CONTENTS Statement of— Amery, Miss Elizabeth, State supervisor of home economics in Mary- Anderson, A. W., Chief, Division of Fisheries, Department of Interior Bowie, Mrs. Gertrude, supervisor of school cafeterias in Montgomery Chatfield, George H., member, board of education, city of New York.. Hershey, Maj. Gen. Lewis B., Director, Selective Service System, Jones, Judge Marvin, War Food Administrator, Washington, D. C... Justin, Dean Margaret, dean of school of home economics, Kansas State College, Manhattan, Kans.. Leonard, Mrs. Paul, chairman, National Congress of Parents and Meegan, Joseph Bernard, Back-of-the-Yards Council, Chicago, Ill.- Ockey, Dr. Wm. C., Chief of School Lunch and Distribution Branch, Page 106 137 96 Parran, Dr. Thomas, Surgeon General, United States Public Health Rosenfield, Harry N., Assistant to the Administrator, Federal Se- Sebrell, Dr. W. H., Medical Director, United States Public Health 13 313 25 Shields, Robert H., Solicitor, Department of Agriculture_ 259, 283, 309 91 51 Winn, Miss Agnes, assistant director, legislative and Federal relations 87 SCHOOL-LUNCH PROGRAM FRIDAY, MARCH 23, 1945 HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES, The committee met at 10 a. m., the Honorable John W. Flannagan, Jr. (chairman), presiding. The CHAIRMAN. The committee will come to order. I think the time has arrived for Congress to determine a course with reference to the school-lunch program. If the school-lunch program is continued, and I think it should be, we should enact legislation setting it up on a sound basis. With this end in view I introduced H. R. 2673. We have, as you know, had a school-lunch program for several years, and the way it has been heretofore set up has caused more or less of an annual headache. H. R. 2673 would declare that it is the policy of the Congress to provide for a school-lunch program under the administration of the Department of Agriculture. We have with us this morning Judge Marvin Jones, who was formerly chairman of this committee, and who, at present, is War Food Administrator. The program at this time is under his supervision. Judge Jones, we are happy to have you with us this morning, and we will appreciate it if you will give us your views with reference to the school-lunch program. STATEMENT OF HON. MARVIN JONES, WAR FOOD ADMINISTRATOR Mr. JONES. Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, I am always glad to come before this committee. I feel, perhaps, more at home around here than before any other committee. I will be brief, I am sure. I am happy to tell you my views in a general way on the need for legislation, permanent legislation, for the school-lunch program. I would like to reemphasize what I have said before-the school-lunch agricultural markets, and I consider the activity an integral part of an effective food production and distribution program. Federal assistance to school lunches has been given this year, as you know, under legislative authority included in the agricultural appropriation bill. Of course, this authorized the program only for 1 year. While we feel the program has been conducted to the great benefit of both school children and agriculture, permanent legislation at this time is most desirable for several reasons: Lack of permanent legislation naturally hampers the War Food Administration in its planning for the distribution of food to schools. Right now, before school closes for this year, we should be laying our plans for next year's program. But, because we do not know what form our authorization for next year will take, we are unable to do so. Schools, too, in planning for their next year's operations, must face the fact that Federal assistance may be materially changed, or, indeed, cut off altogether. This inability to plan their programs keeps many schools, particularly the poorer ones, from working toward the kind of program they would like to have and the kind we would like to see them have. Finally, lack of a permanent program of Federal assistance has deterred many State governments from actively entering into the school-lunch program. While a number of States have furnished funds and other assistance for school-lunch programs, other States have been deterred from setting up a well-rounded plan and an adequate staff by the impermanence of Federal assistance. I believe the legislation proposed in H. R. 2673 permanently establishes Federal assistance to school-lunch programs on a firm base. It sets as the policy of Congress the dual objective that we feel the school-lunch program should be designed to accomplish: expanding the markets for agricultural commodities by encouraging domestic consumption and improving the nutritional status of the Nation's children through providing foods for a school-lunch program. We believe that these objectives are inseparable. It goes without saying that the proper distribution of food so that everybody in the Nation will be adequately fed is not only to the benefit of the people who are now undernourished, but also to the benefit of the farmer whose economy can never be really stable until the whole population is well fed. Of course, the Department of Agriculture and the War Food Administration have been, and will continue to be, vitally interested in programs contributing to this end. Since one of the stated objects of the bill is a lunch program which will safeguard the health and well-being of the Nation's children, we believe that this means that lunches must be nutritionally adequate if they are to accomplish this objective. However, you may find it desirable to give further emphasis in this bill to the nutritional values of the food served in the lunches. H. R. 2673 will permit us to continue substantially the same program that has been so successful the past two years. It provides for a direct appropriation for the purchase of food or for reimbursing schools for their local purchase of food to be used in the lunches. It also provides that surplus agricultural commodities purchased with funds made available under section 32 of Public Law 320 may be distributed for use in school lunch programs. The direct appropriation will provide the firm base so necessary for school-lunch programs, allowing the schools to plan their operations on the basis of guaranteed assistance in securing food for the lunches. The distribution of surpluses to the schools will not only provide additional food for the lunches but will permit us to continue this most satisfactory outlet for commodities we buy under price support programs. In addition to providing an expanding outlet for surplus commodities, the direct appropriation serves agriculture through the stimulation of larger local purchases of food by schools. Furthermore, it has been, and will continue to be, the purpose of the War Food Administration to direct this purchasing power toward foods that are in local abundance. For instance, approximately 11,000,000 dozen eggs would normally be used in a school-lunch program of the size we are assisting this year. However, this use of eggs could be increased 50 percent by substituting them for meat as a protein in the lunch 3 days a month during the school year. Or, if dairy products were in surplus, cheese could partially replace meat or dry beans, and the purchase and consumption of fluid milk could be tremendously expanded above the present usage of 142,C00,000 quarts a year. In the fruit-and-vegetable group, emphasis could be placed on any particular item that may be in abundance. I should also like to speak for a minute on the importance of schoollunch programs as an outlet for the use of commodities we purchase under price-support programs. We have always considered schoollunch programs our most saisfactory recipients for this sort of distribution, not only because everybody is anxious to see children well fed, but because the schools are physically equipped to handle this distribution much better than relief clients and most of the other outlets we have used in the past. And we are presently buying, under our price support program, apples, cabbage, carrots, squash, beets, and onions. All these commodities are being, or will be, distributed to schools for use in their lunch programs. Last October a hurricane blew tremendous quantities of apples off the trees in the Northeastern States. Growers were faced with the prospect of a substantial loss. We purchased about 480,000 bushels of these apples to support the market and protect growers from what appeared to be an almost certain loss. Although school-lunch programs were only beginning to get underway at the time they absorbed half the apples we purchased-apples that would surely otherwise have been wasted. At the present time we are supporting the price of relatively few commodities through purchase for the school-lunch program. However, commitments to our agricultural producers will undoubtedly make this program very important in the future. If we have a vigorous school-lunch program we can put these purchases into it immediately for worth-while consumption. If we do not, the purchases will still have to be made, and I am afraid there would be unavoidable spoilage and wastage of food for lack of an outlet for its distribution. Of course, foods are distributed only in such a manner as will contribute to the value of the lunch and will not have an adverse effect on the market in the community. As you probably know, distribution is made only upon order from the school. H. R. 2673 continues the apportionment of funds on the basis of school enrollment and need, with a proviso that if program participation in any State does not require all the funds apportioned to that State, the excess may be reapportioned, and it continues the requirement that Federal funds be matched by State and local contributions. Both these provisions were contained in the 1945 authorization and they have worked out most satisfactorily. I heartily approve of them. Other provisions of the bill would formalize regulations we are already observing in our conduct of the program, such as forbidding discrimination between various types of schools, providing that lunch must be served without cost to children unable to pay, and similar regulations designed to make the program of benefit to all children. |