PlainBillCongress, translated.Legislation. Context. Public interest.Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
Congressional Research Service
Version 36 · Passed House amended · Dec 8, 2010
Weekends Without Hunger Act - Amends the Richard B. Russell National School Lunch Act to direct the Secretary of Agriculture, subject to the availability of appropriations, to implement a pilot program providing commodities, on a competitive basis, to nonprofits for the provision of nutritious food to at-risk school children on weekends and during extended school holidays during the school year. (At-risk school children are those who participate in the school lunch program and reside in an area served by a school in which at least 50% of the students receive free or reduced price meals under the school lunch or breakfast programs.)
Includes elementary and secondary schools, school food authorities, food banks or pantries, homeless shelters, and other Secretary-approved emergency feeding agencies as eligible nonprofit recipients of such commodities.
Requires commodity recipients to satisfy safe food storage, handling, and delivery standards established by the Secretary.
Showing the opening paragraphs of the official summary.
Directs the Secretary to: (1) complete an interim evaluation of the pilot program by November 30, 2013; and (2) submit a final report to Congress by December 31, 2015, that contains an evaluation of such program and any recommendations the Secretary may have for legislative action.
Authorizes appropriations for the pilot program.
People & committees
Rep. Titus, Dina [D-NV-3] · D–NV
Legislative record
A procedural vote is different from passage. Passage in one chamber does not establish enactment. Explore the glossary.
Received in the Senate and Read twice and referred to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry.
The title of the measure was amended. Agreed to without objection.
Motion to reconsider laid on the table Agreed to without objection.
On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote. (text: CR H8112)
Passed/agreed to in House: On motion to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended Agreed to by voice vote.(text: CR H8112)
DEBATE - The House proceeded with forty minutes of debate on H.R. 5012.
Considered under suspension of the rules. (consideration: CR H8112-8114)
Mr. Sablan moved to suspend the rules and pass the bill, as amended.
Referred to the Subcommittee on Healthy Families and Communities.
Referred to the House Committee on Education and Labor.
Introduced in House
Introduced in House
Primary sources
Text links open the official source. We currently store references to these documents.
Source last updated: Dec 6, 2025. Consult Congress.gov for the current record.
AI Conversation Starters
Choose a perspective, copy a prompt, and paste it into your preferred AI. Each prompt includes the bill version and available official source links, and asks for counterarguments as well as supporting evidence.
Analyze H.R.5012 as objectively as possible. Explain its main provisions, who would be affected, possible benefits and harms, implementation, exceptions, and uncertainties. Present the strongest arguments for and against it, and identify evidence needed to assess its public impact.
Examine H.R.5012 through a progressive lens, focusing on fairness, access, economic inequality, and effects on vulnerable communities. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and distinguish stated goals from demonstrated outcomes.
Examine H.R.5012 through a conservative lens, focusing on fiscal responsibility, institutional stability, federalism, and the scope of government. Explain potential benefits, costs, and unintended consequences. Consider the strongest counterarguments and any provisions that challenge this perspective.
Examine H.R.5012 through a civil-liberties and limited-government lens. Consider individual rights, privacy, voluntary choice, accountability, and government power. Explain tradeoffs, possible safeguards, and the strongest counterarguments without assuming the proposal is beneficial or harmful.