, NVRA.
Just as the League of Women Voters supports WIC, the
National Association of WIC Directors, NAWD, is fully
supportive of efforts to register voters.
The WIC Program prides itself on being the Gateway to
Health Care. WIC strives to reach its mission of providing
quality nutrition education and services, breastfeeding
promotion and education, dietary food supplements and health
care referrals to low income women, and their children at
nutritional risk. Programmatic requirements totally unrelated
to the mission of WIC infringe upon that mission and
seriously detract from the need of staff and participants
alike to focus on the health and well-being of the nation's
women, infants and children.
In your memorandum, you advised that ``. . . efforts to
exempt WIC from the NVRA are precipitous. We believe that the
concerns that have been expressed . . . will prove to be
unfounded.''
NAWD takes exception to these comments. Some nineteen
tangentially related programmatic requirements have been
placed on the Program in the last several years. Experience
has shown that the time required to serve the nutrition
education and breastfeeding support and promotion
needs of WIC participants has been seriously eroded by the
additional requirements placed upon the Program by policy
makers. While these requirements benefit participants, they
detract from WIC's ability to meet its primary mission.
Infrastructure problems (insufficient space, staffing
shortages and constrained Management Information Systems
systems) combined with the added requirements, often
totally unrelated to the nutrition education efforts of
the Program, e.g. the NVRA, are forcing many participants
to experience delays in appointments and others to go
unserved.
Your Memorandum goes on to state that ``limited voter
registration services are required. Effective motor voter
programs have demonstrated that this is a minimal
responsibility that should not detract from the agencies'
primary mission. WIC applicants, should have the same
opportunity as driver's license applicants to participate in
our political process.'' According to a USDA study ``in 1992
nearly two-thirds of WIC participants received benefits from
at least one other public assistance program.'' NAWD feels
confident that the majority of WIC's participants will
receive adequate voter registration information without WIC
Program involvment in NVRA.
NAWD has expressed its concerns to Members of Congress
about the negative consequences voter registration
requirements embodied in the NVRA would have on WIC clincs
and efforts to successfully accomplish the WIC mission. NAWD
advised that if WIC is not exempted from this Act, additional
monies must be appropriated to perform this service.
NAWD has calculated that approximately $25.6 million in
personnel costs alone will be expended for interview and
registration efforts by WIC. This figure does not include MIS
or other administrative costs involved in processing
information, reproducing materials, the cost of materials or
space requirements. Conservatively estimating the cost per
participant to be served by the WIC Program at $41 per month,
expenditures by WIC on NVRA could force over 624,000
participants to go unserved.
NAWD urges you to reconsider your position and calls upon
the League of Women Voters to endorse a healthy future for
all Americans. Granting everyone a healthy future stake in
the successes of the nation makes for better citizens--
willing and fully empowered to participate in the rights of
citizenship--among them the right to vote!
Sincerely,
Douglas A. Greenaway,
Executive Director.
Mr. McCONNELL. Finally, let me ask my friend and colleague from
Kentucky. He was concerned that the way the amendment was crafted, it
might impact other personnel jointly occupying an office. I understand
that under the agreement under which we were operating, it would take
unanimous consent for me to modify my amendment. If he gives me
unanimous consent, I would modify it in such a way that it was more
specifically crafted to effect only the personnel who work in an office
which provide supplemental food and nutrition education under the
section and shall not be considered to be working in an office in a
State that provides public assistance for the purposes of this section.
That modification, I believe would deal--I understand it would not
gain support if the modification is allowed, but it would deal with the
issue he raised.
Mr. FORD. If the Senator will withhold so we can look at that.
Mr. McCONNELL. Yes.
Mr. President, while the staff is looking at that modification, let
me repeat one more time. In the universe of people who come into a WIC
clinic, 77 percent are under 5 years old. Of the remaining 23 percent--
and they are women who have brought in the children--12 percent of them
are under the age of 18. Of this whole universe of people who come into
a WIC office, WIC clients, two-thirds of them go to other agencies that
are required under motor-voter to provide voter registration
assistance.
I offer this amendment today not as an opponent of motor voter, which
I confess to have been last year; I offer this as the ranking member of
the nutrition subcommittee of the Senate Agriculture Committee, and I
do it on behalf of the Nation's WIC directors, the people who are there
dealing with the clients every day, who feel that this will get in the
way of their providing this service, mostly to children, and mostly to
clients who also go to other offices that are required to offer this
service under the National Voter Registration Act.
So with all due respect to those who have spoken in opposition to the
amendment, I do not see how you can argue this is blowing a gaping hole
in the motor voter bill. It seems to me that this is an amendment
clearly designed to deal with the nutritional needs of women, infants,
and children, and not an amendment designed to eviscerate the Motor
Voter Act.
How much time is remaining?
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Feinstein). The Senator has 16 minutes 47
seconds.
Mr. McCONNELL. I reserve the remainder of my time.
Mr. FORD. I will accept the Senator's modification.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent to modify my
amendment in the way I described.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The amendment will be so modified.
The amendment (No. 2559), as modified, is as follows:
At the appropriate place, insert the following new section:
SEC. . IMPROVED ADMINISTRATION OF WIC PROGRAM.
Section 17(f) of the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 (42 U.S.C.
1786(f)) is amended by adding at the end the following new
paragraph:
``(23) The personnel who work in an office which provides
supplemental foods and nutrition education under this section
shall not be considered to be working in an office in a State
that provides public assistance for purposes of section
7(a)(2)(A) of Public Law 103-31.''
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I imagine the audience gets confused that
each of us is referred to as the Senator from Kentucky. I am the one
who is opposed to the amendment. My friend is the one that is the
proponent.
I made a point and I think I caught the amendment that was going to
eliminate every agency that was combined. I guess you can term it
either way you wanted to. But at least I made a point here that this
amendment could have eliminated the ability of any office to register.
Madam President, they say they cannot imagine why we would object to
something like this. The only issue here has been emotion. We find in
the amendment that it could have eliminated the use of registration
forms in all offices. Now it has been modified in an effort to limit
it. I have shown and filed for the Record an amendment from the Center
on Budget and Policy Priorities, one of the most respected advocates
for the WIC Program, saying it would not take up any time or money. I
have a statement from the Department of Agriculture, Nutrition
Services, that says you only offer it one time. When they come back,
you do not have to offer it again. Here is the Pennsylvania form, right
here. You give this to the recipient the first time, and that recipient
has a little bit to fill out here, some to fill out here, and questions
over here.
There is one question on there. ``Does anyone in your household want
to register to vote?'' You can say, ``no,'' and that is the end of it.
You can say ``yes,'' so the employee is required then to say, ``Here is
the form, and you fill it out. If you have any questions I will help
you.'' That is all.
But what we are doing here is we are denying even the possibility of
that mother having this much. We hear a lot of figures--we do not get
numbers--77 per percent of those who come into the WIC office are under
5. That is expected, is it not? Then you have 23 percent that are left,
and 12 percent of those would go to some other office.
Then you say it is only six-tenths of 1 percent of those who are
really meaningful in this. So it is over a million. I am not sure
exactly how many, and I do not think six-tenths of 1 percent is a real
figure.
But how many mothers are denied under this amendment to have an
opportunity to register? They say that this is getting into the voter
registration. That is true. That is what he is trying to eliminate.
That is what I am trying to keep.
When you have a respected speaker say it is not going to cost much,
if anything, it is just the supervisors do not want more work to do--
bureaucrats. They say they are robbing them of time with the mother.
So here is the form. Go fill it out. Do you want to register to vote?
Here is another form. Fill it out.
How much time does that take? That is not denying anybody anything.
It is giving them an opportunity to participate in democracy for those
children under 5 that she brought in with her. To pick on women, the
very first pop out of the box before this law takes effect, then I just
have a lot to wonder about, Madam President, and that is all there is
to it. And that is going to deny someone the ability to perform their
services.
So, I am going to leave it at that.
I yield the floor and reserve the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Kentucky is recognized.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I think we ought not to beat this to
death.
The important thing to remember is that WIC is a child nutrition
program. Yes, it serves women. But it does so with the intent of
producing a healthy, well-nourished baby and teaching the moms about
nutritional feeding habits to pass on to the children.
If the Senate believes WIC as a child nutrition program should
register people to vote, then do you also think that school lunch and
breakfast programs, child care food programs, and the summer food
programs should provide the same registration services?
If that is the rationale, maybe we ought to carry it over to school
lunch, breakfast, child care food, and summer food programs. Those
programs deal also with children.
If WIC is required to be a voter registration agency, should the
election officers be required to administer WIC? Voter registration is
totally unrelated to WIC, just as WIC services are totally unrelated to
registering voters.
I hope the Senate will not conclude that this amendment, which is the
result of correspondence to me as the ranking member of the nutrition
subcommittee, correspondence from the National Association of WIC
Directors, would be an effort on their part or mine to unravel motor
voter.
I hope that people might conclude that the best efforts of those
offices should be put forward in dealing with nutritional problems of
these folks who come there for services.
I am prepared at this point, if the senior Senator from Kentucky is,
to yield back the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. If I understood the Senator is yielding back
the remainder of the time.
Mr. McCONNELL. No. I want to see if we have finished here.
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum and ask
unanimous consent that the time be equally divided.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
The clerk will call the roll.
The legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. DOLE. Madam President, I am pleased to join Senator McConnell in
offering this amendment to exempt WIC clinics from the requirements of
the National Voter Registration Act. Passage of the amendment will help
ensure that the integrity of the WIC Program is not jeopardized by
unrelated administrative requirements.
Forcing WIC clinics to comply with the requirements of the National
Voter Registration Act means that limited administrative funds are
diverted from program purposes and redirected to pay for voter
registration. WIC is a discretionary program that is attempting to
stretch its funds to meet the needs of as many recipients as possible.
Using these funds for voter registration is a mistake.
We all know how successful the WIC Program is at meeting the food and
nutrition education needs of its clients. I, for one, don't want to see
that success imperiled. WIC mothers go to the clinics to receive
instruction on breastfeeding and proper nutrition for their children
and themselves. They are not there to be registered to vote.
In fact, mothers represent only 23 percent of the WIC client
population. Seventy-seven percent of WIC clients are under age 5. So,
obviously, WIC clinics are not the best places to seek out and register
potential voters.
As my colleagues know, I opposed the passage of the motor-voter bill
last year. Motor-voter is yet the latest in a string of unfunded
mandates imposed on the States and localities by the Federal
Government. With a credit-card mentality, the Federal Government
mandates and the States and cities pick up the tab.
Mr. President, in closing I want to thank the distinguished ranking
member on the Nutrition Subcommittee, Senator McConnell, for his hard
work on this issue. I am pleased to join him and Senator Lugar, Senator
Craig, Senator Cochran, Senator Helms, and Senator Coverdell in
cosponsoring this important amendment, and I urge my colleagues to
support its passage. What's at stake is nothing less than the integrity
of the WIC Program.
The folly of requiring WIC Offices to Register Voters
Mr. CHAFEE. Mr. President, I am pleased to be a cosponsor of Senator
McConnell's amendment that would exempt WIC offices from the
requirements of the National Voter Registration Act, which was approved
and signed into law last year.
Some might wonder what voter registration has to do with providing
nutrition services to low-income women and infants. That's a very good
question. The National Voter Registration Act contains a provision that
requires all agencies providing public assistance to offer voter
registration services. Of course, this provision included WIC offices.
Although I have never supported the National Voter Registration Act,
for a number of reasons that I discussed last year during debate on
that measure, I have no argument with the intent of the act. I agree
that we should make every reasonable effort to increase voter
registration in the hope of encouraging greater participation in the
election process. Rhode Island has a motor-voter program that has
worked very well since its inception in 1990. The National Voter
Registration Act, while well motivated, is seriously flawed, and the
effect its implementation will have on WIC offices is one example of
the flaws in this act.
But we aren't here to debate the wisdom of the National Voter
Registration Act. We are here to reauthorize the Child Nutrition Act
and the National School Lunch Act. These programs, particularly the
Child Nutrition Act, have been extremely successful. I always have
supported expansion of the WIC Program, as has my colleague from
Kentucky, who offered this amendment.
In recent weeks, I have received letters and phone calls from the WIC
office in Rhode Island asking for my assistance in relieving the
burdens that would be imposed by the National Voter Registration Act.
John L. Smith, chief of the WIC Program at the Rhode Island Department
of Health, wrote to me on June 2, 1994. He took the time to express
support for the goals of the National Voter Registration Act but went
on to say:
As enlightened as this seems, however, to carry out the
provisions of the NVRA requires significant WIC staff time.
Such staff time cannot be procured without either purchasing
more time or substituting NVRA for other staff activities.
Mr. Smith went on to point out:
At the WIC clinic level, over 80% of the available funds
are used for direct nutritional services to WIC clients.
Therefore, if the program is required to conduct NVRA
activities, it must subtract the time required for these
activities from an already expanding set of requirements to
provide nutrition assessment and education, drug abuse
assessment and referral, breast feeding promotion and
support, and information and referral services for health
care, financial aid and other nutrition support services,
immunization assessment and referral and support services.
In short, Mr. President, we have required the WIC offices to
undertake an enormous list of highly beneficial activities. On top of
these requirements, we have added registering clients to vote.
There is no doubt in the mind of Kathleen A. Stento, chairwoman of
the Rhode Island WIC advisory board, that the requirements of the
National Voter Registration Act would have a detrimental effect on the
quality of the services provided at Rhode Island's WIC clinics. The
advisory council represents the 23 local WIC clinics in Rhode Island.
Ms. Stento wrote:
On this matter, we are united: we DO NOT want to give up
any of our nutrition education time (nutrition education is
the key to our program * * * it is what makes the program
unique to any other food assistance programs, and it is what
makes the program work). The National Voter Registration Act
is worthwhile, but it is not fair to burden the WIC program
with its implementation.
I ask unanimous consent that the full test of the letters from Mr.
Smith and from Ms. Stento be printed in the Record in their entirety.
I do not believe that this is the appropriate time to debate the
National Voter Registration Act, but I do believe that we should take
the appropriate step or relieving WIC clinics of this terribly
burdensome requirement by supporting the McConnell amendment.
There being no objection, the letters were ordered to be printed in
the Records follows:
Rhode Island WIC Advisory Council,
Providence, RI, May 26, 1994.
Hon. John H. Chafee,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Chafee: I am writing on behalf of the Rhode
Island WIC Advisory Council. The Council requests your
further support of the WIC Program for the 1994
Reauthorization legislation.
In particular, we look to you to support full funding for
the program so that all eligible needy mothers and children
can be served and to preserve the nutrition and health
prevention focus of the program.
As you are aware, Rhode Island WIC aggressively built the
Program over the years and now serves one of the highest
proportions of need in the nation. This means, however, that
the State does not share in the annual growth funding
provided by Congress, under current federal funding formulas.
Nevertheless, about 30% of eligible Rhode Islanders are still
unserved, and Council members often have to tell eligible
parents that their children must be placed on a waiting list,
perhaps for a long period of time, until funds are available.
Only with commitment to a full funding approach will
resources nationally be sufficient to allow Rhode Island to
participate in growth.
I also write to you today, asking that you please consider
our strong reservations regarding the National Voter
Registration Act, and the negative impact we feel it will
have on the local WIC agencies here in your home state.
As chairwoman of the Council, I represent the 23 local
agencies in Rhode Island. The WIC Advisory Council meets
regularly to discuss matters that affect the WIC program in
Rhode Island, at the grass roots level. We feel very strongly
that the potential is great for the National Voter
Registration Act to have an extremely negative impact on the
quality of the nutrition services we provide at our WIC
sites.
The overwhelming consensus among the local agencies is that
the time it would take to register voters, would be
decreasing the time we have to provide nutrition education
services, too greatly. On this matter, we are united: we do
not want to give up any of our nutrition education time
(nutrition education is the key to our program * * * it is
what makes the program unique to any other food assistance
programs, and it is what makes the program work).
The National Voter Registration Act is worthwhile, but it
is not fair to burden the WIC program with its
implementation. Please consider the validity of our argument
and do what you can to exempt the WIC program from providing
Voter Registration services.
In conclusion, let me again urge you to work towards
exempting the WIC program from the National Voter
Registration Act. Additionally, I extend to you an invitation
to join the WIC Advisory Council of Rhode Island at an
upcoming meeting, to discuss in person, our concerns
regarding this matter. Please contact me to arrange a place
and date if your busy schedule allows. Thank you for your
time and attention to this letter, we hope to meet with you
at your convenience.
Sincerely,
Kathleen A. Stento,
Chairwoman.
____
State of Rhode Island and Providence Plantations,
Department of Health,
Providence, RI, June 2, 1994.
Hon. John H. Chafee,
Dirksen Senate Office Building, Washington, DC.
Dear Senator Chafee: This is to express my appreciation for
the opportunity to meet with Coates Lear recently to discuss
legislative matters impacting on the WIC Program. This
meeting was particularly timely in light of the current
consideration of WIC Program reauthorization. At the request
of your office, this is to provide additional detail about
the potential impact of the National Voter Registration Act
(NVRA) on the WIC Program.
This Office believes deeply that the WIC Program's
existence, success and support represent an important public
policy and that the determination of such important public
policies should be made with the fullest possible
participation by all members of society eligible to vote. To
this end, it is entirely appropriate of government to
encourage voter participation and educate citizens to be
aware of and knowledgeable about the issues that face the
country and which their votes may impact. It is in this
spirit that the National Voter Registration Act was passed.
As enlightened as this seems, however, to carry out the
provisions of the NVRA requires significant WIC staff time.
Such staff time cannot be procured without either purchasing
more time or substituting NVRA for other staff activities.
The NVRA, and parallel state legislation, provides no
additional financial resources to the WIC Program to purchase
more staff time to carry out its activities. Therefore it is
apparent that the WIC Program can only carry out NVRA
activities by reducing its efforts in other areas. At the WIC
clinic level, over 80% of the available funds are used for
direct nutritional services to WIC clients. Therefore, if the
program is required to conduct NVRA activities, it must
subtract the time required for those activities from an
already expanding set of requirements to provide nutrition
assessment and education, drug abuse assessment and referral,
breastfeeding promotion and support, and information and
referral services for health care, financial aid and other
nutrition support services, immunization assessment and
referral, and general preventive health care participation
referral and support services.
It is fairly obvious that the preceding activities are all
deeply allied with the program's mission of preventive health
care. Activities aimed at NVRA support are not so obviously
allied. Virtually all Rhode Island WIC clinics are certified
voluntary, nonprofit health care sites. They are surprised
that the NVRA law defines them as ``public assistance
agencies''. The customary and accepted meaning of that term
is defined by the various financial assistance Titles of the
Social Security Act, and usually applied to government
administered offices or other agencies primarily providing
assistance under the Social Security Act. I believe that non
governmental subgrantee programs primarily engaged in health
care services, should not be defined as public assistance
providers, for NVRA purposes.
We respectfully request, therefore, that Congress
reconsider the role of the WIC Program with respect to NVRA
and determine that either the NVRA activities detract from
and do not fit with the preventative health activities,
traditional and recently added, of WIC or that NVRA
activities should be supported by additional appropriated
funds for WIC in order not to detract from the program's
nutritional and health assistance role, which has been the
basis of its success in reducing low birth rate, infant
mortality and poor childhood development.
I thank you for the opportunity to bring these ideas,
concerns and recommendations directly to your office.
Please feel free to call on this office at any time for
information about how the WIC Program can be of assistance to
our fellow Rhode Islanders or how policy options might
further or deter the Program's mission, locally or
nationally.
Sincerely,
John L. Smith,
Chief, WIC Program.
Unanimous-Consent Agreement
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I understand we now have an agreement
between both sides.
I ask unanimous consent that the vote on the McConnell amendment or
in relation to his amendment occur at 6:20 p.m.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I understand that Senator McConnell and I
are both ready to yield back.
Mr. McCONNELL. Madam President, I yield back the remainder of my
time.
Mr. FORD. I yield back the remainder of my time.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. All time is yielded back.
The vote will be at 6:20 p.m.
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I ask for the yeas and nays on the
McConnell amendment.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Is there a sufficient second?
There is a sufficient second.
The yeas and nays were ordered.
Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, a few days ago I spoke here about the
compelling need for comprehensive health care reform in our country. I
said then, as I have on many other occasions, that we need to put far
more emphasis on preventive health care so that we can change our
current sick care system into a true health care system. By emphasizing
more preventive care we will not only promote better health for
Americans, but we will also ensure that we spend our money in a smarter
way.
Child nutrition programs stand as one of the very best examples of
how smart spending on prevention pays dividends in money saved and in
healthier and more fulfilling lives for our people. We know that sound
nutrition, beginning even before birth, can prevent many problems
throughout life. Programs like the school lunch and breakfast programs;
the summer food service program; the special supplemental nutrition
program for women, infants and children [WIC]; the special milk
program; and the child and adult care food program are critically
important tools in the effort to improve--and indeed save--lives while
spending smarter.
As the chairman of the Nutrition Subcommittee of the Committee on
Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry, I was pleased to hold hearings
earlier this year on this legislation and more generally on the crucial
role of sound nutrition in building promising futures for our children.
Those hearings followed hearings held by Chairman Leahy which dealt
with related aspects of this legislation and the child nutrition
programs.
The necessity of sound childhood nutrition and the important role of
Federal child nutrition programs could not be clearer. Children who are
hungry or undernourished suffer impaired health, growth, physical
development and cognitive and behavioral development. Good nutrition is
a sound prevention strategy against a host of serious and costly health
problems including infant mortality, premature births, low birth
weight, anemia and even lead poisoning. For example, studies have shown
that each $1 invested in WIC prenatal assistance saves from $11.92 to
$4.21 in Medicaid costs. in a study I requested, the GAO estimated that
the initial investment in WIC prenatal benefits of $296 million in 1990
would save $1.036 billion in health and education expenditures over the
next 18 years.
Undernourished children simply do not learn as well as they should.
The President recently signed the goals 2000 education bill, which
included the goal that every U.S. child enter school ready to learn.
But without proper nutrition our children simply will not be ready to
learn.
We are also gaining a much clearer picture of the specific ways in
which nutrition and dietary patterns early in life affect health
throughout life. Three of four leading causes of death in our Nation
have been linked to diet. Sound nutrition and dietary habits in
childhood and adolescence have been linked to the prevention of chronic
disease and illness later in life. And healthy dietary habits formed in
childhood provide a solid foundation for a lifetime of healthier
eating.
Simply put, without sound nutrition our Nation's children will be
foreclosed from attaining their full human potential for leading
healthy and fulfilling lives. When our children's lives are diminished,
each and every one of us is also diminished in some way, as is our
Nation. And despite the encouraging progress that has been made,
millions of children in our Nation remain at risk for the damaging
consequences of inadequate or unsound nutrition. With all that is at
stake, we simply cannot afford to be complacent about the nutrition of
our Nation's children.
Once again, I want to congratulate Chairman Leahy for his leadership
on this legislation that we have put together in the Agriculture
Committee and to commend him for his heartfelt commitment to nutrition
issues, particularly regarding children. This bill reauthorizes and
makes improvements in the various Federal child nutrition programs. The
legislation will improve the ability of the programs to meet the
nutritional needs of our Nation's children. And, in recognition of the
link between diet and health, the legislation will help improve the
nutritional quality of the meals children receive.
Despite severe budgetary limitations, this legislation will achieve
significant improvements in child nutrition programs. The bill provides
for stronger efforts to include more children in the school breakfast
and summer food service programs. The bill provides for more help to
local school districts to improve the nutritional quality of the meals
they serve and to meet new USDA nutrition guidelines. USDA will be
directed to improve the nutritional quality of commodities provided to
schools and to label commodities in order to enhance the benefit to
schools of the commodity distribution program.
The bill also reauthorizes the WIC program and makes a number of
improvements designed to help the program better achieve its objectives
and to facilitate administration of the program. In particular, the
bill reinforces and strengthens efforts within the WIC program to
promote increased breastfeeding. I worked to include breastfeeding
promotion in the 1989 WIC reauthorization, and am very pleased that
this bill expands these efforts. I am also pleased that this bill
reauthorizes the WIC Farmers Market Program and provides for the growth
of program, both in States like my State of Iowa already in the program
and through the participation of additional States. We also initiated
this program through the 1989 bill, and it is very gratifying to see
that it has become a very popular and successful program.
Finally, I want to mention the important provisions of the bill
designed to prevent and deter fraud, bid-rigging and other
anticompetitive activities in procurement for the child nutrition
programs. The bill will significantly strengthen USDA debarment
procedures, and will provide training, technical assistance, advice and
guidance to help State and local agencies prevent and avoid fraud and
anticompetitive activities. I have a keen interest in these provisions
of the bill. Any fraud against Government programs is detestable, but
cheating child nutrition programs surely falls into a distinct category
of outrageous behavior.
Mr. President, this legislation represents a crucial part of our
Nation's prevention strategy. It is not only nutrition legislation. It
is also health legislation. And it is education legislation. I urge my
colleagues to support this important bill.
Mr. DOLE. Mr. President, I rise in support of legislation to
reauthorize the child nutrition programs. This legislation revises and
extends the Supplemental Nutrition Program for Women, Infants and
Children [WIC], the Summer Food Service Program, the Commodity
Distribution Program, State administrative expenses and the Nutrition
Education and Training Program. The bill also makes a number of changes
in those child nutrition programs which are permanently authorized.
One provision addresses an issue which is very important to me. In
compliance with USDA child nutrition and section 504 regulations many
schools around the country are working to make the National School
Lunch and School Breakfast Programs accessible to children who, because
of disability or chronic illness, are unable to eat what is on the
regular menu. To accomplish this task, these schools need specific
technical guidance.
A popular maxim among those of us here in Congress who actively
support school meal programs is that a hungry child cannot learn. This
is doubly true of children with special dietary needs. For a child with
diabetes or severe allergies, appropriate nutrition can mean the
difference between sickness and health. For a severely disabled child,
appropriate nutrition can mean the difference between being alert and
responsive or passive and withdrawn.
When the school lunch program was established in 1946, and when I was
involved in expanding it during the early 1970s, no one envisaged that
regular schools would be asked to serve children with such a wide array
of disabilities and chronic illness. Many of these children come from
low-income families without the financial resources to provide them
adequate nutrition, making their needs that much more pressing.
Section 123 of this bill requires USDA to issue guidance to assist
schools and other institutions in accommodating the special dietary
needs of these children. The guidance will give meal providers a
greater understanding of how they can meet these needs. In many cases,
accommodation may require no more than substituting fruit for a piece
of cake or making available a special plate or cup. In other cases, the
preparation of special meals may be necessary.
This section also contains discretionary funding for grants to States
to cover nonrecurring costs associated with accommodating special needs
children. These funds will be awarded on a competitive basis and can be
used to purchase special feeding and food preparation equipment. Other
appropriate uses would include providing training or purchasing
educational videos, manuals or other training materials dealing with
accommodating children with special dietary needs.
The grants included in this bill will assist the food service
community in providing for the special needs of these children. This
bill contains other worthy provisions which refine operating
procedures, reduce paperwork and establish targeted discretionary pilot
programs and assistance grants.
Mr. President, in closing I want to thank the distinguished chairman
and the ranking member of the Agriculture Committee, Senator Leahy and
Senator Lugar, the chairman and ranking member of the Nutrition
Subcommittee, Senator Harkin and Senator McConnell, and Senator
Cochran, their staffs, and their members of the Senate Agriculture
Committee for their hard work on this legislation. This bipartisan
effort addresses needed changes in the child nutrition programs and
will ensure their continued effectiveness. I urge my colleagues to give
it their support.
Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, I am pleased that we have come to the
place of floor action on S. 1614, the Better Nutrition and Health of
Children Act of 1993. This Act has several provisions that historically
have been very important to our country. It also has provisions that
have been particularly important to Iowa.
The WIC Program has received overwhelming support over the years from
Republicans and Democrats alike. It has proven successful in providing
preventative care for women, infants, and children by providing good
basic nutrition.
I, like many of my colleagues, have consistently supported greater
funding for the program as a means of reducing other health costs down
the road.
I am pleased to see an increase in funding for the WIC breastfeeding
program. Medical research shows that children who are breasted are less
likely to encounter certain physical challenges than children who are
formula fed. The Iowa WIC program has consistently encouraged WIC
recipients to breastfeed their children for both physical and emotional
health reasons.
The Farmers' Market WIC Program has been one of the projects in which
I have had special interest for several years. The program provides
fruits and vegetables for nutritionally at-risk women and children. In
Iowa alone, it serves countless thousands who would not have received
fruits and vegetables otherwise. Additionally, it helps farmers who
need to diversify their market and encourages use of farmers' markets
generally. Research shows that women continue to use farmers markets
even after they are no longer officially part of the Farmer Market WIC
Program.
I am pleased with several provisions of the committee bill being
considered today. The committee language has increased funding for the
Farmers Market Program and provided for a greater administrative match.
Because farmers markets are not year round in many States, there are
special considerations, such as start up and shut down costs for these
programs that other programs do not face. Additionally, the bill allows
States to use up to 1 percent of its funds for market development in
areas where there are no farmers markets for nutritionally at risk
families. This provision will allow States to develop farmers markets
in underserved areas.
Of course, the school breakfast and lunch program are an important
part of any child nutrition reauthorization. The bill before us
provides appropriate attention to the millions of children served
through these programs. It addresses the issue of moving toward school
breakfast and lunches serving nutritious foods, but does so in a way
that is not overly burdensome to school districts trying to care for
our children. It also provides flexibility to school districts to
choose lowfat or skim milk products if they prefer these products to
whole milk.
I am pleased that the committee has been able to address my chief
concern with the proposal, which was its original cost. Many of the
high cost provisions originally in the bill have been dropped so that
we have a balanced bill before us today. I join my colleagues in
supporting this final proposal.
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I suggest the absence of a quorum.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The clerk will call the roll.
the legislative clerk proceeded to call the roll.
Mr. FORD. Madam President, I ask unanimous consent that the order for
the quorum call be rescinded.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. Without objection, it is so ordered.
____________________