These include the development of new markets for U.S. agricultural commodities; purchase of strategic and critical materials; procurement of military equipment, materials, facilities and services for the common defense; purchase of goods or services for other friendly countries; promotion of balanced economic development and trade among nations by loans to private business; payment of U.S. obligations abroad; loans to promote multilateral trade and economic development; financing international educational exchange; financing the translation, publication and distribution of books and periodicals.

Also included in the uses of foreign currencies are the collection and dissemination of scientific and technological information; the conducting and supporting of scientific activities overseas; purchase, lease or rental of sites and buildings and grounds abroad for U.S. Government use; participation in trade fair activities; and providing assistance in the expansion or operation in foreign countries of established schools, colleges or universities founded or sponsored by citizens of the United States.

Title II of Public Law 480 authorizes the President to furnish out of stocks owned by the Commodity Credit Corporation surplus agricultural commodities to friendly governments to meet famine or other urgent or extraordinary relief requirements the main purpose being to provide quick aid in emergencies on a government-to-government basis.

Title III permits distribution of farm products owned or controlled by the Commodity Credit Corporation to areas in the United States which are in acute distress because of unemployment or other economic causes. It also makes these commodities available in connection with major disasters and to voluntary agencies such as CARE for use abroad. It further authorizes the Secretary of Agriculture to barter or exchange agricultural commodities owned by CCC for: (1) strategic or other materials not produced domestically in sufficient quantity to meet U.S. requirements; (2) materials, goods or equipment required in connection with foreign economic, military aid and assistance programs; or (3) materials or equipment required in substantial quantities for offshore construction programs.

Mutual security distributions dovetail with Public Law 480

Another program involving exports of surplus agricultural commodities is authorized in section 402 of the Mutual Security Act. Under this authority-as under title I of Public Law 480—surplus agricultural commodities are sold for foreign currencies. While many of the procedures are similar under these two laws, their primary purposes are different.

Under Public Law 480 the main purpose is to regain and expand markets in foreign countries for U.S. agricultural commodities. Under section 402 of the Mutual Security Act, the main objective is mutual security, and Congress has specified that of the current mutual security appropriation, $175 million is to be used to finance the export and sale of U.S. agricultural commodities. The foreign currencies from these sales are used for requirements of the mutual security program in foreign countries for economic programs and projects and for military (troop) support.

The national school lunch program

Among the Government food distribution programs which have an individual legislative authority is the national school lunch program. Part of the funds for this program are a direct congressional appropriation; part are a transfer of section 32 funds; and a large part are provided locally. The program requires, among other things, that one-half pint of milk be served with each type A lunch. For the 1958-59 school year, Congress appropriated $110 million for apportionment among the States to reimburse schools for food purchases made locally, and for direct purchases by the U.S. Department of Agriculture for distribution to participating schools. Another $35 million of section 32 funds also was designated for the purchase and distribution of foods.

Basic to the school lunch idea is that proper nutrition and good eating habits contribute to satisfactory schoolwork. Early in the century "penny lunch programs" came into vogue and were gradually expanded. During the 1930's, school lunch programs began drawing upon farm surpluses. Enabling legislation made possible the distribution of these foods on a limited basis to schools serving free lunches in 1932 and 1933.

Passage of the act of 1935 made possible the expansion of this distribution and in 1939 the U.S. Department of Agriculture announced a special program to

further expand school feeding through the use of surplus foods on the basis of the number of needy children served in the schools. During the succeeding 5 years the relief aspect of school feeding programs gradually shifted. Equal emphasis was placed on: (1) improving the health of children; and (2) encouraging the increased consumption of agricultural commodities.

In 1943 the Department of Agriculture inaugurated the program under which reimbursement was paid from section 32 funds to meet a part of the food purchase cost. Schools participating in the cash reimbursement program were required to meet certain nutritional standards in the lunches served, provide free or reduced-price meals for children unable to pay, and operate their lunch programs on a nonprofit basis. In 1945, Congress spelled out the conditions under which Federal assistance to school lunch programs would be provided. On the basis of these provisions the National School Lunch Act was passed in 1946.

Under the National School Lunch Act the basic responsibility for program administration is in the hands of State and local education officials. The Secre tary of Agriculture is responsible for establishing standards for program operations and the maintenance of general supervision. Funds are made available each year by congressional appropriations. Not less than 75 percent of the amount must be apportioned to various States where it is used by State educational agencies except in States where the agencies are not permitted to disburse funds to private schools. In these instances the Department has the responsibility.

Section 6 of the National School Lunch Act provides that a part of the annual appropriation for the program is to be used by the U.S. Department of Agriculture in making large volume purchases of food for distribution to participating schools.

The special milk program

The special milk program for children is unique among Government food distribution programs in that it applies to only one commodity-milk. Its purpose, moreover, is to make possible the consumption, by children, of more milk than they otherwise would have.

Congress initiated the program in 1954 with an initial authorization for the expenditure of up to $50 million from the funds of the Commodity Credit Cor'poration. In April 1956 the authorization was increased to $60 million for the fiscal year 1956, and to $75 million for the fiscal years 1957 and 1958. Recent congressional actions has further increased available funds to $78 million for fiscal year 1959. The program also was expanded to include nonprofit summer 'camps and child-care institutions. Congress has extended the program until June 30, 1961.

Special Milk Program Continues Gains

Program administration is handled by the U.S. Department of Agriculture which enters into agreements with State agencies. In some cases the State educational agency administers the program both in schools and in child-care institutions. In States where no State agency may disburse funds to private schools or institutions, the Department takes on that function.

State agencies determine the rate of reimbursement per one-half pint of milk. Maximum rates of reimbursement, together with maximum allowable handling charges per half-pint unit, are determined by the Department of Agriculture. Maximum rates of reimbursement are 4 cents for each one-half pint of milk served to children over and above the one-half pint of milk served as a part of each school lunch under the national school lunch program, and 3 cents for each one-half pint of milk used in all other schools, or in child-care institutions.

-Distribution in the armed services

Another distribution program, exclusively for dairy products, is the plan under which their increased use is stimulated in the Army, Navy, Air Force, Marines, the hospitals of the Veterans' Administration, the U.S. Coast Guard, and the U.S. Merchant Marine Academy.

The program was approved by Congress in 1954 under section 202 of the Agricultural Act of 1949. It involves the use of Commodity Credit Corporation stocks, or reimbursement by Commodity Credit Corporation for armed services purchases of milk and dairy products in excess of normal purchases.

The effectiveness of the program is evidenced by the fact that consumption of fluid milk in the military has tripled that provided by the basic ration. From the program's start in November 1954 up through 1958, the armed services used approximately 1.7 billion pounds and the Veterans' Administration 14.6 million pounds of fluid milk over normal consumption. From May 1953 through March 1959, 159.7 million pounds of butter and 10.7 million pounds of cheese were transferred from CCC stocks, over and above the amounts provided in the basic ration.

The proof of the programs

The effectiveness of the Government food-distribution programs in utilizing dairy products is well verified by facts and figures. On April 28, 1954, when Commodity Credit Corporation had peak holdings of 599.3 million pounds of nonfat dry milk, it also had 363.5 million pounds of butter, and 384.1 million pounds of cheese. As of March 31, 1959, the comparative figures were 16.2 million pounds of butter, 6.7 million pounds of cheese, and 43 million pounds of nonfat dry milk.

Between July 1, 1953, and June 30, 1958, the programs under section 32 and section 416 have accounted for the domestic distribution of 499 million pounds of butter, 452 million pounds of cheese, and 458 million pounds of nonfat dry milk. In foreign distribution, section 416 accounted for 237 million pounds of butter, 123 million pounds of butter oil, 569 million pounds of cheese, and 1.8 billion pounds of nonfat dry milk.

To these figures must be added the amounts exported under titles I and II of Public Law 480 and under the mutual security program.

Under Public Law 480 exports have totaled 32.2 million pounds of evaporated and condensed milk, 3 million pounds of dried whole milk, 223.3 million pounds of nonfat dry milk, 84.2 million pounds of cheese, 59.2 million pounds of butter, and 13.3 million pounds of butter oil, anhydrous milk fat, and ghee.

Sales for foreign currencies under the mutual security program and economic aid from July 1954 through December 1958 accounted for exports of 346 million pounds of evaporated and condensed milk, 4.7 million pounds of dried whole milk, 6.7 million pounds of nonfat dry milk, 57,000 pounds of cheese, and 4.7 million pounds of butter.

In summary, the several distribution programs have proved their worth as efficient tools in the utilization of surpluses for the benefit of both consumers and producers. Utilization through domestic outlets such as school lunch programs, needy persons, and charitable institutions, and through foreign outlets for the relief of hunger by donations and in sales for foreign currencies have been constructive not only from the standpoint of nutritional improvement, but also from the standpoint of contributing toward economic stability in agriculture. Senator HUMPHREY. Next is Mrs. Annalee Stewart, Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. Mrs. Stewart, you are always welcome.

STATEMENT OF MRS. ANNALEE STEWART, LEGISLATIVE SECRETARY, U.S. SECTION, WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM

Mrs. STEWART. Thank you.

Senator HUMPHREY. We are pleased that you are here to represent the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom. Do you want to proceed?

Mrs. STEWART. Thank you. Mr. Chairman, I appreciate the opportunity to give the views of our organization.

My name is Mrs. Annalee Stewart, and I am legislative secretary of the U.S. section of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, 214 Second Street NE., Washington, D.C. The league has long been interested in reducing the great disparities in living standards between the advanced and the less-developed countries, which we regard as a grave threat to peace. At its triennial international congress to be held this month in Stockholm, representatives of the U.S. section of the league will join with members from many other countries in appraising ways and means of promoting economic development throughout the world.

I might also say, Senator, that I am flying a week from tomorrow to Copenhagen where I am to speak at the international seminar for young people, which has been arranged by the Danish section of the Women's International League for Peace and Freedom, with the assistance of a grant by the Danish National Commission for UNESCO, and I am going to have the privilege of speaking to these young people on the theme, "How Nongovernmental Organizations Work To Influence National Policy for Better East-West Relations." It will be my privilege to speak about the ways in which this committee, your committee, has worked, and others, in trying to bring about better relations and to show how we, in the United States, have an opportunity to speak directly to our Senators and Representatives. I am always glad to tell people of other countries because we have such a privilege in that way. I am taking some of the testimony to show them what we are doing for peace here, and what you are doing not only here but in the field of world disarmament through the United Nations.

SUPPORT OF WOMEN'S INTERNATIONAL LEAGUE FOR PEACE AND FREEDOM FOR S. 1711

The league supports the food for peace bill because we believe that America's abundance of food should be used to further the causes of peace and development, and that the present bill offers the best approach to the use of our agricultural surpluses for these ends. We cannot claim to be economic experts, able to evaluate all the ramifications of the agricultural support program. In some ways that program does conflict with policies long advocated by our organization, since we have always believed that freer international trade-with respect to tariffs, embargoes, subsidies, and "curtains"-is in the interest of all peoples. Yet we realize that farmers alone cannot be expected to bear the brunt of a sudden cessation of Government subsidies while other sections of the economy continue to receive them. Eventually we believe that the American market must be opened more freely to imports from abroad, thus generating a greater outflow of dollars through trade, and enabling other countries to buy our agricultural and other products with earned dollars. Whatever may be said as to the wisdom of the policies which have led our agriculture so far away from a free market basis-and we are not debating that today-surpluses above what others can buy for dollars must for the present be accepted as a fact and their great constructive potential must be fully utilized at home and abroad.