Richard G. Lugar, United States Senator for Indiana

On June 8, 2008, U.S. Sen. Dick Lugar will keynote the 10^th anniversary celebration of Second Helpings in Indianapolis. Second Helpings rescues prepared and perishable food, re-prepares it into nutritious meals, and distributes those meals to organizations that feed hungry people. They also use some of the rescued food to train adults for careers in the culinary field, helping to eliminate hunger at its source.

Lugar has been actively engaged in raising awareness about hunger issues and global food shortages. On May 22, Lugar sent a letter to the editors of Indiana newspapers stating that both energy security and food security are necessary. On May 14, Lugar participated in a Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on global food shortages.

Lugar’s prepared text follows:

Thank you, Cindy Kelly, for your gracious introduction. And thank you to Cindy Hubert, the Board, staff, volunteers, and supporters of Second Helpings for inviting me to celebrate such an auspicious occasion for the Second Helpings organization and our Indianapolis community.

I would also like to thank Just Cause Catering for providing the food this evening. And I offer special gratitude to the culinary students for the wonderful demonstrations during this reception.

Each of us is gathered this evening because of a strong and vigorous commitment to the eradication of hunger. We seek to be agents of change because we know of the negative consequences hunger can have on physical and mental health, the stability of family, children’s education and development, and a stable economy. Quite simply, we want to make a difference – often one person, one family, and one community at a time. This can seem like a daunting task when we are faced with statistics that approximately 33 million Americans are in need of food assistance, with a large percentage of those Americans being children. The USDA recently reported that in 2007, federal food assistance expenditures totaled $54.7 billion, the seventh consecutive year of such spending increases. Furthermore, a recent article in the New York Times reported what this organization knows all too well – that Americans waste about 27% of consumable food, or about a pound of food per person per day.

But as other communities and like-minded advocates seek to address the needs of the hungry, we find inspiration in Second Helpings’ mission and its many supporters, staff and volunteers who have committed themselves to service. Today, we celebrate these remarkable years of advocacy that commenced when a small group of visionaries built upon their experiences to confront hunger in Indianapolis. Over ten years, an organization which began by securing 7,000 pounds of unused food to serve over 3,000 meals in the first month, now secures over 100,000 pounds of unused food to serve over 50,000 meals every month. The meals provided by Second Helpings go to 50 social service agencies in the Greater Indianapolis area, allowing these agencies to do what they do best in providing assistance to those in need. Furthermore, Second Helpings has also succeeded in training hundreds of individuals through the Culinary Job Training Program.

For all of these reasons, I was pleased to help author and pass into law the bipartisan Good Samaritan Hunger Relief Tax Incentive Act. This law enhances the current deductible value and allows farmers and small business owners to take a deduction when they donate food to their community food bank. Previously, this deduction was available to large corporations but not to small businesses. The program was first enacted into law in 2006 and has resulted in over $30 million worth of food donations annually. While the authorization for this provision has temporarily expired, we have worked to include an extension in legislation to be considered by the Senate next week. America’s Second Harvest estimates that permanently enacting the Good Samaritan Hunger Relief Tax Incentive Act would result in donations of 800 million meals over the next decade.

Extending these policies and increasing resources for food banks is critical to Second Helpings’ work and provides a perfect example of how government can serve as an effective partner with community controlled programs. Our country is better served through these partnerships and when government leaders actively support and initiate hunger relief efforts and strong farm and nutrition policies both domestically and internationally.

I had one of my first public service experiences with federal food assistance programs in the early 1960s when I served on the Indianapolis School Board. During my tenure, the board approved Indianapolis Public Schools’ participation in the National School Lunch Program. This was a novel concept at that time as Indianapolis had not previously solicited assistance with their nutrition programs. Since then, and throughout my Senate career, I have supported hunger relief efforts both domestically and abroad, specifically those related to childhood nutrition.

Our nation’s schools provide our children with over 30 million federally subsidized meals each day. For some of these children, these meals provide the bulk of their nutrition needs. Proper nutrition is the foundation of providing equal educational opportunities to our youth.

In 1996, I led the effort to successfully oppose replacing the school lunch program with block grants. This was an important moment in public policy because the nutritional needs of a poor child do not differ from state to state. In my view, the loss of the school lunch program would have been felt almost exclusively by schoolchildren who cannot be expected to be self-reliant. The long-term prosperity and security of our country could be damaged if we handicap the learning process of underprivileged children by dropping the national standard that they will be fed at lunchtime.

On a similar note, Congress must also keep in mind that while many children receive a significant portion of their food needs at school, this need does not subside during the summer. In 1999, I authored the Simplified Summer Food Service Pilot Program to reduce the administrative requirements for community organizations that wish to supply children with government funded summer lunches. This program has been an unqualified success. The 13 original pilot states have demonstrated a 51% increase in participation between 2000 and 2006. I am pleased to report that Congress recognized this success and recently expanded it nationwide.

I am pleased by these successes, but we must be realistic about our future challenges. The current increase in food prices world wide is neither an isolated incident nor a short term trend. And while some may view domestic hunger relief efforts as a regional or community issue, it is in fact closely associated with world markets.

The fundamental shift underlying both our energy and food markets, and commodities in general, is soaring global demand. Growing and wealthier populations in emerging economies consume more meats, grains, oil, coal and other commodities. And the impact of this demand is being felt around the world.

The U.S. Agency for International Development, the World Food Program, and the Food and Agriculture Organization estimate that people in nearly 40 countries are now facing food shortages and potential social unrest because of the increase in food prices and the decrease in the global availability of some cereal grains.

This situation was produced by a complex web of factors. On top of demand, the highest oil prices on record have driven up food costs all along the farm-to-market chain. The surge in oil prices has increased transportation, packaging, and fertilizer costs; and provided the impetus for developing alternative fuels, such as ethanol. We have also experienced droughts in some food exporting countries, expanded trade barriers, a weakening of the U.S. dollar, increased commodities speculation, and market-distorting subsidies.

These factors have come together to make the current food problem particularly acute. It is clear that food shortages are likely to recur frequently if the United States and the global community fail to increase assistance, open agricultural trade, and invest in agricultural productivity.

U.S. foreign assistance for agriculture has declined from an average of a little over $1 billion annually in the 1980s to an average of $328 million since 2000. Globally, only 4 percent of official development assistance from all donors in 2007 was allocated for agriculture. This amounts to neglect of what should be considered one of the most vital sectors in the alleviation of poverty.

We also must scale back agriculture subsidies and trade barriers that raise prices and undercut many farmers in the developing world. These policies are distorting agricultural trade and decision-making on a global scale and preventing many potentially productive farmers in the developing world from accessing markets. In most cases, agricultural subsidies and trade barriers have no rational basis other than the protection of politically powerful constituencies, a fact best demonstrated by the recent farm bill passed by Congress which blatantly disregards WTO ruling against cotton subsidies. As a result, all sectors of our economy are open to retaliatory measures. The United States should abide by our trade commitments and seek to remove export barriers and import tariffs.

We also need a more constructive debate about biotechnology. World leaders must understand that over the long term, satisfying global demand for more and better food can be achieved only by increasing yields per acre. In the 1930s, my father, Marvin Lugar, produced corn yields of approximately 40 to 50 bushels per acre. Today, the Lugar farm yields about 150 bushels per acre on the same land in Marion County, Indiana. The Green Revolution, from 1965 to 1985, saw the introduction of high yield seeds and improved agricultural techniques that resulted in a near doubling of cereal grain production per acre over 20 years. But yields may have to be doubled or tripled again.

I understand that some critics have singled out corn ethanol as the primary culprit in the food crisis. But as I described earlier, increased demand for corn-based biofuels is just one of numerous factors that have contributed to higher food prices. Compared to last year’s 146 percent price increase for wheat and 70 percent increase for rice – neither of which is used for biofuels -- the 46 percent increase in corn was relatively modest.

Furthermore, if corn biofuel production were curtailed, we would see additional pressure on global oil prices and a withering of the nascent biofuel distribution infrastructure. This infrastructure is essential if we are to hasten the commercialization of cellulosic technology, which promises abundant ethanol from non-food sources like switchgrass and forest wastes. Cellulosic technology has the potential to far outrun corn in the volume of ethanol produced, and it can do so at a lower cost. Wide commercialization of cellulosic ethanol would radically improve the energy outlook for rural areas all over the world.

Without a diversification of energy supplies that emphasizes environmentally friendly options, the national incomes of energy poor nations will remain depressed, with negative consequences for stability, development, disease eradication, and nutrition.

Despite these challenges, I remain optimistic that we can improve our food and economic security. With increased food assistance, both domestically and abroad, and with the commitment to the betterment of communities which is driven by each of you and organizations like Second Helpings, we will succeed. I commend Second Helpings on its remarkable ten years of service, and I wish each of you strength and vigor in carrying out its mission in the years to come.

###