On June 16, the House Agriculture Subcommittee on Specialty Crops and Foreign Agriculture Programs held an oversight hearing on food aid programs, including P.L. 480 or Food for Peace, Food for Progress, the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust, and the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program.
In his opening remarks, Chair William Jenkins (R-TN) stated, “It is important for members of this Subcommittee to understand how vital international food aid is in promoting goodwill to countries that need food. It is also important to understand that food aid is important to American farmers who produce the food, American businesses who process, package and transport the food, and the American private voluntary organizations who are on the ground making sure the food goes to those who really need it.”
U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) Foreign Agricultural Service General Sales Manager Kirk Miller stressed that the Bush administration “remains committed to the international goal adopted at the 1996 World Food Summit to reduce by half the number of chronically hungry people by the year 2015. At the 2002 World Food Summit, the United States outlined three critical priorities for achieving that goal: reducing hunger by increasing agricultural productivity; ending famine; and improving nutrition worldwide.” He noted that in FY2004, “USDA supplied more than 1 million metric tons of U.S. food commodities valued at $375 million. In fiscal year 2005, we estimate that we will provide about 993,000 metric tons of commodities valued at $290 million.”
Highlighting various food aid programs administered by USDA, Mr. Miller said that the goal of the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program “is to use food as an incentive to improve education and nutrition,” adding, “For fiscal year 2005, USDA is negotiating 17 Food for Education agreements in 15 developing countries. These programs will assist an estimated 3.4 million beneficiaries, primarily school children. Overall, about $87 million will be available to provide 98,000 tons of food.” He explained that proposals are funded based on three criteria: they must provide incentives to help offset cultural barriers that limit education of girls; lessen the need for children to work rather than go to school; and improve literacy rates, school attendance, and support for education in recipient countries. Pointing out that the administration requested $100 million for the program in FY2006, Mr. Miller said that this funding would provide assistance to 500,000 more children than FY2005.
Explaining that most funding for food aid programs has been diverted to emergency assistance, U.S. Agency for International Development (USAID) Acting Assistant Administrator William Garvelink stated, “Our challenge is to use our resources in ways that save lives now while preventing emergencies in the future,” adding, “Programs that focus on longer term development initiatives are critical if we are to prevent and mitigate future emergencies. [P.L. 480] Title II development activities are implemented in a number of technical sectors, with a focus on interventions that improve household nutrition and increase agricultural productivity. Some of the sectors include: maternal and child health and nutrition, water and sanitation, agricultural productivity, natural resource management, education, support to orphans and vulnerable children and their communities, and microenterprise.” Mr. Garvelink noted that the HIV/AIDS crisis is “one of the most serious new barriers” to combating global hunger. “This epidemic threatens agricultural communities and rural economies around the world,” he stated, adding, “USAID has been supporting its implementing partners in responding to this challenge. An initial $10 million investment in 1999 grew to over $20 million in FY2004. Increasingly, partners are responding to community needs for programs that address reduction of food insecurity in the medium and long term in addition to responding to immediate food needs. USAID and its partners are developing these responses in coordination with the President’s Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief despite the availability of limited resources.”
Sean Callahan, vice president of overseas operations for Catholic Relief Services (CRS), said that food aid programs are “a wise investment” and “an effective tool that enables people to feed themselves,” adding that between 2002 and 2004, CRS activities under Title II “showed a doubling of rice yields in India, an 86% increase in breastfeeding in Africa, more than 1.1 million students fed, and an overall graduation rate of 42%.” Mr. Callahan noted that in FY2006, CRS and the Coalition on Food Aid “estimate that the historical 60% US share of global food aid amounts to $2 billion. Providing this level will allow the U.S. to meet both our share of relief and of development commitments around the globe.” He urged Congress to appropriate the full $2 billion during its consideration of the FY2006 spending bills.
A senior policy advisor for World Vision, Robert Zachritz, expressed his concern that the United States has become the largest donor of food commodities in humanitarian emergencies. He explained that this emphasis on emergency programs “has caused USAID to divert food aid from important developmental programs,” which “is unfortunate because it takes away from efforts to end the cycle of poverty and hunger.” He urged Congress to focus more attention on non-emergency Title II programs during consideration of the next farm bill; appropriate $2 billion for international food aid programs in FY2006; and continue its support for Food for Progress, the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program, and the Bill Emerson Humanitarian Trust.
The subcommittee also heard testimony from representatives of soybean, wheat, and rice producers and the North American Millers’ Association. Bart Ruth, former president of the American Soybean Association, said that non-emergency food aid programs “are critical to our vision of aid to the developing world,” adding, “While emergencies need to be addressed, the development programs focus on improving overall health and nutritional status of the population. That means prolonged life, and prolonged ability to work. In countries devastated by AIDS many will not receive any form of medical treatment, and food may be the only means of keeping up the productive cycle of an individual.” He added, “If we abandon non-emergency food assistance now, we may never be able to alleviate the HIV/AIDS crisis in many countries. Even though the President’s [Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief] is well-intentioned and has potential to alleviate suffering, many caregivers on the front lines of the struggle report a huge need for proper nutrition that can sustain a viable immune system.”
