[Congressional Record Volume 163, Number 34 (Monday, February 27, 2017)]
[Senate]
[Pages S1436-S1439]
From the Congressional Record Online through the Government Publishing Office [www.gpo.gov]
Ending Global Hunger
Mr. MORAN. Mr. President, I am here on the floor tonight to speak
about our Nation's efforts to end global hunger. It is an undertaking
that countless individuals, foundations, and government agencies have
devoted a significant amount of time, resources, and effort attempting
to solve.
Those who have dedicated their lives to feeding the hungry deserve
our deepest gratitude and respect. They made the decision to improve
the lives of others less fortunate than themselves, and they often have
done that at their own loss of comfort and their own well-being. There
is no nobler a calling than trying to do something for someone else,
especially when it costs you something as well.
Regardless of our faith, our creed, or our religion, almost all of us
are taught early in life that it is our duty to help those in need.
Americans consistently have taken that moral responsibility to heart.
As individuals, we help our neighbors through our churches and other
local organizations. We help feed our hometowns. As a country, we lead
the world in providing food aid to millions of people who are in need
of that assistance.
In 1983, at a signing of a World Food Day proclamation, President
Reagan cited 450 million people in developing countries who were
undernourished. Our global population has risen by 3 billion people
since that time, and today there are nearly 800 million undernourished
people in the world who do not have enough food to lead healthy, normal
lives.
While strides are being made in the fight against food insecurity, it
is clear that our commitment cannot waiver, and ending hunger must
remain a priority.
At that same White House ceremony, President Reagan chided the Soviet
Union for failing to provide humanitarian relief to those in need.
President Reagan offered a direct challenge to the Kremlin to explain
why the Soviet Union only provided weapons but not food assistance to
the underdeveloped world.
While the threats in the world today are different than those faced
during the Cold War, American food assistance remains a powerful
foreign policy tool. American food aid elevates our country's moral
standing and leadership in the world, as realized by President Reagan,
but our efforts to reduce food insecurity also serve our own national
interests by promoting political, economic, and social stability in the
world.
Food-related hardships and hunger--either due to price increases or
food shortages--act as a catalyst for protests and armed conflicts. We
have witnessed regions of the world that are critical to America's
strategic interests descend into chaos due to people not having access
to affordable food.
From 2007 to 2011, spikes in global food prices led to increased food
insecurity and unrest in the world. In the Middle East and North
Africa, food-related challenges were one of the major drivers of the
mass uprising that we call the Arab Spring.
In Syria, Islamic State rebels use the promise of food and basic
necessities to recruit soldiers. Food shortages have led refugees to
leave camps and return to an active war zone in search of food for
themselves and their families.
Closer to home, food prices contributed to rioting in Haiti in 2007
and 2008. As food prices increased and economic conditions
deteriorated, U.S. Coast Guard interceptions of people from Haiti
attempting to immigrate to our country rose by 20 percent, straining
Coast Guard resources.
The National Intelligence Council warns that a continuation of the
fundamental contributors to food insecurity--such as expanding
populations, slowing of agricultural yields, and gaps in infrastructure
and distribution systems--will result in increased food insecurity,
hunger, and instability in the
[[Page S1437]]
Middle East, Africa, and South Asia over the next 10 years without
greater, greater intervention by the United States and others.
In America, we take our food system for granted. Americans spend less
than 10 percent of our disposable income on food. Even though less than
2 percent of our country is directly engaged in farming, Americans have
direct access to the safest, most affordable, and highest quality food
in the world.
I am proud of the wheat farmers and the ranchers in my home State of
Kansas. Agriculture production is a noble calling. Feeding the world is
important and a meaningful way to spend one's life, and Kansas families
have done it for generations.
Our country's food system at home is critical to our own security and
well-being, and helping other countries achieve food security and
stability serves our national interests as well.
Utilizing U.S.-grown commodities in food aid programs also benefits
American farmers and ranchers by creating export markets for our
agricultural products, sometimes reducing an excess of supply.
Almost 10 percent of exports of the hard red winter wheat grown in
Kansas in 2016 was utilized by international food programs,
representing a significant market share for wheat grown in our State.
Today's low commodity prices only serve to highlight the need for ag
export markets for producers.
A few months ago, I called on the U.S. Agency for International
Development and the Department of Agriculture to significantly increase
the amount of wheat in our global food aid programs.
Our country's abundance of food imparts a moral duty to provide
humanitarian relief to those in need. We have witnessed great
unsettlement and mass migration in the world due to political
instability and civil wars. The vast majority of people affected,
including displaced refugees whose lives were uprooted and whose
ability to feed themselves was taken away, are suffering through no
fault of their own.
In other parts of the world, people are born into such poverty that
simply finding sufficient food is a daily challenge. Reading recent
articles, the question has often been: Where am I going to find food to
feed my family?
People in Cambodia indicate they have no idea. It is a day-to-day,
moment-to-moment, meal-to-meal experience. Even if that food is
available, it is often not accessible to people without the means to
pay for it.
Many of these people--weary, desolate, and hungry--survive only
because of the generosity of the American people. Those hungry and less
fortunate depend on a nation with moral strength and clarity to give
them a helping hand.
There is still more work to be done in the fight against hunger, and
America ought to continue to rise to the challenge of providing food
and helping people feed themselves throughout the world.
It is a turbulent world stricken with conflict, and sometimes the
hunger and problem seem so great that it would be easy just to walk
away and say it is too big of a problem to solve. But certainly we have
the ability.
We have the means to feed one person. If we can feed one, why not
two? And if we can all feed two, why not three?
We can't simply look at this challenge as being too big to overcome
and that the world will always have hungry people and then just say: We
have no responsibility to respond.
Food aid provided by the U.S. reduces despair and increases
stability. My point is that it has a moral component. It is the right
thing to do, but it is also beneficial to our own Nation, providing
stability around the globe and increasing our own national security.
The importance of these issues motivated me when I was in the House
to chair the House Hunger Caucus, and now I cochair the Senate Hunger
Caucus. I can't remember what year it was, but I had a midlife crisis.
I have probably had several since then. But my thoughts were at that
point in time, back in my House days, that at least then I thought of
myself as a pretty good Member of Congress. I answered the mail. I met
with constituents. I visited my State on a weekend-by-weekend basis. I
had input. I did the things that a good Member of Congress is supposed
to do. I represented my constituents well.
But we all can do something more than just be a good Member of
Congress, and that was my conclusion. If there is an issue that we want
to champion, if there is an issue on which we want to make a
difference, if there is a moral cause we want to rise to the occasion
to support, hunger, particularly for Congressman--now a Senator--from
Kansas, ought to be a place I put my stake in the ground and go to
work.
I suppose I have taken a few months off of this issue--and maybe I am
having another midlife crisis--but it is time for me to reengage and to
engage effectively as best I can to see that we live up to a moral
commitment that also benefits our own country.
So I now cochair the Senate Hunger Caucus. I have since I came to the
Senate. I serve with a number of my colleagues, including the one who
is on the floor tonight, the Senator from Illinois. I ask my colleagues
to join us in the effort to meet the needs of a hungry world, to take
the step to see that one more person is fed, one more family has less
insecurity, one more mother or father no longer worries about whether
their children are going to go to bed hungry.
Former Kansas Senator Bob Dole has set many standards in the way that
he led his life, which we should all aspire to meet, not the least of
which is his unwavering commitment to ending hunger. Those of us in
this Senate today ought to seek to carry on Senator Dole's legacy. I
would encourage my colleagues to join me and others as we work to put
the Senate Hunger Caucus together, to enhance its ability to address
the issues that we face in the real world to fight hunger.
I am committed to reengaging these efforts. Along with the other
caucus cochairs--Senators Boozman, Casey, Durbin, and Brown--I would
extend an invitation to each of my colleagues to join that caucus so
that we can take the small step of fighting hunger by becoming more
knowledgeable, more aware and engaging in the moral and strategic
battle to end hunger around the globe.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER. The Senator from Illinois.
Mr. DURBIN. Mr. President, let me start by commending my colleague
from Kansas. It is an honor to join him in this Senate Hunger Caucus
effort. He does it in the tradition of Senator Bob Dole of Kansas.
Along with George McGovern, they were two of the most unlikely
political allies. They really dedicated a large part of their public
lives to fighting hunger.
I am happy to join him in the memory of Paul Simon, who did the same
for the State of Illinois. So I am looking forward to joining the
Senator in this effort. I hope the Senator doesn't have to suffer
another midlife crisis in the future. Let's continue this in a good
bipartisan spirit.
I thank the Senator from Kansas.
Mr. President, I have come to the floor repeatedly in recent months
to raise concerns about the Russian cyber act of war against our
Nation, about Russia's aggression elsewhere against the West, this
President's disturbing alliance with Russia, and the majority party's
incredible silence on the Senate floor on these matters.
Well, I just spent several days visiting our allies in Eastern
Europe--notably Poland, Lithuania, and Ukraine--and return even more
concerned.
You see, regardless of the partisan leanings of who is in government
in these nations, the concern is the same.
Is the United States, history's champion of democracy and collective
security in Europe, backing away from these values and commitments just
as Russia is more aggressively challenging them?
Is the American President really using phrases like ``enemy of the
people'' to describe a free press--a term used by Soviet dictator
Joseph Stalin, that was so ominous that Soviet Premier Nikita
Khrushchev later demanded the Communist Party halt its use because it
``eliminated the possibility of any kind of ideological fight''?
Are the Trump administration's bizarre blinders to Vladimir Putin's
aggression and true nature--and the silence of too many of my
Republican colleagues on this danger--a harbinger of some kind of
Western retreat to the Russians?
[[Page S1438]]
Well, I met with many of our dedicated diplomatic and military
personnel in the region who, as part of ramped up reassurance efforts
by the previous administration, are working to keep Putin in check.
These included more than 100 U.S. military personnel working with
their Lithuanian counterparts about an hour outside of the capital in
Rukla. These U.S. troops and their colleagues rotate out of Poland and
throughout the Baltics to augment their NATO partners in deterring a
Russian attack.
Mr. President, the concerns about Russian aggression are legitimate
and warrant serious attention. Let's take a look at just recent Russian
actions in Europe. One day after President Trump spoke to Putin on the
phone in late January, Russian-backed separatists increased their
fighting in Ukraine--1eading to the highest death toll in months.
After Vice President Pence tried to reassure allies at the Munich
Security Conference the other week, Russia agreed to start accepting
identification documents issued by the separatists in eastern Ukraine--
one step closer to annexing the illegally seized territory.
Putin is strong-arming Belarussian President Lukashenko to allow
Russian troops to remain based in Belarus following an upcoming
significant military exercise. Russia is putting more and more
sophisticated weapons into Kaliningrad, which when combined with
permanent troops in Belarus, will significantly increase security
threats to the region. Russia just announced a referendum to rename
land it illegally seized by force in Georgia.
Putin is trying to stir unrest in Kosovo where NATO is trying to
maintain stability after the horrific violence of the Balkan war. He
attempted a coup in Montenegro. And Russia continues its aggressive
disinformation campaign and cyber attacks throughout Europe, trying to
manipulate elections and sow instability and lack of trust in
democratic institutions. One Polish expert summed all this up wisely,
saying ``if the United States does not respond to the Russian attack on
its election, Putin will feel he has a free hand to keep taking such
destabilizing actions in the West.'' I worry that is what is already
happening.
So, what is the response to these actions by this White House and the
majority party--the party of Ronald Reagan who understood the Russians
so well?
So far, with the exception of a few important voices, largely
silence.
In fact, as I have mentioned here before, since October when the
first intelligence reports came out about the Russian attack on our
election, not a single Republican has come to the floor to discuss this
act of cyber war by a former KGB official on our country.
And our President, who has attacked hundreds by Twitter for even the
most benign perceived slight, has refused to say anything negative
about Putin.
Obviously, we need to get to the bottom of the Russia attacks on our
election and if anyone in the Trump campaign had inappropriate contact
with the Russians. An independent commission led by respected
individuals such as Sandra Day O'Connor or Colin Powell could lead such
an effort. And we need to see the President's tax returns to clarify
what his son said in 2008 regarding Trump's businesses seeing ``a lot
of money pouring in from Russia.''
We need to pass the bipartisan Russian sanctions bills pending in the
Senate Foreign Relations Committee--one that tightens sanctions on
Russia for its actions here and abroad and one that requires
congressional approval before any sanctions on Russia are lifted.
And we need to make sure we include continued support to Ukraine and
for the European Reassurance Initiative in our next appropriations
bills.
Mr. President, I remember as a young Congressman trying to get into
Lithuania more than 25 years ago when it courageously tried to hold an
election breaking free from the Soviet Union.
Those brave Lithuanians had little but their idealism and a few
rifles to protect themselves from the Soviet tanks.
But in the end they prevailed, and one by one, Eastern European
nations freed themselves from Communist tyranny, a struggle Ukraine is
still fighting against Russia.
Today one can still visit the KGB museum in the capital of
Lithuania--a hall of horrors that nobody should ever forget. One
Lithuanian member of parliament I met, who remembers life not only
under the Soviets but also under the Nazis, recalled how his mother had
survived 4 years in a Nazi concentration camp.
He emotionally said that he had always seen the United States as the
champion of freedom, democracy, and a Western global order. I could
tell he was deeply worried about any backsliding on that important role
and any possibility of returning to the darker days in Europe.
I don't know exactly what Steve Bannon is whispering in Trump's ear
regarding his dark world view and indifference to the transatlantic
Western alliance, but this post World War II partnership has served
American and global interests. The relationship has brought stability
to Europe after decades of horrific war. It has brought democracy and
common markets and served as a check against the Soviet Union and now
Russia.
I am glad Vice President Pence made some references to this at the
Munich Security Conference, but those words will not be enough on their
own. Quite simply, any sympathies in the White House with Russian
efforts to undermine the transatlantic relationship are outrageous and
dangerous, and I will oppose them here in the Senate.
To reiterate, Mr. President, during the Presidents Day break, I took
a trip to three capitals, which I consider to be timely and important
visits: Warsaw, Poland; Vilnius, Lithuania, and Kiev, Ukraine. I have
been to these cities many times, and I have a particular attachment to
them. My mother was born in Lithuania, and so returning there, as I
have for over 35 years, I have seen a sweep of history as that small
Baltic State has moved from a republic of the Soviet Union to a free
and independent nation today. I am so proud of the courage of
Lithuanians that had brought them to this moment.
Going to Warsaw, Poland, is natural for a Senator from Chicago. We
have more Polish Americans in that city and in our State than anyplace
outside of Poland. We are very proud of our Polish heritage. They are
wonderful people. They are not only hard-working, good Polish
Americans, but they are also always thinking about their own homeland,
which was under the control of the Warsaw Pact, a Soviet-inspired
alliance, for decades, at the expense of their freedom.
I also visited Kiev, Ukraine. That capital has become well known to
many of us since the invasion by Vladimir Putin, which is the point I
would like to make.
The thing that ties these three countries together, despite their
differences in history, is the fact that if you ask each of these
countries today to identify the major external threat to their
existence and to their freedom, they would identify Vladimir Putin of
Russia. I found that in Warsaw, again in Vilnius, the capital of
Lithuania, as well as in Ukraine.
It was interesting--and Senator Jeanne Shaheen joined me on my trip
to visit Poland--that as we met with the leaders of that nation, we
heard repeatedly their concerns about Russian aggression. It was
something that was critically important to them. They were heartened by
statements made by Vice President Pence at the Munich conference about
the future of the NATO alliance, but let's put it in context. The
reason the Vice President had to travel from Washington to Munich,
Germany, to say to the Western world that was gathered there that the
NATO alliance was still strong was because the current President of the
United States, Donald Trump, had tweeted that NATO was obsolete, and
one of his followers, Steve Bannon of Breitbart fame, had questioned
whether we should be engaging in these kinds of alliances.
Well, I think those alliances are critical. The NATO alliance has
been one of the most successful in history. So when Vice President
Pence went to Munich to assure our NATO allies that we were still on
their side, it was an important message.
I did find one other thing telling and memorable about that trip to
Warsaw. One of the Polish leaders said to me: We have read that the
Russians invaded your election. We are used to this. He called it the
hybrid war. He
[[Page S1439]]
said: It isn't just aggression by Russians with military aggression,
which is scary enough, but it is a war of cyber aggression and a war of
propaganda, and clearly Vladimir Putin believed in your last
Presidential election that he could use some of those same tactics that
he uses against Poland and the Baltics in the United States. This
leader in Poland then challenged me: What are you going to do about
that? Now that you know that Vladimir Putin has invaded your election,
now that your intelligence agencies tell you that, will you do
something? Will you take this seriously? Will you investigate it? He
said: Our worry in Poland is, if you will not respond to Vladimir
Putin's invasion into your cyber space, what will you do if he invades
Poland? Will you stand by us as you promised in article 5? If you don't
take him seriously when he invades your sovereignty, will you take it
seriously when he invades ours?
It is an important question and a right question. I hope we take a
lesson from it--not to take Vladimir Putin for granted, not to view him
as a superhero or great leader but to understand that people around the
world are watching to see how we react to this Russian invasion of our
election.
In Lithuania, they face propaganda on a daily basis. German troops
under the flag of NATO are now in Lithuania making it clear that we are
committed to the future and security of that nation. What did Vladimir
Putin and the Russian propagandists do as soon as these German troops
moved into Lithuania? They created an absolutely false rumor that a
German soldier had raped a Lithuanian woman. It wasn't true, but it was
the kind of false information that they have spread in the hopes of
undermining the confidence of Lithuania and the NATO alliance.
I met with the President of Lithuania, Dalia Grybauskaite, and she is
a very decisive leader. I thought of Margaret Thatcher's style when I
met with President Grybauskaite. She is an ``Iron Lady'' in her own
right to protect Lithuania and other Baltic States from Russian
aggression.
The last trip we made was to Ukraine, and Congressman Mike Quigley of
Chicago joined me in that visit. In that visit, we had a chance to meet
late at night, 9 o'clock at night with the President of Ukraine, Petro
Poroshenko, who was kindly waiting for us to get off the plane and come
join him at his Presidential offices. They are struggling even to this
day. As President Trump is in conversation with President Putin about
future relationships, sadly, at that very same moment, aggression by
the Russians in Ukraine was growing. Over 10,000 people have been
injured or died now because of the Russian invasion of Ukraine. There
is speculation, and I hope it is just that, that some backroom
negotiations are underway to recognize this Russian aggression in
Ukraine. I sincerely hope that never happens. We should never condone
what Vladimir Putin has done to that country of Ukraine. They are
struggling now to get back on their feet. They are making reforms that
are unpopular but necessary. They are strengthening their economy and
at the same time they are fighting a war.
I left there with two resolves. One was to make sure we provide
military equipment necessary for Ukraine to be successful to ward off
this Russian aggression; No. 2, to continue to work with them in terms
of building their economy and reform; and, No. 3, that we have a
visible physical presence with those NATO forces in the Baltic States
and in Poland. We have a great alliance in these countries. In Poland
the Illinois National Guard has been a longtime ally of the Polish
forces, and we are very proud of that relationship.
When it came to Lithuania, we were able to see a group from Fort
Carson in Colorado. It was a tank command. I never saw prouder soldiers
in my life--American soldiers anxious to show this Senator the Abrams
M1 and the fighting vehicles they were using preparing for the
possibility of defending Lithuania and the Baltics. It was an inspiring
moment.
I made my statement part of the record, and I know the Senator from
South Dakota is seeking the floor, but I left there committed to the
NATO alliance and committed to the effort to stop the aggression of
Vladimir Putin, committed as well to come home to the United States and
say to my colleagues in the Senate and House that we have to take it
seriously when Vladimir Putin tries to change the outcome of an
American election. It is a sad day in American history. I believe
November 8, 2016, is a day that will live in cyber infamy for what
Vladimir Putin tried to do in the United States. For us to ignore it,
to sweep it under the table, to hide it behind some committee door,
when no one knows what is going on inside, is not the appropriate
answer. We need an independent, transparent investigation of what the
Russians did, a special prosecutor at the executive level, and an
independent commission like the 9/11 Commission, headed by notable
Americans like GEN Colin Powell or Justice Sandra Day O'Connor, who
will bring all the facts to light so we know once and for all the truth
of what happened and make certain it never happens again.
I yield the floor.
The PRESIDING OFFICER (Mrs. Ernst). The Senator from South Dakota.