Right use of and distribution of material, will create opportunity and desire for its use by large numbers of people. The people using land, material, labor, and time, will increase value of all parts and the movement of goods in all directions. One worldwide exchange pool, five regional banks, to help local banks. A man-size answer to a worthwhile job.

OUTLINE FOR EXTENDED WORLDWIDE CRUSADE FOR ECONOMIC AND MORAL DEVELOP

MENT

FIRST S. 1711, WITH ADMINISTRATOR

Does the noise of the whistle pull the train or the work of the engine? In words of the Bible: "By these works shall you know them." So, let's get the facts, state our case. Stand up to be counted in this world crusade. Goal: outlaw war, work for peace, but keep our powder dry.

1. Statement requesting approval of S. 1711 to begin now food for peace program. Lincoln's 10 standard principals:

(a) Request for subcommittee or Research Board.

(b) Offer of 10-part program (outline).

(c) Request for publishing material in small folder for easy distribution.

2. Outline of evolution and development in today's stage of cooperation:

(a) Awakening, (b) revolution, (c) cooperation, (d), a tremendous force of peoples crusade unlimited.

3. Review mutual security in light of these 10 parts. Save $1 billion.

4. National regional planning: Cooperation of national citizen efforts and desires; self-help, code (sample) for industry production; local, State, regional and central equals forums.

5. Short term (5 years) S. 1711 plus 10 House bills (food for peace bill) 16 Senators. Use of food to help small family earn their independence by working on such as the Volta River project for community development.

6. Cooperation with United Nations in special temporary:

(a) Aid H.R. 6681 (26 Congressmen sponsors).

(b) Use of food stamps plan to increase use of food for schools, camps, etc., from 20 to 80 million (mostly children).

7. Outline of family and community development self-support by use of S. 1711. Development loan. Stamp aid plus local land.

8. Inter-American Bank and suggesting of similar regional or continental banks (five banks), Europe, South America, Africa, Mideast, Far East.

9. Set up central barter and surplus pool to cooperate with five regional banks, to begin with now held $10 billion value surplus other soft moneys, Development Loan Fund, and other intergovernmental surpluses of other countries in 5 years upward of $30 billion available supplies, ready to be sold, exchanged, or held as reserve. For emergency or crop failure.

10. Reasons for use of voluntary army of qualified teachers of say 100,000 teachers, leaders, war objectors, to first study and prepare to serve in agriculture, vegetarian diet, 4-H work, sanitation, other trades. About half of world's people are vegetarian. Three charts:

(a) Bio food chart, homeopathic basis food for medicine.

(b) Absorption chart (mineral absorption), people react to mineral, etc. (c) Vitamin food chart for better daily food, strength, happiness, prevention of troubles and ill health; elimination of worlds evils by substituting happiness and kindness, by peoples projects.

Plan our work and work our plan.

D. T. LARSON, Sr., Hartford, Conn.

An ounce of prevention (by kindness) is worth a pound of cure (by guns).

STATEMENT OF REPRESENTATIVE GEORGE MCGOVERN, DEMOCRAT, SOUTH DAKOTA, BEFORE SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS RE INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR PEACE ACT, 1959 (S. 1711)

Mr. Chairman and members of the committee, although the American people are understandably concerned about the mounting level of farm surpluses, we ought not to lose sight of the potential value of our food abundance. Through

out history, those nations blessed with plentiful food resources have flourished; conversely, nations suffering from food shortages have languished.

"Give us this day our daily bread" is still the prayer of human beings in the far corners of the earth. For most Americans, it is the prayer of gratitude for ample food. But for more than a billion human beings it is the cry of hunger the feeble plea of the old man begging on the streets of Cairo, the child whimpering for milk in Bombay, the weary African mother trying to convert a few scraps into an evening meal for her family.

For several years, I have been advocating a more imaginative use of our farm abundance. It has seemed to me that piling up vast quantities of food in a world of misery and hunger is morally wrong, economically wasteful, and politically dangerous. Morally, we are losing sight of the Great Teacher's admonition to feed the hungry and clothe the naked. Economically, we are paying hundreds of millions of dollars a year in storage costs for commodities that are already beginning to deteriorate. Politically, we are creating an unfavorable image of Uncle Sam abroad when we wring our hands over our surplus food problem in full view of the world's hungry inhabitants.

I wonder if we fully realize the power of food in our relations with other countries. Is it possible that many of the underdeveloped nations now receiving expensive military shipments from the United States would be more impressed and better strengthened by less costly shipments of food?

Personally, I become more convinced each day that our most powerful material asset in building a world of peace and freedom is our food abundance. It seems probable to me that the remarkable productivity of the American farmer, if properly used, can be a more decisive factor in the struggle between freedom and communism than the sputnik. The hungry multitudes of Asia, Africa, and the Middle East are far more interested in bread than in any number of jets and space engines. Does anyone wonder what the crafty Khrushchev would do if he had America's surplus food to use in his international operations?

On January 29, I introduced House Concurrent Resolution 60, cited as the "Food for Peace Resolution." That resolution read as follows:

"Whereas the abundance of food and fiber produced by the American farmer is the marvel of the world; and

"Whereas most of the people of the world are undernourished; and

"Whereas the American people historically have been concerned with the wellbeing of other peoples; and

"Whereas in many nations of the free world, vital economic development programs are retarded and political stability is threatened by an inadequate supply of food; and

"Whereas the remarkable bounty of the free American farmer has resulted in accumulations of farm commodities for which there is insufficient domestic demand; and

"Whereas the Congress seeks to reduce unnecessary expenditures, including, where possible, those for commodity storage and for foreign assistance; and "Whereas the Soviet bloc has publicly challenged the United States and her allies to economic competition in demonstrating before the world the viability of their respective economic systems: Now, therefore, be it

"Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That it is the sense of the Congress that an agricultural abundance is one of America's greatest assets for raising living standards and promoting peace and stability in the free world; and that Congress favors action to resolve the paradox of American agricultural surpluses and world food needs by more fully utilizing the resources of the American farmer as an integral part of the U.S. foreign assistance program.

"SEC. 2. This concurrent resolution may be cited as the "Food for Peace Resolution."

As a partial implementation of the above resolution, I introduced on February 3, 1959, H.R. 3976, a measure to authorize the Secretary of Agriculture to make long-term contracts for the disposal of surplus agricultural commodities, and for other purposes.

This measure is identical to H.R. 2420, introduced by the gentleman from Texas, Mr. POAGE.

The legislation would enhance the effectiveness of our foreign economic aid policy by assuring underdeveloped countries a stable supply of agricultural commodities for domestic consumption on long-term credit during periods of

economic development. Typical of the nations which could profit greatly from such legislation are India, Pakistan, and Ghana. These countries provide challenging examples of friendly, free nations that are undergoing a period of rapid industrialization which is crucial for their national well-being, but which is putting an enormous strain on their economic resources. A painful shortage of food and disastrous price inflation are the natural concomitants of industrial payrolls in the developing countries. Indeed, unless the quantity of food can be increased, an expanding industrial payroll is a serious inflationary threat. Furthermore, available dollar exchange is required for capital investments rather than food and clothing if economic development is to move ahead.

If the United States intends to preserve the integrity of the free world we must provide these nations during their heroic struggle for betterment with necessary foodstuffs from our overflowing granaries so that we relieve some of the pressures on their own economies. This could be accomplished by legislation similar to the proposals by Mr. Poage and myself. This legislation recognizes that we must assure the developing nations long-term food supplies. They must be able to depend on such supplies rather than awaiting a year-by-year extension depending on the annual mood of Congress.

On April 20, I introduced H.R. 6530, a measure identical to legislation introduced by the senior Senator from Minnesota, Senator Humphrey, which we consider here today.

This measure, cited as the Food for Peace Act of 1959, contains the following provisions:

1. The sale of surplus farm commodities for foreign currencies to the extent of $2 billion a year for the next 5 years.

2. Outright grants of food surpluses to countries experiencing famine or chronic hunger.

3. Continued encouragement to church groups and other voluntary private agencies that wish to distribute surplus commodities overseas on a direct peopleto-people basis. This section of the bill also includes grants of surplus farm stocks to public and private agencies for use in the United States in the school lunch program, nonprofit summer children's camps, charitable institutions including hospitals, and needy citizens.

4. Agreements with friendly countries to establish foundations to promote education, health, research, and other projects from foreign currencies accruing to the United States through the sale of farm surpluses. We could literally convert surplus farm commodities into education and health.

5. A Peace Food Administration under the President to direct the various operations provided for in the legislation.

This measure represents significant amendments to Public Law 480, under which we are already moving surpluses to other countries. Included in that program is a truly fine section that permits the churches and other private institutions to distribute surplus commodities overseas. The church world service groups have done a magnificent job with this most valuable program. view, this particular activity is the finest single example of the kind of people-topeople relationships that the world desperately needs.

In my

"Food for Peace" is more than a slogan. It offers a partial solution to our agricultural problem and will at the same time relieve much of the suffering of a world that looks to America for leadership in this crucial hour.

I believe that there is no single act that could be taken by the 86th Congress that would be any more significant than to strengthen broadly our use of farm surpluses both at home and abroad.

It is my hope that this distinguished committee will see fit to act favorably on legislation similar to the Food for Peace Act of 1959.

STATE OF WISCONSIN,

Senator HUBERT HUMPHREY,
Senate Office Building, Washington, D.C.

EXECUTIVE OFFICE,
Madison, July 30, 1959.

DEAR HUBERT: I am happy to comply with your request for my comments and suggestions on your food for peace proposal incorporated in your bill, S. 1711. In my opinion, the revisions you are proposing in the Public Law 480 program would indeed make more effective use of our abundance of farm products to help build essential world conditions for peace and freedom, and thereby promote and strengthen the foreign policies of the United States.

Transferring this program from the Department of Agriculture to a new Peace Food Administration in the Executive Office of the President would be of great and constructive value from the foreign policy standpoint. The present emphasis is placed on surplus disposal-on getting rid of an unwanted and unwelcome embarrassment of food surpluses. This negative approach is bound to provoke a negative response in the receiving countries.

We shold rather give this program a positive emphasis. The fact is that abundant food supplies are a blessing in a world in which a billion people are undernourished. Our Government should treat these food supplies as a welcome asset which we are fortunate to have available. We should handle them as businesslike investments in economic and social progress in the less-developed countries, rather than as a giveaway. We should accept payment in local currencies, over an extended repayment period if necessary.

Your proposal to authorize food supply contracts for up to 10 years is likewise realistic and constructive. Neither sound investors nor businesslike borrowers will launch construction projects unless there is reasonable assurance of sufficient resources to complete them to the stage that they become productive. Food is one of the main economic requirements for capital construction projects in many of the less-developed economies. Only if they have an assured supply of additional food can these countries afford to start building the roads, bridges, sanitation and water systems, and other projects they need without creating destructive inflation. Our food supplies, therefore, can provide a large share of the capital cost of such projects.

But needed projects can not be commenced if there is a danger that the food supply might be cut off in midstream. Long-term food supply contracts would allow this serious bottleneck to be broken.

From our standpoint, with $9 billion in surpluses in our stockpiles today and $1.5 billion more already in sight, there should be no question that we can afford to negotiate a reasonable volume of food supply contracts for up to 10 years.

Another particularly important feature of your proposal is for the use of our surpluses for market development.

Many of the underdeveloped economies are likely to remain short of food, and are therefore potential permanent markets for American farmers. Utilization of our food surpluses as investments in their capital construction projects will, by itself, help to develop consumer acceptance of our products.

Nonfat milk powder-which is Wisconsin's major surplus farm product-is the world's best buy from the nutritional standpoint. Aggressive market development, with research, experimentation, and promotion in methods of preparing and merchandising this and exportable dairy products, offers valuable longrange benefits to Wisconsin dairymen.

Best personal regards.

Sincerely yours,

GAYLORD A. NELSON,
Governor of Wisconsin.

STATEMENT OF SENATOR RICHARD L. NEUBERGER, OF OREGON, FOR SENATE COMMITTEE ON FOREIGN RELATIONS HEARING ON S. 1711, INTERNATIONAL FOOD FOR PEACE ACT

Mr. Chairman, and members of the committee, I appreciate the opportunity to present my views in support of S. 1711, the International Food for Peace Act of 1959, of which I am pleased to be a cosponsor.

The people of my State of Oregon have for some time been aware of the dramatic force for goodwill of our oversea surplus food distribution programs, as implemented through the provisions of Public Law 480, the Agricultural Trade Development and Assistance Act. They know also that it has brought increased demand for grain and fruits produced in and shipped from Oregon, particularly to Asian markets.

I have several times called the attention of the Senate to the effective work of the Oregon Wheat Growers League in this respect. Working under Public Law 480, the Oregon Wheat League has demonstrated clearly to the people of Oregon the humanitarian and economic values which have resulted from the program, which its representatives have been able to implement in Japan, South Korea, India, and Pakistan.

I have heard from representatives of the Oregon Wheat League who have worked in the Orient with this program of the meaningful effects which even this small scale operation can have in terms of alleviating hunger in the all too prevalent areas of extreme poverty. After a trip this spring to Japan and Korea, Mr. Clancy Jean, executive vice president of the Wheat League, wrote, "In Korea the stabilizing effect of U.S. grain stocks is very noticeable. Because countries like Korea are basically agrarian-and short of food-this tends to stabilize the country's economy. Food prices no longer have the extreme fluctuations caused by the size of the rice crop, inadequate transportation, and spring poverty."

S. 1711, the bill now under consideration by this committee, would provide the machinery for expanding our present meager and inadequate oversea surplus food distribution into a truly effective and meaningful program.

The bill would

1. Permit expanded use of local currency sale of U.S. surplus agricultural commodities.

2. Expand use of existing international agencies for distribution of such foodstuffs.

3. Place the entire U.S. oversea food distribution program on a long-term basis.

4. Allow establishment of barter agreements.

5. Coordinate all elements of the program through establishment of a Peace Food Administration to operate this comprehensive program.

A long-range program combining these features under an effectively coordinated administration, such as S. 1711 would provide, would turn America's overflowing agricultural storage bins into storehouses of good will. I hope that the committee will give it full and favorable consideration.

THE NATIONAL FEDERATION OF BUSINESS
AND PROFESSIONAL WOMEN'S CLUBS, INC.,
Washington, D.C., July 14, 1959.

Statement on S. 1711, the International Food for Peace Act of 1959 respectfully submitted to the Honorable J. W. Fulbright, Chairman of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

From: Mrs. Ruby H. Poole, National Legislation Chairman.

The majority of our National Legislative Steering Committee voted to support S. 1711, the International Food for Peace Act of 1959. Our National Federation of Business and Professional Women's Clubs, Inc., is composed of 174,000 members functioning in 3,426 clubs in the 50 States, the District of Columbia, and Puerto Rico.

We believe that expansion of Public Law 480, as proposed in S. 1711, would help the new nations, the rising countries, those just coming out of colonialism, that need capital for development through receiving our food for peace. The great opportunity in this program is that we can sell to these countries for their own money. We can make use of these foreign currencies to pay our bills in these countries, and here is where our products can become food for peace. We can loan the money back to them for their economic development to build roads, schools, factories, or whatever they may need to improve themselves. We can be building further trade and promoting good will for our country by helping new countries promote health, education, and business expansion.

If a food for peace program were developed on a big enough scale, it would siphon off our depressing surpluses and put them to work in parts of the world that are short of food and fiber. It would upgrade our own economy and that of deficit countries.

As food for peace would not be sold in our normal dollar or pound sterling markets, but would operate where there are no dollars or British pounds, American foodstuffs can be used in such a way that they do not interfere either with American markets or markets of agriculture in the local country or in neighboring countries who have traditionally supplied their need.

We hope that the Senate Foreign Relations Committee will take favorable action on S. 1711.