TESTIMONY OF

U.S. REPRESENTATIVE JAMES P. McGOVERN

BEFORE THE

U. S. SENATE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE, NUTRITION, AND FORESTRY

JULY 27, 2000

THE IMPORTANCE OF A GLOBAL SCHOOL FEEDING PROGRAM

I want to thank the Chairman, Senator Lugar, and Ranking Member, Senator Harkin, for the opportunity to appear before your Committee this morning. Your years of service and leadership both on agriculture issues and on foreign aid and humanitarian issues are admired and appreciated by your colleagues and, I might add, the people of Massachusetts. By holding the first hearing to explore the importance of a universal or global school feeding program, once again this Committee demonstrates that leadership.

In the U.S. House of Representatives, I'm happy to report a bipartisan movement is growing in support of this initiative. Congressman Tony Hall, Congresswomen Jo Ann Emerson and Marcy Kaptur and I recently sent a bipartisan letter to President Clinton signed by 70 Members of Congress, urging him to take leadership within the international community on this proposal. I am attaching a copy of that letter to my testimony and ask that it be part of the Record of this hearing.

I would also like to enter into the Record as part of my testimony a letter in support of this initiative by the National Farmers Union. In their letter, NFU states: "The benefits to those less fortunate than ourselves will be profound, while our own investment will ultimately be returned many times over. The international nutrition assistance program is morally, politically and economically correct for this nation and all others who seek to improve mankind."

As Senators George McGovern, Bob Dole and Richard Durbin have just testified, the proposal we are discussing today is very simple: to initiate a multilateral effort that would provide one modest, nutritious meal to the estimated 300 million hungry children of the world. I do not wish to repeat their testimony, but there are points I would like to underscore.

Mr. Chairman, I believe the world moves on simple ideas.

This simple idea is also a big idea, made more compelling in its potential to move us closer to achieving many of our most important foreign policy goals:

reducing hunger among children

increasing school attendance in developing countries

strengthening the education infrastructure in developing countries

increasing the number of girls attending school in developing countries

reducing child labor

increasing education opportunities for children left orphaned by war, natural disaster and disease, especially HIV/AIDS

Over the next ten to twenty years, achieving these goals will significantly affect the overall economic development of the countries that participate in and benefit from this initiative. Children who do not suffer from hunger do better in school - and education is the key to economic prosperity. The better educated a nation's people, the more its population stabilizes or decreases, which, in turn, decreases pressures on food and the environment.

Our own prosperity is clearly linked to the economic well-being of the nations of Asia, Africa, Latin America and Eastern Europe. As their economies grow stronger, so do markets for U.S.-made products. The generation of children we help save today from hunger and who go to school will become the leaders - and the consumers - of their countries tomorrow.

This simple idea, Mr. Chairman, might prove to be the catalyst to a modern-day Marshall Plan for economic development in developing countries: A coordinated international effort to create self-sustaining school feeding programs and to enhance primary education throughout the developing world. Our farmers, our non-profit development organizations, and our foreign assistance programs could help make this a reality.

On the other hand, it could also fail.

It could fail, Mr. Chairman, if we in Congress fail to provide sufficient funding for this initiative; if we fail to provide a long-term commitment of at least ten years to this initiative; and if we fail to integrate this initiative with our other domestic and foreign policy priorities.

In its July 23^rd announcement, the Clinton Administration has made available $300 million in food commodities to initiate a global school feeding program. This is an admirable beginning for a global program estimated at $3 billion annually when it is 100 percent in place, with the U.S. share approximately $755 million per year.

To ensure the success of this initiative, we will need to commit ourselves to long-term, secure funding for this and related programs.

First, new legislation to authorize this program, and the necessary annual appropriations to carry it out, must at a minimum provide for the total U.S. share. These funds would not only provide for the purchase of agriculture commodities, but also for the processing, packaging and transportation of these commodities; for the increased agency personnel to implement and monitor expanded U.S. education projects in developing countries; and for an increased number of contracts with U.S.-based non-governmental organizations (NGOs) implementing these feeding and education programs in target countries.

A significant portion of this assistance will go to our farming community for the purchase of their products, and that's as it should be. Quite frankly, Mr. Chairman, I would rather pay our farmers to produce than watch them destroy their crops or pay them not to produce at all.

Second, the United States must lead and encourage other nations to participate and match our contributions both to the food and the education components of this project.

Third, we will need to increase funding for development assistance to strengthen and expand education in developing countries. One of the key reasons for supporting school feeding programs is to attract more children to attend school. If that happens, then the schools will need cooking centers, cooking utensils and cooks. Within a year or two, the increase in student population will require more classrooms. Those classrooms will need teachers and supplies. Additional development assistance, delivered primarily through NGOs, will be needed to successfully implement both the food and the education components of this proposal.

Fourth, we will need to secure greater funding for and recommit ourselves to debt relief and to programs that support and stimulate local agriculture and food production in these countries - two important priorities of our foreign assistance programs. Revenues that developing countries must now use to service their debt could instead be invested in education, health care and development. Successful school feeding programs also rely on the purchase and use of local food products, which are in harmony with local diet and cultural preferences. If the ultimate goal is to make these food and education programs self-sustaining, the promotion of local agricultural production and national investment in education are essential.

Fifth, our commitment to this effort must be long term. Too often initiatives are announced with great fanfare and then fade away with little notice given. Many development organizations currently active in the field with "food for education" programs are skeptical of this proposal. Many governments of developing countries share that skepticism. They have heard it before. They have seen programs announced, begun and then ended as funding abruptly or gradually ended. Our commitment to both the food and education components of this initiative must cover at least a decade.

Sixth, we do not need to re-invent the wheel to implement this program, or at least the U.S. participation in this multilateral effort. We have a long and successful history of working with our farming community to provide food aid. We have successful partnerships with NGOs already engaged in nutrition, education and community development projects abroad. We also have established relations with international hunger and education agencies, including the Food Aid Convention, the World Food Program, UNICEF and the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organizations (FAO).

Finally, Mr. Chairman, I believe we must also take a good long look at our own needs, and at the same time we contribute to reducing hunger abroad, we must make a commitment to ending hunger here at home. In a time of such prosperity, it is unacceptable that we still have so many hungry people in America. None of our seniors should be on a waiting list to receive Meals-on-Wheels. No child in America should go to bed hungry night after night. No family should go hungry because they don't know where the next meal will come from. No pregnant woman, no nursing mother, no infant nor toddler should go hungry in America. We have the ability to fund existing programs so these needs are met.

If I may, Mr. Chairman, I would also like to add one more comment. As first proposed, this initiative also had a universal WIC component. The United States is already involved in several nutrition and health programs for mothers and infants. I hope that we might also expand our assistance in this area and reach out to our international partners to increase their aid as well. We all know how important those early years of development are in a child's life. I fully support the school feeding and education initiative we are discussing this morning. But if a child has been malnourished or starved during the first years of their life, much of their potential has already been damaged and is in need of repair. Surely the best strategy would include health, immunization and nutrition programs targeted at children three years and younger.

I believe we can - and we must - eliminate hunger here at home and reduce hunger among children around the world.

I believe we can - and we must - expand our efforts to bring the children of the world into the classroom.

I hope you and your Committee will lead the way.

Thank you, Mr. Chairman.