GOP gives new meaning to an old plea: 'Hold the ketchup'

Editor's Note: This is the fourth story in an occasional series highlighting the topics addressed in the "Contract With America." Today's story focuses on school lunches.

By JON FEINBERG
Collegian Staff Writer

Ketchup -- used on a variety of foods from scrambled eggs to french fries. The flavorful topping has become the symbol of a political debate that is now burning on Capitol Hill.

Democrats wielded bottles of the 'tomatoey' condiment last week when they voiced opposition to a Republican proposal that would reform federal funding of school lunch programs. Using ketchup as a symbol of an item that would not be supplied to schools any longer, Democrats claimed that Republicans were willing to starve children in order to cut government spending.

However, Republican lawmakers have said the proposal, which is part of the "Contract With America's" Personal Responsibility Act, will make it easier for state governments to control welfare programs.

The measure calls for block grants of federal funding to replace the current system of entitlement programs.

Regardless of promises that the proposal will ease the burden on states, Megan Schaper, food service director of the State College Area School District, said the measure could cause problems locally.

Currently, the district receives reimbursements for school lunches from both the state and federal government, Schaper said. The amount of reimbursements is determined by the number of students who either pay for their lunches in full, receive a partial discount or get free lunches, she said.

If the proposal passes, Schaper said the district stands to lose nearly $70,000 in reimbursements for students who pay for their lunch. The district would also lose as much as $106,000 that is used for food products, she said.

The loss of reimbursements, which allow the district to have low-priced lunches, could result in a 45-cent increase in prices, she said.

Although needy children will still be able to receive free lunches, Schaper said those students that pay in full will likely be discouraged from buying school lunches.

This result could be harmful to education, Schaper said, because children will not be getting the nutrition necessary to stay awake and learn.

"Overall it's been proven that a school lunch provides more of the basic nutrients than a bagged lunch," she said. "A lot of kids are carrying a lot of snack cakes and chips."

Another worry is that block grants do not allow for adjustments if more students need free lunches, Schaper said.

"There's nothing built in there if there's an increase in need," she said. "We'll have to tell kids 'We're sorry we can't feed you.' "

Despite the worries of many local school districts, proponents of the bill emphasize the benefits of block grants.

U.S. Rep. Bill Clinger, R-Warren, has consistently expressed support for letting states control the funding of welfare programs.

Block grants are more efficient then the current system because state governments know better than Washington bureaucrats how to meet their needs, Clinger said in a news release. Another advantage, he said, is that money will not be wasted in administrative expenses in the federal government.

Clinger has also acknowledged the concerns of opponents to the measure but has maintained that it will not end welfare programs.

"In reality the block grant is is not going to be taking food out of the mouths of children," said Chris Krese, Clinger's press secretary. Clinger has urged fellow Republicans to compel state agencies to maintain the nutritional requirements of school lunches, he said.

Regardless of the promises made by many federal law makers, officials in the state government are unsure of how the measure will affect their funding.

"We're not really sure about what the impact will be in Pennsylvania," said Beth Boyer, spokeswoman for the state Department of Education. There will not be any specific details available until a definite proposal is passed, she said.

Krese said the bill is being written up in committees now and will come to the House of Representatives floor for debate in mid-March.