reimbursing it for the cost of obtaining agricultural commodities and other foods for consumption by children in the special summer lunch program.

Now, it appears to me, and I wonder if you would like to elaborate on this for the purpose of legislative intent, that if a State agency found that indeed a lady who takes care of 5 or 6 or 7 or 10 children during the summer for a working mother, meets all of the other criteria and is not for profit, it is entirely conceivable that this program would be made available to her. But, primarily, the main thrust of your legislation is to provide this help in summer youth centers, isn't that correct?

Mr. SCHEUER. That is quite correct. But other public or nonprofit private agencies, such as a church, a settlement house, a YMCA program, or a day camp, could also be included.

Mr. PUCINSKI. In this area, I think Mr. Andrews' question is a valid one. Within the definition of the act itself, it is entirely conceivable, and as a matter of fact it is more probable than not, that throughout this country there are many so-called summer day camps operated by 1 or 2 people where 5, 6, or 10 children may be engaged in an organized program of activity throughout the summer months. Under your concept, these people, if they met all of the other criteria, would be eligible for this assistance.

Mr. SCHEUER. If they met the criteria of the supervising State agency, yes.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Does that clear it up?

Mr. ANDREWS. I think that is important. I have just one more question.

Mr. Scheuer, I am a little concerned, as an introduction to this whole legislation, with a protest coming from all of my districts to the effect that the budget has cut out the old school program, the school lunch programs, at least the milk programs. Are you acquainted with that Bureau of the Budget's intentions along this line? Mr. SCHEUER. I am not sympathetic to the cutting back of the milk program.

Mr. ANDREWS. I thought it was strange that while we are getting one type of educational help, we are cutting down severely on the other one.

Mr. SCHEUER. I don't think that this Congress is going to cut it down.

Mr. ANDREWS. But, I would like to find our what amount is going to be cut out before we make additions here.

Mr. SCHEUER. I think you will find

very strong sentiment in this Congress for not cutting back on the school milk program.

Mr. ANDREWs. Thank you.

Mr. SCHEUER. Perhaps the lunch programs and the school milk programs should be consolidated in a comprehensive piece of legislation that would include them both. I will investigate that prospect. However, I want to make it clear that I am categorically against cutting back the milk program. It is an integral part of the program of providing adequate nutrition and a well-balanced diet to every American child during the entire year.

Mr. MEEDS. Congressman Scheuer, may I take this opportunity to compliment you on your introduction of this legislation and, as typical of you, recognition of a problem which is becoming more and more acute with the increased emphasis the present administration is placing

upon summertime as time for educating the educationally deprived child and of providing educationally and culturally deprived children of an opportunity to catch up.

Certainly the increased emphasis which has been placed upon summer programs in the past year alone makes this bill, and the program which you are sponsoring, an almost absolute necessity. We are now in a situation where we are educating during the summer, and where we are providing these cultural enrichment programs during the summer at fantastically high rates, not only in the public sector but also in the private nonprofit sector.

I think it is very timely and I compliment you on the introduction of this legislation.

I have two brief questions, and one just for the purpose of reiteration of something that has been said. I wholly agree with the position of the Secretary of Agriculture and evidently, the position you are taking. This program should be extended to preschool children. Mr. SCHEUER. Definitely.

Mr. MEEDS. And, I would like to ask further if you feel that the Department of Education in a State, as the Secretary of Agriculture has pointed out, which has had experience in this area, might not be the best source of the administration of a State program?

Mr. SCHEUER. As I mentioned earlier in my testimony, I would be quite agreeable to supervision of the program by the appropriate State educational agency. I perhaps mentioned that before you came in, Congressman.

Mr. MEEDS. Thank you.

Mr. SCHEUER. All of us are eager to preserve the proper role of the States in our Federal-State-local tripartite form of government and to strengthen State and local governments.

Mr. MEEDS. Mr. Chairman, if I may, I hate to leave but I have another committee meeting and I would like to be excused.

Mr. PUCINSKI. You may be.

Mr. SCHEUER. I would like to add a word to what Congressman Meeds said. Summertime is also learning time. Many of our children benefit from Headstart programs and special learning and enrichment programs, but I don't think that we should overlook the fact that children extend and assimilate during the summer much of what they are taught in winter. John Dewey, the eminent educational philosopher, used to say that we learn to swim in winter and skate in summer.

I think that this bill is conceived to make sure that the child's health and general state of well-being is maintained on a year-around basis, to encourage his total growth and development over the summer, as well as during the school year.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Mr. Scheuer, I would like to congratulate you again for this testimony. It is quite obvious that the discussion here this morning both by Mr. Andrews and yourself, and Mr. Meeds, and yourself, indicates that what you are really trying to do here is not only provide appropriate food for these youngsters during the summer months, but more important perhaps, you feel that the whole process of feeding the youngsters, whether it is during the regular school year or during the summer school program or during the various other programs mentioned here, is part of the educational process.

You feel there is a direct correlation between proper diet and proper feeding, at least during the noontime meal, with the educational experience and progress of the youngster. I think that this is a very significant aspect of your bill.

It has always been my hope that our schools, during the normal year, would make the lunch period more a part of the learning program, learning proper food habits, and learning proper food manners, and learning proper behavior.

It is rather significant that as we grow up as adults the lunch hour becomes perhaps one of the most important function of our day, whether it is in politics or industry or business. Business men get together during the lunch period and during that one hour or so they have a chance to meet and exchange ideas.

I would think that this would become that same philosophy which would permeate the educational process, so that the lunch period would become an integral part of the whole learning experience of a youngster.

To that extent, I think, it is significant that you, as a member of the Education Committee, should recognize that point and introduce this very important legislation. I would like to again congratulate you and I assure you that we will explore this subject very thoroughly. It is my hope that the committee will take some affirmative action on your proposal very quickly.

Mr. SCHEUER. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Thank you very much, Mr. Scheuer. It is our intention to hold hearings probably in New York and probably in the Midwest and somewhere in the Southwest on this very important subject, and we are looking forward to your continued cooperation. Thank you.

Our next witness is Mr. Howard P. Davis, the Deputy Administrator of the Consumer Food Programs, Consumer and Marketing Service of the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

Mr. Davis, we are very happy to have you here this morning, and I would recommend that perhaps you may either read your statement in its entirety or, if you wish, it would go in the record at this time and you can summarize it. I notice it is a brief statement and so perhaps you would just prefer to read it and then we will have an opportunity to ask you some questions.

I am very happy to see you here this morning and to testify on this very important legislation. So often we take the school lunch program for granted. I don't think the American people realize fully what a tremendous contribution the Department of Agriculture is making to the development of the young mind and the well-being of the young body in this hot lunch program. I would like to take this opportunity to congratulate you, and Secretary Freeman, and all of the other people who have played such a tremendously vital role in the development of this program.

I consider this hot lunch program one of the most important aspects of our contribution to the well-being of our society. Perhaps this legislation will again give us a chance to fully inform the American people of what a significant contribution you and the Department of Agriculture are making in this field.

I welcome you before the committee this morning.

STATEMENT OF HOWARD P. DAVIS, DEPUTY ADMINISTRATOR, CONSUMER AND MARKETING SERVICE, U.S. DEPARTMENT OF AGRICULTURE

Mr. DAVIS. Thank you very much, Mr. Chairman. I am very happy happy to appear before you this morning, to discuss H.R. 9339.

The Department of Agriculture is strongly in favor of the basic objectives of H.R. 9339 since it would serve to complement the national school lunch program which is discontinued in almost all areas during the summer months.

As now written, H.R. 9339 closely parallels the National School Lunch Act but would extend a similar type of food assistance to a variety of public and private organizations conducting "summer youth centers" during the period when schools are not in regular session. This term is defined in the bill to include recreation centers, day camps, neighborhood child centers, summer camps, and similar organizations organized to promote the health and recreation of children.

This bill would authorize the appropriation of funds to the U.S. Department of Agriculture for reimbursement to summer youth centers for the purpose of buying food supplies and the appropriation of funds for nonfood assistance and would authorize the purchase and distribution, by the Secretary, of agricultural commodities to be used in the summer lunch programs. The summer youth centers also would be specifically eligible for foods acquired under the section 32 surplus removal program.

The bill authorizes the Secretary to make agreements with appropriate State agencies for the administration of the program. We think it would be desirable for the proposed bill to provide that the administration of the program should, to the extent practicable, be placed in the State educational agencies since these agencies by experience would be the best equipped to carry out this type of program. Any proposals for further extension of child feeding should provide administrative funds to the States. A major factor involved in extending food service to summer youth programs is the cooperation required of appropriate State agencies to administer the program. State departments of education are now responsible for the administration of the national school lunch and special milk programs in schools. They have the competence, experience, and trained personnel to administer an effective child-feeding program.

Further, it has been our experience that group feeding programs must be handled by professionally trained and experienced personnel to cope effectively with problems of proper food storage, preparation and service under the necessary sanitary conditions.

Moreover, many of these agencies are now seriously understaffed and severely handicapped by inadequate State budgets. We feel that the majority of the State school lunch agencies would be extremely reluctant to assume the added responsibility without provision for administrative funds. The recently enacted Elementary and Secondary Education Act and the OEO legislation recognized that with these increased activities, the State and local administrative costs would be increased. Therefore some administrative funds to support the additional work for the State agencies in enlarging food service activities would be in order.

The bill directs the Secretary to apportion funds among the States on the same basis, insofar as practicable, as funds are apportioned under section 4 of the National School Lunch Act. Since the School Lunch Act formula is based, in large part, on the previous year's record of the number of meals served, we would suggest that the initial formula be based on child population figures of each State, as published by the Bureau of the Census, and the per capita income of each State.

After 2 or 3 years' operating experience, the regular School Lunch Act apportionment formula could be employed. The initial formula also should provide that any funds so apportioned but unused could be transferred to other States which needed and could use additional funds.

The bill provides for the use of surplus agricultural commodities acquired under section 32. In order to make the most effective use of our agricultural abundance, provision should also be made to specifically clarify the use for this program of commodities distributed under authority of section 416, of the Agricultural Act of 1949, as amended.

We also believe that the benefits of a program such as contemplated in this bill should be extended to include preschool children. I should point out that provision for summer feeding programs has been included in a comprehensive child feeding measure, H.R. 13361, the Child Nutrition Act of 1966 proposed by the President and introduced in the House of Representatives on Monday of this week. This bill embodies the Department's views in this area and has the Secretary's wholehearted endorsement.

I might add, Mr. Chairman, that, due to the shortness of time, my statement has not been cleared by the Budget Bureau, so my remarks here this morning will represent only the views of the Department of Agriculture.

Mr. PUCINSKI. Thank you very much, Mr. Davis.

Mr. Andrews, do you have any questions?

Mr. ANDREWS. Again, could you elucidate what is in the mind of the Department of Agriculture in cutting down on the school programs? You certainly know something about it, or do you?

Mr. DAVIS. First of all, to clarify a common misunderstanding, there is nothing in our budget for 1967 that would indicate any intent or desire on the part of administration to cut down on the school lunch program or change the school lunch program. This has been an effort to redirect the program to some extent, to try to reach that group of needy children attending schools where there is a preponderance of needy children, and therefore that school being unable to support a lunch program for those children.

So, it is an attempt to direct greater attention to that group of children but in no way to change the basic approach of the school lunch program which is designed to serve all of the children.

Now, as to the special milk program. Here, again, in view of the high level of out economy and our general budget considerations, it was felt that this program might well be limited to those schools and those children who most needed the Federal assistance to obtain additional milk. We must recognize that all of the children who are participating in the school lunch program receive one-half pint of milk with each lunch as a part of that lunch, as a requirement.

65-921-66- 3