asia and the current tension that is imminent, including everything that you listed with human rights development and peace and security. so to that, especially with the tensions in the south china sea and the diversion in -- with the conflict necessary between rising powers and many others and the u.n., my question to you is do you think we have adequate representation of the regions in the security council? how do pld a security council in regional representatives and also what institutions do you think -- by the powers in that conflict? is there anything that we can do to retain or to at least maintain the respect to the institutions? you said it was detrimental that

the u.n. or the established institutions being rejected or disregarded. is that what i gather from you. so please give us your suggestions, how to best resolve the current conflict in asia. thank you. >> there are a couple people right behind you. >> thank you. ashley, georgetown institute for women, peace and security. you mentioned the upcoming review open 1535. i was curious what the office has been doing to improve the gap between implementation and rhetoric. we have seven wonderful resolutions, yet only 3% of peace negotiations had women as signatories. so i'm wondering what the sg's office can do to improve that. thank you.

>> foundation for empowerment. thank you very much for your passionate speech of dedication and your commitment to international organizations. i used to work for the worldback over 20 years. in the meanwhile i was working for the -- in geneva. the commission on macroeconomics. so at the time, i could make the comparison between world bank and the doun. there are so many institutions by the u.n. so in times of peace and development, i couldn't agree with you more that the peace and development go hand in hand. but there are many institutions u.n. proliferated that certainly missions are overlapping and

that they are very much to be polite they are sort of like marginalized. i don't know their effectiveness. as a person who used to work on the international development, it's heartbreaking that the eastern european community -- i mean, the war had collapsed and there's no institutions, no organization, u.n. organization which was based in vienna had any -- because they are -- their client has now been open to the capitalism. but because of what 170 steps interest, that institution tends to disappear and survived and still goes on. so my question again is that it is nice to hear that u.n. is trying to take a stock of the last 70 years and trying to move

forward. in that commitment, is the u.n. willing to take a look at some of the institutions and if they are overlapping, they are willing to and that they have -- to eliminate some of them and if they don't need did she if they have a capacity, can they really work with others rather than on other institutions? thank you very much. >> i think that gives you enough to chew on for a first round. >> i would start with the last one. and i think it is clear that the u.n. has grown throughout time in an organic manner. there has been no particular design of the architecture of the u.n. in fact, we have had different organizations flourishing in different times and based on real needs at the time.

one can also argue that after certain process, some of these organizations could be mainstream into others or merged. it's a very, very difficult exercise because each one of these organizations as member states involved and there is a strong ownership by member states and member states sometimes are different ministers in member states. they are not a single member state. often member states ask us to be more coherent, coordinate better among ourselves. member states themselves don't necessarily coordinate in the system and in their presence in the system. so i think the purpose that i mentioned as we move forward is exactly trying to see how we tackle that.

one of the biggest problems i see we have these days internally is the need for coordination to get things done. sometimes coordination becomes an end of its own and you stay so much in coordination that you lose sight of why is it that you are there and who are you there to serve? so we need to find ways to simplify and to define or mandates in the manner that is more clear and at the same time, is more geared towards working together. it's a very strong competition for resources these days. and that goinges against the notion

of coming together. because it's so difficult to fund the programs that we have. it is so much that we rely on extra budget taer funding that the different agencies find some program fight for the pool of resources as a matter of survival. there is a big contradiction between something that is absolutely significant which is pulling them together and at the same time, the notion that unless you have your own institution recognized, it's unlikely that you get enough resources. so for me that is part of the -- of how we adopt the unite nations to this reality of the 21st century particularly to this reality of this sustainability development agenda which will require a totally different approach by member states and by us. so a long question that has not

really precise answer for us no doubt. the secretary general has been -- i'm starting backwards. has been very, very keen on the question of women. if you look at the presence of women in the secretariat, in very, very important positions, it has grown exponentially. ems believes very deeply that women should be an center r essential part of negotiation and peace processes. when i work on his behalf in the great lakes, we brought to the table, the women, and in the framework that was great upon the 11 member states women have a relevant peace to address and it's working.

it is matter of putting pressure and putting pressure and putting pressure. the only way is to reservice the issue. that is why this is so important and the review is so important and adding and adding and adding pressure. that goes in automatic mode, for sure. then on the question of adequate representative, i cannot answer that. this is a question to be answered by member states. i'm sure i can have somebody come in from my region and make the same argument or somebody coming in from africa and making that same argument. what is clear is that there is a very wide agreement that something should change representing representation. for instance, why this agreement on how this should be done. so as long as there is not a

common view on how to make it happen it's very, very difficult, that something will materialize anytime soon. >> let me ask you that. it's one thing to talk about representation, but are you seeing a different level and quality of engagement by the group of countries we tend to describe as emerging powers, by india, by brazil, by china? are you seeing a difference in their engagement at the u.n.? >> well, to me i don't have that long history in the united nations, so i don't know how they were whether the ambassador was in the united nations. i cannot compare. but it's clear to me from what i see that this emerging powers feel that they don't have enough share of the same. this goes beyond the security council only and that often the agenda is not shape their participation in a very very

established maern manner. just to give an example talking about the design of mandate by the security council, and their participation asks the stakeholders pccs is something they continuously ask to be more open and a more direct participation. so no doubt that they see themselves in a manner that is not fully reflected in the way we work. >> let's go back to the audience. so i'll start up here and work my way back. >> thank you, bob. i was a senior adviser to four different parts of the u.n. in a few weeks, a report on global governance will come out and madeleine albright and cobari have coauthored. and i think you probably have been briefed on it. one thing they've talked about

in the report is that they ought to take an optic to the 75th anniversary and really work on building support for major changes. and i'm wondering if there was an agenda that you had of perhaps different financial formulas, perhaps ideas for we forming the general assembly that you think should be worked on. and i have to just as a coda say another great gift from argentina to the vatican is he's going to come out with a very major statement and i'm wondering how the united nations is going to capitalize on that. >> sometimes refer to the secretary as a secular pope. so we'll put that in context. >> madam my name is irving and i'm a professor at johns hopkins

university of international studies next door. one of the challenges that you mentioned, that of climate change is an area that has led to powerful and i would say transformational change. his leadership which was illustrated last year dramatically actually did broaden the circles of outreach and engagement and has led to opening dialogue on development oriented solutions to climate change. beyond sovereign states and engaging the private sector especially the financial services sector in an extraordinarily successful way. by raising the abolition of corporations, they brought new hopes into what had become a staltified process of negotiations among member states. could you please say a little bit about how you see the role of the eosg and the climate change support team continuing in this broadening effort to

create the opportunity for engaim gaugement of the private sector as equals of the u.n. going beyond correct o.p. 21 in december of this year and on to a fuller solution? a kwobtive and collaborative solution that buildings the framework for sustainability development. >> i'll take one more before we go back. to the back. >> thank you. i work for sao lao here in washington, d.c. i have one quick question. in addressing all the different and complex problems in the world, what is -- what are the things that are unique that u.n. can provide and no other entities are able to offer? in this drastically changing environment. thank you. >> susana.

>> thank you. on the report on global governance, i have -- i know a bit. i'm not really fully privy to what is coming out. so i will navigate in from the basic i know. forgive me if i've not totally -- the notion of having a five-year perspective to what is needed to change, it's a very interesting notion. one of the problems is that coming from the private sector, i always thought that the private sector was very short-term oriented. i didn't have enough of a strategic horizon. i have learned now that there's a much bigger or rison in the private sector than the one we have. again, going fire after fire and being pulled and pushed by the

reality of today and reacting to the reality of today. so being able to have an agenda that is developed over a period of time and that has the understanding by member states to me is fundamental. that means member states need to trust that that agenda is in the interests of everybody and work towards that agenda. reform is often seen with a suspicious mind within the united nations. a certain relationship between reform and cost cutting measures and i think it's wrong to see it from that perspective. i believe that many member states, many of the emerging powers that we referred to understand there is the need for

a broad reform and it goes beyond the security council. so if we were able to articulate a few things with the common agreement by member states, i think that is very powerful way to move the ewe in it nated nations. what will i suggest to put in there? well, it is clear that there is a strong tension between the general assembly and its willingness to delegate powers to the secretary general. it's not different from any other legislative body in the world with the executive body. i'm sure in this town this is a very well known reality. the question of how deep you go into managing what is under the responsibility of the secretary general as chief of the

administrative officer, i think it's something that requires a conversation. it can only happen if member states fully trust that the secretary general is going to do this in the best interests of the organization and not manage by any external factor. so that would be something that, for me is important to see whether there is an opportunity to come to a common view and move that agenda forward. it will make a big difference probably in how fast and how creatively the u.n. can react. having said that, there's a very interesting example that happened with ebola. the u.n. reacted to the secretary general's proposal in three days. so where there is a will there is a way. and it's a good example of the general assembly working towards something that was absolutely a demand that needed to happen

now. and we got resources within a week. so sometimes we think that this cannot work. but maybe if there is an interesting in my good work, it can be proven that it is possible. in the secretary general and climate change i think this is an excellent example of how much the secretary general can do in a certain agenda. we were having a conversation with ambassador and bruce before coming in and we were talking about how much influence the secretary general has and this question of is the secretary general a secretary or a general in all of these things. i think that the secretary general has much less influence than what people perceive the secretary general has. but at the same time it has

much more influence than some others believe he has, he or she has. i will ask the she now to be politically correct. the secretary general and his own conviction that move this agenda, and, you know when everybody went to copenhagen and that did not materialize, it would have been easy for him to give up. it was a very difficult moment and he did not give up. so he had work with every single member state on this agenda, very big powers, the very small nations that are now grounding themselves in water. and he has made the case i think, i wouldn't say secretary general ban is the ohm one, but

if his high moral ground helped in shaping this agenda. now we have the pope adding his voice. so i hope that that will also bring more to the table. it's clear, again, as i discussed about development, this is an agenda that will not happen just with the engagement of member states. the biggest contributors in a positive or in a negative way will be in the private secretary he. so unless we enlarge in a very concrete manner the commitment of the private sector unless we make sure that there is alignment between what private sector zs, what policies are established by government and what overview of all of this has done added international level this will not materialize. it's clear that we will have to

think through what comes after december. but we are not there yet. it is something that is being work. so i don't have a specific answer to your question what is going to happen within our own office. but there will be follow-up to it, no question. this secretary general will not let go i assure you that. and what is the difference between the u.n., what does the u.n. add as a uniqueness? i think it's clear that the authority and the convening power that the u.n. has through the general assembly, through the secretary general is something that is totally unique and i go over to meetings of different regional organizations, of different combinations of member states. these meetings are very good for useful. we need to work with them. they have a very important

perspective from a more narrow representation. but in the end, there's certain issues that can only be sorted out at the level of the united nations. that's why we need to treasure the value of the united nations and we need to find a way to make some institution more effective so that we don't lose the trust of the people and we are able to deal on it. >> think about the trust of the people. this one is -- and there are a lot of people watching on the web, as well. and i look out and i see the average age is pretty young, especially the young people who stood at the back. what do you say to young people engaging at the u.n. and working at the u.n., is that something you encourage? >> well let me start with the personal perspective. if you would have told me 12

years ago you are going to be in the united nations and eventually you will be in the secretary cabinet of the secretary general, i probably would have answered by saying, this is totally crazy out of your mind. then for different reasons i came into the united nations and i came into one of the strong programs of the united nations and i came to learn the value of an organization, of a group of organizations of a system that have a unique presence all over the world and is able to listen to the people all over the world. i think sometimes we don't listen well enough so my call to the young people is to involve themselves, to use all means and, of course social media is available now for

people to convey messages to participate. last career, we had different ingredient in the u.n. that brought civil society of different combinations some meetings and we had 4,000 people one single day around a subject. of course, this is a drop in the bucket of the representation of the world, but there are opportunities. in the case of the sustainable development goals, there were some huge consultations throughout the world. every single country had a participation across many, many people to try and shape what were their priorities. so you need to push us you need to claim for your space and to make sure that what we do really

serves a purpose. we can only do that if we hear from you. that is the reality. >> use is one reality. i was listening and in your talk you touched on asia latin america, middle east, africa and europe. one country that didn't come up is the united states. >> i knew better. >> but what is it you say to american decisionmakers about why it is that the u.n. matters to them, matters to us? >> first of all, it is clear to everybody that the united states is the first power in the world. it is the most powerful country in the world. so one could seem that being in that position does not need anything to support its policies in its decision. to me precisely being in that

unique situation of being the most powerful country having the united nations is going to deal to engage with others in a manner that is -- if i can use the word, not precedented to others. this is a way to set up around the table and start a conversation that probably are not possible in any other way. that's one thing. that's a question of engagement beyond the bilateral. because, again, many of the issues that are of concern to the united states citizens are those issues that are cited at cross border, cross cutting and cannot be solved ohm by the united states. then there's the piece and security side of the discussion. and there, the united states clearly has a privilege situation in a security council

and the veto power and the security council. when the people of the it's say, yes, we need to be engaged but be careful so far and how often, it is clear that the united nation sess key potential tool that can serve the view and the perspective of the united states as long as they agree with others. so yes, it's true that when you get to that you are not the only one. and that sometimes may be perceived as a down side by the americans. i think it's precisely the opposite. if you are well engaged the chains you have to make your case case, to have your foreign policy well represented to the united nations is very high. so it's a win for me.

i don't see it in any other way. >> brookings is about to turn a hundred and we go through our planning process to think about what that means, but i suspect your job is harder as the u.n. turns 70 and you adapt the extraordinary complexity to the world around you. the u.n. is often in the news for fire fighting and for failures, but i have to say it's an enormous privilege to see up front and up close the talent and the dedication of the people who actually make it work and make such contributions. so thank you for being here today to share that. >> thank you. thank you. on the next washington journal, john sanunu, former governor and chief of staff to george h.w. bush on a book he wrote about the 41st president the quiet man. then chris murphy a member of

the foreign relations committee on u.s. policy toward isis and his amendment to ban presence to iraq and syria and as part of our spotlight series, we will discuss a recent story on whether any of the 2016 republican hopefuls will cut government spending. washington journal is live on c-span every morning at 7:00 eastern and you can contribute to the program on facebook and on twitter at c-span wj. >> federal reserve chair janet yellen holds a news conference wednesday following the quarterly federal open market committee meeting. you can see the event live starting at 2:30 p.m. eastern here on c-span3. this weekend the c-span cities tour is partnered with comcast. to learn about the history and literary life of key west, florida, earnest hemingway wrote

several of his novels at his home in key west. >> they found this home and bought it for $8,000 in 1931 and pauline converted this hayloft into his first formal writing studio. >> here, he fell in love with fishing, with the clarity of his writing, how fast he was producing his work. he knocked out the first rough draft of a farewell to arms when arriving in key west. he once had a line that if you really want to write start with one true sentence. for a true writer, each book should be a new beginning where he tries again for something that is beyond the payment. he should always try for something that has never been done or that others have tried and failed. >> key west is also where president harry truman sought

rev refuge. >> by coming to key west, he could come with his closest staff, let down his hair. sometimes some of the staff would let their beards grow for calm of days. they certainly at times use jaufr color stories and they certainly could have a glass of bourbon and, you know, visit back and forth without any scrutiny from the press pap sports wear company sent a case of hawaiian shirts to the president with the thought that if the president is wearing our shirt, we're going to sell a lot of shirts. and so president truman wore those free shirts that first year and then organized what they call the loud shirt contest. that was the official uniform of key west. >> watch all of our events from key west saturday on c-span2's book tv and sunday afternoon at 2:00 on american history tv on c-span3.

the health hunger free kids act of 2010 is set to expire on 2013. rules and regulations for federal childhood nutrition programs. this is just over two hours. >> a quorum being present, the committee on educational workforce will come to order. good morning secretary. welcome to the educational workforce committee. thank you for joining us to discuss an issue i know we all care deeply about. that's providing low income children and families access to healthy meals and snacks. we know the important role nutrition plays in a child's development and education. as i've said before it's common

sense that if children are hungry or malnourished then they are less likely to succeed in the classroom. that's why the federal government has aimed to provide america's most vulnerable students the nutrition assistance they need. ensuring children have access to healthy food is a goal we all share and lies at the heart of our effort to reform federal child nutrition programs many of which are set to expire later this year. we have conducted several hearings and briefings to learn more about these programs as well as the rules and regulations that dictate their implementation at the state and local levels. what we have learned from students, parents, school nutrition professionals, government watch dogs and others key stakeholders and, yes, even in the department of agricultural is that the latest reauthorization of federal child nutrition laws is the most far reaching and costliness in a generation. current law requires an apartment to prescribe how much money schools charge for meals, what food can and cannot be

served in schools and how much of it can be served. in other words, washington is responsible for deciding what and how much our children eat. these regulations have created an environment where students are not getting the nourishment they need and food and taxpayer dollars wind up literally in the trash can. julia va conveyed to the committee what she is seeing across the country. she decried the sharp increase in cost and waste in the stark decline of student lunch participation under the new requirements. we are often told that more than 90% of participating schools are complying with the law. first, as we learn from the government accountability office, it is highly likely this number is overly optimistic. but let's not forget that schools that choose to participate must comply with the law. the question isn't how many

schools are in compliance. the question is at what cost? the company estimates that participating school districts will be forced to absorb $3.2 billion in additional compliance cost over a five-year period. to make matters worse fewer students are being served. since the regulations were put in place participation in the school meals programs has declined more rapidly declined more rapidly than any other period over the last three decades. but 1.4 million fewer children being served each day. and we saw these challenges first hand during my first visit in savage minnesota. students described smaller portion sizes and limited options left students hungry and more likely to buy junk food. after students petition the schoolboard, fire lake decided to drop out of the school meals program next school year. it is the only way the school can meet the needs of its students. and the problems with the law do not stop there. the office of inspector general

for the department of agricultural and the gao identified programs misusing taxpayer dollars raising serious concerns about whether or not we were assisting those in need. as we work to reauthorization federal child nutrition programs, we muft find solutions that will ensure taxpayer dollars are well spent and children are well served. we know developing a one size fits all approach is not the answer. more mandates and more money are not the answer, either. instead, we should look to improve these programs by giving states and school districts the flexibility this he need to fulfill the promise of child assistance. we were advised at a time recent hearing it's critical to remove barriers and create efficients to reach kids that currently go without. i look forward to discuss how we can achieve just that without imposing more burden on our schools. again, mr. secretary, thank you for joining us to share your perspective on these important issues.

i look forward to our discussion and with that wsh i will now recognize the committee's ranking member, mr. scott, for his opening remarks. >> thank you, mr. chairman for holding this hearing. today we'll discuss the implementation of the 2010 healthy hunger free kids act as well as policy ideas for the upcoming reauthorization for the child nutrition act. i'd like to thank our secretary of agriculture for being with us to discuss this important issue. moore than 6/0 years ago through the enactment of the first federal child nutrition program, the natural school lunch act of 1946, congress recognized that feeding hungry children was not just a moral imperative, but also an imperative for the health and security of our nation because so many of our youth were malnourished and not prepared for military service. in 1946 the 79th congress passed the national school lunch act, quote, as a measure of national security to safeguard the health and well being of the

nation's children and to encourage domestic consumption of nutritionus agricultural commodities and other food by assisting the states through grants and aid and other means in providing an adequate supply of fooe food and other facilities for the establishment, maintenance and expansion of nonprofit school lunch programs. today we're faced with another crisis that impacts our nation's national security. our children are now too obese to enlist in our nation's military. one-third of children in this country are obese and overweight and childhood obesity as tripled over the last the 30 years. according to one report, our nation has the highest rate of childhood obesity costing a shocking $1930 billion a year. this not only weakens our economy, it increases our budget deficit. while all segments of our population are affected school, low income families those especially vulnerable to obesity

due to the additional risk factors associated with poverty. unfortunately the poorest among us have the least access to healthy food, many times without full service grocery stores and farmers markets in their communities. in my home state of virginia dorothy mcculloch has been focusing not only on ending childhood hunger and on improving access to virginia's locally grown commodities. this helps children, supports farmers and strengthens local economies. the reality is the negative effects of school nutrition are preventable. we still have a long way to go but their r there are positive signs of progress through the implementation of the child nutrition programs. the program for women, infants and children, the wic program has consistently proven to be a cost-effective investment that improves the nutrition and health of low income families. the program has led to healthier infants, more nutritionus diets better health care for children

and subsequently higher act semesteric achievement for students. for some students, their only access to nutritionus meals is at school, through the school meal programs and we know the children and teens can consume up to half of their total calories at school. during the average school day in 2011 more than 31 million school children ate school lunch and over 12 million ate school breakfast. it is up to us to ensure our children are fed nutritionus meals that can support them as they learn and grow. the first time in over 30 years the healthy hunger free kids act is given the opportunity to make reforms that improve the nooug nutrition and hunger safety net for millions of children. study ves shown children are now eating more fruits and vegetables and at many schools there has been widespread acceptance of the nutrition programs. as we address the implementation of the law it is important to remember that the guidelines are evidence-based, not based on

politics or corporate bottom lines. they reflect the healthy eating habits most of us in the room try to follow each day. there are a small number of schools still working to meet the compliance of new standards, but the vast majority of schools, 95%, report they are implementing the new healthy meals standards. these are powerful tools in creating greater opportunity for at-risk youth and helping them break free of the tragic cycle of poverty. it is critical we ensure they have the support they need to be success frl. i look forward to hearing about the usda's new technical assistance initiative team up for progress team up for success and how the unique challenges of schools are being met. today, we have the opportunity to discuss the scope and impact of the new school meals and wic programs and i hope that we will also discuss ways to improve and strengthen them. this reauthorization of the child nutrition program should build on the progress we've made over the last five years.

thank you, mr. chairman. i yield back. >> thank you, gentleman. pursuant to committee rules 7-c, all members are permitted to submit written statements. without objection, the hearing record will remain open for 14 days to allow others referenced during the hearing to be submitted for the official hearing record. i'll now introduce our distinguished witness who probably needs nowhere no introduction, being a cabinet secretary, but just as a reminder, the honorable tom vilsac is the secretary of the united states department of culture. in this role he manages the staff of over 100,000 as he administrates the agricultural policies including oversight and implementation of the child nutrition programs. he served two terms as the governor of iowa.

it's always nice to have somebody from the neighboring state here mr. secretary. now i ask you please to stand and raise your right hand. do you solemnly swear or affirm that the testimony you are about to give will be the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth? >> i do. >> thank you pup may be seated. let the record reflect our witness answered in the affirmative. and they always do. let me just remind you briefly of the lighting system. some hearing rooms have gotten more sophisticated than our old ones. ours are straightforward. we've got the green, yellow and red lights. you can largely ignore those. i've never gavelled down a cabinet secretary for opening remarks that were a little too long, but please be mindful that we have a lot of members who want to ask questions. when we get to the question and answer period, i will do my best to keep my colleagues to the five-minute rule. mr. secretary you're recognized.

mr. chairman thank you very much. and in the interest of time perhaps the chair would allow me to associate myself with the ranking member's remarks and the chairman's remarks relating to the integrity of the program. if you take representative scott's remarks and your remarks on the integrity of the statement, you pretty much have my opening statement. with that, i'll answer questions. >> did we even bother to turn on the green light? mr. secretary, that is outstanding. is that does set a record. >> let me start, if i may -- yeah. put me on the clock because database as i mentioned to you briefly, that i will give you a chance to talk about the numbers here, but i went to visit a school in my district to learn about the school meal program because some of the students had written a letter, signed a

petition suggesting that maybe they ought to get out of the program. so i went to visit them and very, very nice school. students coming through the lunch program with amazing technology. they had a little card and they could put it up there and immediately the cashier saw who they were and if they were on the program. things going pretty well. and i sat down with the four students and the principal and some other adults there as well. but i found it interesting in the discussion with the students. there was two young women. this is a high school, two young men, one of the young men was getting ready to go on scholarship out to arizona to play football. and i'm not sure how much he weighed. i didn't ask him. well over 200 pounds. but one of the young women weighed clearly half of that. yet part of their complaint was look, this system has us trapped

here because we have to have the same portions. and that doesn't make any sense to us if you're going to go to play football on scholarship, seems they thought and it seems to me reasonable to me that you ought to have more food. and so what was happening was that because they -- the portions weren't large enough in all cases they were taking their own money and going and buying food. and it clearly was not the sort of healthy lunch that was being served in the school cafeteria and it was indeed, a healthy lunch and they didn't have complaints about how the food tasted. they said they liked the broccoli. so i took them at their word and they liked the fruit and so forth. but they certainly were upset about the portions and the fact that they then had to go and buy more food, stop off at a fast food place or something like that, was clearly not what we're trying to get to here. so -- and this was a relatively

wealthy school. and these kids probably had the money where they could stop and buy that food and some students without those resources couldn't do it. so it seems to me that while the students wanted healthy meals but the meals that they were being served didn't meet their needs, and they were so upset about that that they petitioned to drop out of the program. now, of course the school has agreed to drop out of the program. how can you say, if you are saying that the program is working as advertised when you have those kinds of problems where you clearly have an issue where football player seems ought to be having a considerably bigger portion than someone half their weight. >> mr. chairman, i think the -- i'd start by explaining that the standards that have been established were based on expert advice and direction from the institute of medicine in terms of what an average sized individual would need at that point in time during the day.

it's roughly 25 calories less than the meals that were previous to the healthy younger kids act. so it's not that big an impact in terms of the difference. this is not an all you can eat applebies. this is a school lunch program. and the reality is the vast majority of students, hoom students elementary students and middle school stunts have accepted and are in faifr of these new standards. a reents survey had 70% of students say they like the new program. i don't doubt that you'll find a few folks that have concerns and that's why we've suggested they can bring a snack. there's no reason they can't bring a snack to school. there's a sharing table, opportunities for those who aren't going to eat everything that's on their plate for whatever reason can share with those who want more food.

there are vending machines at the school that will provide consistent, smart and lengthyhealthy snacks. so there are way toes address this issue without snesly rolling back the standards and creating a significant roll back. and i think the reason why i sociologied myself with representative scott's comments is we are dealing with twin issues here. we're dealing with 17 million youngsters who are food insecure. at the same time, we're dealing with nearly a third of our youngsters who are obese or at risk of being obese. so on balance if you follow the expert advice if you provide options and snacks and sharing tables and you see a preponderance of students accepting these standards, i think we are on the right track. so, you know, i'm convinced that we have -- we've also looked at the issue of plate waste

suggesting somehow that folks are throwing food away. the reality is harvard has looked at this, the red center@has looked at this and they found kids are, in fact, consuming more fruits and vegetables. >> my time has indeed expired. mr. scott. >> thank you. thank you, mr. secretary. i understand that 95% of the school districts are reporting that they are in compliance with the upgraded standards in the last reauthorization. is that right? >> that's correct, representative, and that's why they're excited to six cents reimbursement increase. >> and is there any reason to reduce the standards? >> i can't see the reason to reduce the standards. we have provided flexibility as you well know in sodium whole grains and in other aspects of the rule. i think we'll continue to look for opportunities to be flexible, but i don't think you want to roll the standards back. >> and are the standards based on a medical and professional

scientific advice? >> they are consistent with the institute of medicine standards. >> does the program community eligibility where if overwhelming portion of the students are eligible that headquarteryou can go schoolwide, forget about eligibility and just serve everybody, can you talk about that program a little bit and how it avoids a lot of the administrative costs associated with the program? >> 14 thois schools, over 2,000 school districtses and 6.4 million children are currently benefiting from the community eligibility program. it essentially says to a school district if you have more than 40% of your youngsters who are directly certified as being taniff eligible or medicaid eligible, then you are entitled to adopt community eligibility, which allows you to have a student not have to take a form

home to mom and dad and fill it out and bring it back. it allows the school district essentially to receive reimbursement based on a mathematical computation. that's the amount of resource that the school district gets. school districts have -- about half the school districts eligible for this have adoctored it. and i think there are two reasons why we need to press this program. one is it indeed saves money for the administration. roughly $29 a student is saved. secretarily, it provides more accurate reads in terms of the number of kids who are actually going to participate in the program. so it reduces aerates and provides greater access. so safe to say saving costs reducing air rates and greater access. we continue to promote this. one of the issues, frankly, is school districts use the free and reduced lunch calculation to determine their eligibility for title one funding. so i've spoken to secretary

duncan about whether or not we could create a similar mathematical formulation that would get over the issue with title one. and i suspect if we did that we would see even greater participation. >> thank you. have you done any rules and regulation changes for the school breakfast and lunch programs that ensure that more children are participating? >> well there are more children participating in school breakfast, wul over 1 million more students are participating. 300 million more meals are being served this year than previous years. i think one of the greatest things that we've been able to do is reduce the stigma of school breakfast in terms of providing opportunities for meals in the classroom so that kids are not necessarily segregated at the beginning of the school day in the cafeteria so that people can make a judgment about their financial well being. and so based on those kinds of standards and based on those kinds of activities we're seeing an increase. obviously, we don't have

attached to it additional reimbursement rates as we did with the school lunch program. but we are seeing increased participation and teachers will tell you they are happy to see this because a hungry child is not a child that's ready to learn. >> have you seen any money that nutrition programs save money? >> to the extent that we're dealing with the obesity issue, it's about $14 billion a year in annual health care costs for kids and those will increase whether they take the chronic diseases they are suffering from into adulthood. so to the extent we can get a hnl on the obesity issue and to the extent we provide proper nutrition on kids living in newer homes, we will see better health outcomes. more immunizations better cognizant immunizations as a result of the wic program. >> and that reflects reduced

costs? >> it obviously does. and the same thing i think the same argument could be true for the summer feeding program as well. >> thank the gentleman. dr. fox. >> thank you mr. chairman. and thank you mr. secretary for being here. i want to associate myself with the comments of the chairman in terms of his comments related to the imposition of rules from washington which impose one size fits all attitude. and i think -- and in my question, i will reflect that. but you said something in your comments in answer to a question that i think illustrates that so well. you said there's no reason why they cannot bring a snack. that is up until now. until such time as perhaps the agricultural department determines that children can't bring snacks.

that -- the attitude is you're allowing them to bring snacks. so that the rule making comes from here. the -- the permission is being given by washington. that ought to be freedom of choice. and the attitude that there's no reason means you haven't declared a rule. but let me ask my question about the competitive foods rule because it goes along with that. you issued a rule in 2013 called the competitive foods rule. you couldn't establishment the costs or the effect on school revenue without any certainty but you did note that the 247,000 comments which focused on finances, most of them were concerned that the rule would reduce school revenue. additionally, it's estimated school revenue authorities received on average 16% of their revenue from competitive food sales. so how do you determine the rule

was responsible action and requirement from this administration? >> well, first of all, let me clarify my remarks involving snacks if i might. i wasn't suggesting that folks were being allowed to bring snacks. they've always been allowed to bring snacks. there's never been a prohibitive about mom or dad allowing a youngster to take a snack to school to munch on. that aud ought to be clear. studies of the venting machines providing healthier knacks have indicated there has not

hopefully this hearing will allow us to continue to put that information out so people take advantage of those resources. >> you can give me some answer later, but i wonder if you tried in the department of agriculture to put the employees in the department of agriculture on the school food and lunch program for a week or two to see how they respond to it. i think that would be an interesting experiment. but i have a second question. the $á9usda's oig highlighted high rates of improper payment in the national school lunch and breakfast program. they had the lunch program is one of 13 federal high error programs. i know you and the ranking

member talked about the program. what are you doing to make sure the program is serving those most in need? >> there are a few reasons why we have the aerate that we have. there is a -- a certification issue involving parents basically providing information about income that is not necessarily accurate or incomplete. there is an aggregation that takes place at the school district where they basically aggregate all of the information and provide it to the state that sometimes errors are in that process.