WASHINGTON -- President Clinton, attempting to seize the initiative from House Republicans, unleashed an attack yesterday on preliminary GOP plans to trim federal school lunch and nutrition programs.
A bill including the cuts passed the House Economic and Educational Opportunities Committee yesterday on a 20-6 vote along party lines.
"I think it is ironic that . . . the single most important issue in the world to them seems to be to cut the school lunch program and end it," said Mr. Clinton after meeting with Democrats on Capitol Hill. "I think it would be a terrible mistake to put an end to it, to gut it, to undermine it. And I hope that my party will stand against this."
The president was referring to the National School Lunch Act, which provides free or discounted meals to some 14 million American children each day and the Women with Infants and Children program which supplements the diets of more than 2 million poor women who are pregnant or have infants and toddlers at home.
During the 1993-1994 school year, the last year for which records are complete, 69.4 percent of Baltimore students received free or reduced price lunches. Across Maryland that year, 29.5 percent of students participated in the program.
The school lunch and nutrition programs are considered success stories by Democrats, who say they save the government money in health-related expenses.
Both programs have enjoyed bipartisan support for years, and the school lunch program is widely identified with Republican President Richard M. Nixon, who greatly expanded it. The Republican proposal would give these functions to the states -- and give block grants to the states to cover expenditures on the food programs.
Administration officials and other Democrats, however, said that ending the "entitlement" nature of these programs would invariably result in less spending for them the future.
"You know, an old conservative adage used to be 'If it ain't broke, don't fix it,' " said Mr. Clinton. "Here's a program that isn't broke, that's done a world of good for millions and millions of children of all races and backgrounds."
Republican party chief Haley Barbour countered: "I am embarrassed for them that they would make the argument that the governors of their own states would receive this money -- and then let the children of their constituents starve."
The rhetoric was the sharpest so far in highlighting the philosophical gap between the House Republicans and their "Contract with America" campaign manifesto and the view of Democrats that the federal government -- not the states -- must protect the poorest Americans.
Barely two hours after the president spoke on Capitol Hill, reporters were summoned to the White House, where top officials elaborated on the president's remarks.
"This proposal is one of the most mean-spirited, short-sighted . . . proposals that I've seen debated in this town," White House Chief of Staff Leon E. Panetta said. "It would really take food out of the mouths of millions of needy school children, toddlers, infants and mothers."