Urging West Virginia’s members of Congress to ask the President not to cut funding for the Local Food in Schools and Child Care nutrition
Summary
House Concurrent Resolution 96 urges West Virginia’s congressional delegation to ask the President not to cut federal funding for the Local Food for Schools and Child Care (LFSCC) program. The resolution describes the program as a federal initiative that helps schools and child care sites buy fresh and minimally processed food from local farmers, ranchers, and food businesses, while also supporting child nutrition and rural economies. It emphasizes that the program was intended to provide states with $660 million over three years and allowed states flexibility to design local purchasing strategies.
The resolution is not a state regulatory bill and does not create or amend West Virginia law. Instead, it is a formal legislative request directed at federal officials, expressing the Legislature’s support for continued federal appropriations for LFSCC and related local food purchasing efforts. If adopted, its practical effect would be to transmit the Legislature’s position to the state’s congressional delegation, but it would not itself change state statutes, appropriations, or agency authority.
Impact
HCR96 has no direct effect on West Virginia statutes or state agency duties. Its impact is primarily symbolic and political: it places the Legislature on record in support of continued federal funding for the Local Food for Schools and Child Care program and asks West Virginia’s members of Congress to oppose cuts. The resolution is aimed at federal nutrition policy, school meal procurement, local agriculture markets, and child care food programs, rather than state law.
Sentiment
The overall sentiment in the bill text is strongly supportive of the LFSCC program and opposed to the federal decision to terminate its funding. The resolution frames the program as beneficial to children, schools, child care providers, farmers, ranchers, food businesses, and rural communities, and it presents the funding cut as harmful. No committee transcript or vote record is available, so there is no recorded legislative debate or roll-call evidence of dissent in the provided materials.
Contention
The main point of contention is the federal termination of LFSCC funding, which the resolution characterizes as a harmful cut to local food purchasing and child nutrition. Supporters of the resolution emphasize local control, fresh food, economic benefits for farmers, and accountability through federal oversight. Potential critics would likely focus on federal spending, program termination decisions, or whether such resolutions are an appropriate use of legislative time, but no opposing arguments or named opponents appear in the provided record.