[Congressional Record (Bound Edition), Volume 153 (2007), Part 14]
[Senate]
[Pages 19298-19302]
[From the U.S. Government Publishing Office, www.gpo.gov]




      DR. NORMAN BORLAUG'S RECEIPT OF THE CONGRESSIONAL GOLD MEDAL

  Mr. HARKIN. Mr. President, in a very beautiful ceremony in the 
Rotunda of the Capitol this morning, Dr. Norman Borlaug was presented 
with the Congressional Gold Medal, America's highest civilian award.
  Dr. Borlaug, of course, as we know, is the father of the Green 
Revolution and the winner of the Nobel Peace Price in 1970. In 1986 he 
established a World Food Prize, which is headquartered in my home State 
of Iowa, to recognize individuals who have improved the quality, 
quantity, and availability of food around the globe.
  Dr. Borlaug was born and raised in Iowa, earned his Ph.D. in plant 
pathology and genetics at the University of Minnesota in 1942. After 
graduation he went to work in Mexico where he developed high-yield, 
disease-resistant varieties of wheat, which dramatically increased food 
production.
  He then went on to introduce these and other high-yield wheat 
varieties in Pakistan and India, which had the effect of nearly 
doubling production in those countries, saving countless lives.
  It was pointed out this morning that in the previous 4,000 years, 
rice production in those countries had leveled off, but in the 4 years 
after Dr. Borlaug introduced his new strains of rice, they actually 
doubled that production. Yields that had been basically unchanged for 
4,000 years, they doubled in 4 years with new genetics and practices.
  Iowans are a humble people. But we are very proud of the long line of 
Iowans who have been extraordinary leaders in bringing food to a hungry 
world, people such as Herbert Hoover, Henry C. Wallace, Henry A. 
Wallace, and first and foremost, Dr. Norman Borlaug.
  When I think of Dr. Borlaug's achievements, I am reminded of those 
famous words in the Book of Proverbs:

       Where there is no vision, the people perish.
       More than half a century ago, Dr. Borlaug surveyed a world 
     where starvation and malnourishment were rampant. And he had 
     a vision of a Green Revolution. Because of that vision, 
     upwards of 1 billion lives were saved across the globe, which 
     is an accomplishment of staggering proportions.

  Well, that's not bad for a kid who began his education in a one-room 
rural schoolhouse near Cresco, IA.
  Norman Borlaug has been called a great scientist, a great agronomist, 
and a great humanitarian. Of course, he is all of those things. He is 
also a great persuader, a man who time and again overcame political and 
cultural challenges in order to spread his revolution, first in Mexico, 
then in Asia, and now Africa.
  The good news is that at the age of 93, Dr. Borlaug is still going 
strong, still curious and creative, still full of

[[Page 19299]]

dreams for changing the world. As I said, he started the World Food 
Prize and has devoted a great deal of time and energy to strengthen and 
elevate that initiative with crucial help from John Ruan of Des Moines. 
There is, for example, the World Food Prize Borlaug-Ruan Internship 
Program, in which young people, about 100 every year, take part. They 
present papers on research in different parts of the world, and then a 
number are chosen and are sent as interns to places around the world to 
learn and begin the process, as Norman Borlaug did, of working with 
people to expand food production.
  Let me just read from one paragraph of Norman Borlaug's statement on 
the occasion of the Congressional Gold Medal ceremony this morning on 
July 17.
  He ended his remarks by saying:

       My plea today to the members of Congress and to the 
     Administration is to re-commit the United States to more 
     dynamic and generous programs of official development 
     assistance in agriculture for Third World nations, as was 
     done in the 1960s and 1970s. Ever-shrinking foreign aid 
     budgets in support of smallholder agriculture, and especially 
     to multilateral research and development organizations such 
     as the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center 
     (CIMMYT) where I have worked for 40 years, as well as its 
     sister research institutes under the Consultative Group for 
     International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), are not in our 
     nation's best interest, nor do they represent our finest 
     traditions.

  In other words, he is saying cuts to these programs that we are 
making are not in our Nation's best interests and do not represent our 
finest traditions.

       As you chart the course of this great nation

  Dr. Borlaug tells us--

     for the future benefit of our children, grand-children, and 
     great-grandchildren, I ask you to think more boldly and 
     humanely about the Third World and develop a new version of 
     the Marshall plan, this time not to rescue a war-torn Europe, 
     but now to help the nearly one billion, mostly rural poor 
     people still trapped in hunger and misery. It is within 
     America's technical and financial power to help end this 
     human tragedy and injustice, if we set our hearts and minds 
     to the task.

  One more thing that Norman Borlaug said this morning, is this: When 
people are in misery and they are hungry and they do not have enough to 
eat, all kinds of ``isms'' begin to flourish, including terrorism.
  He said, if we really want to get at the root cause of terrorism and 
the recruitment of terrorists, feed a hungry world. Make sure everyone 
has enough to eat.
  I ask unanimous consent to print in the Record the full statement of 
Norman E. Borlaug on the occasion of his receiving the Congressional 
Gold Medal this morning.
  There being no objection, the material was ordered to be printed in 
the Record, as follows:

Norman E. Borlaug--Statement on the occasion of the Congressional Gold 
          Medal Ceremony, United States Capitol, July 17, 2007

       It is a great honor to be awarded the Congressional Gold 
     Medal, in recognition of my work to feed a hungry world. I 
     thank members of Congress for giving me an opportunity to 
     comment on the challenges and complexities of feeding a world 
     of 10 billion people who I expect will be living on the 
     planet Earth sometime this century.
       When I was born--in 1914--there were only 1.6 billion 
     people on Earth. Today, we are 6.5 billion and growing by 80 
     million per year. The task of feeding this growing population 
     has been made more complex, since agriculture is now being 
     asked not only to produce food, feed and fiber, but also raw 
     materials for bio-fuels. Thus, there is no room for 
     complacency for those of us working on the food front.
       I am now in my 63rd year of continuous involvement in 
     agricultural research and production in low-income, food-
     deficit developing countries. I have worked with many 
     scientists, political leaders, and farmers to transform food 
     production systems. Any achievements I have made have been 
     possible through my participation in this army of hunger 
     fighters. There are too many to name, but you know who you 
     are. I thank you for your dedication and assistance all of 
     these years. I also thank my family, and my late wife 
     Margaret, for the understanding and unselfish support you 
     have given me
       The Green Revolution was a great historic success. In 1960, 
     perhaps 60 percent of the world's people felt hunger during 
     some portion of the year. By the year 2000, the proportion of 
     hungry in the world had dropped to 14 percent of the total 
     population. Still, this figure translated to 850 million men, 
     women and children who lacked sufficient calories and protein 
     to grow strong and healthy bodies. Thus, despite the 
     successes of the Green Revolution, the battle to ensure food 
     security for hundreds of millions of miserably poor people is 
     far from won.
     The Green revolution
       The breakthroughs in wheat and rice production in Asia in 
     the mid-1960s, which came to be known as the Green 
     Revolution, symbolized the beginning of a process of using 
     agricultural science to develop modern techniques for the 
     Third World. It began in Mexico with the ``quiet'' wheat 
     revolution in the late 1950s. During the 1960s and 1970s, 
     India, Pakistan, and the Philippines received world attention 
     for their agricultural progress. In the 1980s and 1990s, 
     China, home to one fifth of the world's people, has been the 
     greatest success story. China today is the world's biggest 
     food producer and its crop yields are approaching those of 
     the United States with every successive year. However, it is 
     almost certain, that China and India--home to one third of 
     the world's people--will become the largest agricultural 
     importers in the coming decades, as their economies shift 
     from being agrarian to industrial.
       Critics of modern agricultural technology invariably turn a 
     blind eye on what the world would have been like without the 
     technological advances that have occurred, largely during the 
     past 50 years. For those whose main concern is protecting the 
     ``environment,'' let's look at the positive impact that the 
     application of science-based technology has had on land use. 
     If the global cereal yields of 1950 still prevailed in 2000 
     we would have needed nearly 1.2 billion ha of additional land 
     of the same quality--instead of the 660 million ha that was 
     used--to achieve the global harvest of that year. Obviously, 
     such a surplus of land was not available, and certainly not 
     in populous Asia, where the population had increased from 1.2 
     to 3.8 billion over this period. Moreover, if more 
     environmentally fragile land had been brought into 
     agricultural production, the impact on soil erosion, loss of 
     forests and grasslands, biodiversity and extinction of 
     wildlife species would have been enormous and disastrous.
       At least in the foreseeable future, plants--and especially 
     the cereals--will continue to supply much of our increased 
     food demand, both for direct human consumption and as 
     livestock feed to satisfy the rapidly growing demand for meat 
     in the newly industrializing countries. It is likely that an 
     additional 1 billion metric tons of grain will be needed 
     annually by 2025, just to feed the world, let alone fuel its 
     vehicles. Most of this increase must come from lands already 
     in production through yield improvements. Fortunately, such 
     productivity improvements in crop management can be made all 
     along the line--in plant breeding, crop management, tillage, 
     water use, fertilization, weed and pest control, and 
     harvesting.
     Africa's food production challenges
       More than any other region of the world, African food 
     production is in crisis. High rates of population growth and 
     little application of improved production technology during 
     the last two decades resulted in declining per capita food 
     production, escalating food deficits, deteriorating 
     nutritional levels, especially among the rural poor, and 
     devastating environmental degradation. While there are more 
     signs since 2000 that smallholder food production is 
     beginning to turn around, this recovery is still very 
     fragile.
       Sub-Saharan Africa's extreme poverty, poor soils, uncertain 
     rainfall, increasing population pressures, changing ownership 
     patterns for land and cattle, political and social turmoil, 
     shortages of trained agriculturalists, and weaknesses in 
     research and technology delivery systems all make the task of 
     agricultural development more difficult. But we should also 
     realize that to a considerable extent, the present food 
     crisis is the result of the long-time neglect of agriculture 
     by political leaders. Even though agriculture provides 
     livelihoods to 70-85 percent of the people in most countries, 
     agricultural and rural development has been given low 
     priority. Investments in food distribution and marketing 
     systems and in agricultural research and education are 
     woefully inadequate. Furthermore, many governments pursued 
     and continue to pursue a policy of providing cheap food for 
     the politically volatile urban dwellers at the expense of 
     production incentives for farmers.
       In 1986 I became involved in food crop technology transfer 
     projects in sub-Saharan Africa, sponsored by the Nippon 
     Foundation and its Chairman, the late Ryoichi Sasakawa, and 
     enthusiastically supported by former U.S. President Jimmy 
     Carter. Our joint program is known as Sasakawa-Global 2000, 
     and has operated in 14 sub-Saharan African countries the past 
     20 years. We have assisted several million small-scale 
     farmers to grow extension demonstration plots for basic food 
     crops: maize, rice, sorghum, millet, wheat, cassava, and 
     grain legumes.
       The recommended production technologies come from national 
     and international agricultural research organizations, and 
     include: (1) the use of the best available commercial

[[Page 19300]]

     varieties or hybrids (2) proper land preparation and seeding 
     to achieve good stand establishment, (3) proper application 
     of the appropriate fertilizers and, when needed, crop 
     protection chemicals, (4) timely weed control, and (5) 
     moisture conservation and/or better water use if under 
     irrigation. We also work with participating farm families to 
     improve on-farm storage of agricultural production, both to 
     reduce grain losses due to spoilage and infestation and to 
     allow farmers to hold stocks longer to exploit periods when 
     prices in the marketplace are more favorable. Virtually 
     without exception, farmers obtain grain yields that are two 
     to three times higher on their demonstration plots than has 
     been traditionally the case. Farmers' enthusiasm is high and 
     political leaders are taking much interest in the program.
       Despite the formidable challenges in Africa, the elements 
     that worked in Latin America and Asia will also work there. 
     With more effective seed, fertilizer supply and marketing 
     systems, hundreds of millions of smallholder farmers in 
     Africa can make great strides in improving the nutritional 
     and economic well being of their populations. The biggest 
     bottleneck that must be overcome is lack of infrastructure, 
     especially roads and transport, but also potable water and 
     electricity. In particular, improved transport systems would 
     greatly accelerate agricultural production, break down tribal 
     animosities, and help establish rural schools and clinics in 
     areas where teachers and health practitioners are heretofore 
     unwilling to venture.
     Crop research challenges
       Crop productivity depends both on the yield potential of 
     the varieties and the crop management employed to enhance 
     input and output efficiency. Agricultural researchers and 
     farmers worldwide face the challenge during the next 25 years 
     of developing and applying technology that can increase the 
     global cereal yields by 50-75 percent, and to do so in ways 
     that are economically and environmentally sustainable. Much 
     of the yield gains will come from applying technology 
     ``already on the shelf'' but yet to be fully utilized. But 
     there will also be new research breakthroughs, especially in 
     plant breeding to improve yield stability and, hopefully, 
     maximum genetic yield potential.
       While we must continue to push the frontiers of science 
     forward, we also must be mindful of the need to protect the 
     gains already made. Agriculture is a continuing struggle 
     against mutating pathogens and insects. A clear example is 
     the new race of stem rust that has emerged in East Africa, 
     which is capable of devastating most of the world's 
     commercial bread wheat varieties. Ironically, I began my 
     career in agricultural science combating stem rust some 60 
     years ago and I am now in the twilight of my life, once again 
     facing my old nemesis. There hasn't been a major stem rust 
     epidemic for more than 50 years, since the virulent race 
     called 15B devastated much of the North America wheat crop 
     during 1950-54. Out of that crisis came new forms of 
     international cooperation in plant breeding, which led to 
     accelerated development around the world of high-yielding, 
     disease-resistant, broadly adapted wheat varieties. However, 
     in the ensuing years, complacency, increasing barriers to 
     international exchange of plant breeding materials, declining 
     budgets, staff retirements and discontinuity in training 
     programs, has resulted in a much weakened system. This has 
     been evident in the slow international response to a very 
     serious new stem rust race, called Ug99, first spotted in 
     Uganda and Kenya in the late 1990s. Ug99 has now escaped from 
     Africa and begun its migration to North Africa and the Middle 
     East. It won't be long before it reaches South Asia and later 
     China, North America and the rest of the wheat-growing world. 
     Wheat scientists are now scrambling to control this disease 
     before it gains a foothold and causes catastrophic losses to 
     the livelihoods of several hundred million wheat farmers and 
     widespread global wheat shortages that will affect prices and 
     the welfare of several billion consumers. Since 2005, 
     excellent collaboration has been forthcoming from the USDA, 
     key land grant universities, and USAID. A far-reaching 
     research program is being considered by a major U.S. 
     foundation located in Seattle that if approved could solidify 
     and accelerate the progress to date. As part of this research 
     effort we also hope to identify why rice, alone among the 
     cereals, is immune to the rust fungi, and then use 
     biotechnology to transfer this genetic immunity from rice to 
     wheat and other cereals. If we are successful in this quest, 
     the scourge of rust, mentioned in the bible, could finally be 
     banished from the Earth.
     What can we expect from biotechnology?
       During the 20th Century, conventional plant breeding has 
     produced--and continues to produce--modern crop varieties and 
     hybrids that have contributed immensely to grain yield 
     potential, disease and insect resistance, stability of 
     harvests and farm incomes, while sparing vast tracts of land 
     for other uses, such as wildlife habitats, forests, and 
     outdoor recreation.
       The majority of agricultural scientists including myself 
     anticipate great benefits from biotechnology in the coming 
     decades to help meet our future needs for food, feed, fiber, 
     and bio-fuels. Promising work, now utilizing the powerful new 
     tools of biotechnology, is also under way to develop greater 
     tolerance of climatic extremes, such as drought, heat, and 
     cold. Such research is likely to become more important in the 
     future as the world experiences the effects of climate 
     change. We must also persist in scientific efforts to raise 
     maximum genetic yield potential to increase food production 
     on lands currently in use while protecting against serious 
     negative environmental impacts.
       Seventy percent of global water withdrawals are used for 
     irrigating agricultural lands, which account for 17 percent 
     of total cultivated land yet contribute 40 percent of our 
     global food harvest. Expanding the area under irrigation is 
     critical to meeting future food demand. However, competing 
     urban demands for water will require much great efficiencies 
     in agricultural water use. Through biotechnology we will be 
     able to achieve ``more crop per drop'' by designing plants 
     with reduced water requirements and adoption of improved 
     crop/water management systems.
       Developing country governments need to be prepared to work 
     with--and benefit from--the new breakthroughs in 
     biotechnology. Regulatory frameworks are needed to guide the 
     testing and use of genetically modified crops, which protect 
     public welfare and the environment against undue risk. They 
     must be cost effective to implement yet not be so restrictive 
     that science cannot advance.
       Since the private sector patents its life science 
     inventions, agricultural policy makers must be vigilant in 
     guarding against too much concentration of ownership and also 
     be concerned about equity of access issues, especially for 
     poor farmers. These are legitimate matters for debate by 
     national, regional and global governmental organizations.
       Even with private sector leadership in biotechnology 
     research I believe that governments should also fund 
     significant public research programs. This is not only 
     important as a complement and balance to private sector 
     proprietary research, but is also needed to ensure the proper 
     training of new generations of scientists, both for private 
     and public sector research institutions.
       U.S. agriculture is being asked to produce more food, feed, 
     fiber and now biofuels, while protecting the environment and 
     not greatly increasing land use. Science is ready for the 
     task, but science will not succeed without wise and adequate 
     support from the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) and 
     its congressional committees. Traditional programs of 
     research and education at USDA and in the land grant 
     universities must continue. Congress must also invest more 
     generously in fundamental research to learn more about the 
     cellular and molecular events that determine how plants and 
     animals reproduce, grow and fight off stresses such as 
     drought, cold and disease. Most of these major innovations 
     will start first with acquiring deeper fundamental 
     understanding.
       Getting the most from fundamental research will require 
     changes in the culture of decision making in public 
     agricultural institutions. Leading scientists must be 
     involved in deciding which programs have scientific merit and 
     in setting realistic scientific priorities. There should be a 
     council, like those of the National Institutes of Health, 
     where scientists and stakeholders can pool their wisdom in 
     recommending research priorities. Building such changes into 
     the current farm bill is a high priority.
     Educating urbanites about agriculture
       The current backlash against agricultural science and 
     technology evident in some industrialized countries is hard 
     for me to comprehend. How quickly humankind becomes detached 
     from the soil and agricultural production! Less than 4 
     percent of the population in the industrialized countries 
     (less than 2 percent in the USA) is directly engaged in 
     agriculture. With low-cost food supplies and urban bias, is 
     it any wonder that consumers don't understand the 
     complexities of re-producing the world food supply each year 
     in its entirety, and expanding it further for the nearly 80 
     million new mouths that are born into this world annually? I 
     believe we can help address this ``educational gap'' by 
     making it compulsory in secondary schools and universities 
     for students to take courses on agriculture, biology, and 
     science and technology policy.
       One exciting high school program, in which I am personally 
     involved, is the World Food Prize Youth Institute program 
     originated by Des Moines philanthropist Juan Ruan and led by 
     the World Food Prize Foundation. Each year, more than a 100 
     high school students, mainly from Iowa but now expanding to 
     other states and countries, convene at the George Washington 
     Carver auditorium at Pioneer Hybrid Company headquarters in 
     Johnston, Iowa, with teachers and parents, to present their 
     well-researched essays on about how to increase the quantity, 
     quality, and availability of food around the world. They make 
     these presentations in front of past and present World Food 
     Prize laureates and other experts, and lively discussions 
     ensue. Each year, a select few graduating seniors win travel 
     fellowships to go to a developing country where they live and 
     work at an agricultural research institute, and

[[Page 19301]]

     learn first hand about hunger and poverty, and the role that 
     science and technology can play to alleviate these 
     calamities. It is especially gratifying to see the growth and 
     development of these young, mostly female, summer interns. It 
     literally is a life-changing experience for them, and it 
     shows in their performance at university and in career 
     selections. More programs like this are needed, so that 
     future generations of Americans have a better sense about the 
     complexities and challenges of feeding a growing world.
     Agriculture and the environment
       As the pace of technological change has accelerated the 
     past 50 years, the fear of science has grown. Certainly, the 
     breaking of the atom and the prospects of a nuclear holocaust 
     added to people's fear, and drove a bigger wedge between the 
     scientist and the layman. Rachel Carson's book Silent Spring, 
     published in 1962, which reported that poisons were 
     everywhere, also struck a very sensitive nerve. Of course, 
     this perception was not totally unfounded. By the mid 20th 
     century air and water quality had been seriously damaged 
     through wasteful industrial production systems that pushed 
     effluents often literally into ``our own backyards.''
       We all owe a debt of gratitude to environmental movement in 
     the industrialized nations, which has led to legislation over 
     the past 40 years to improve air and water quality, protect 
     wildlife, control the disposal of toxic wastes, protect the 
     soils, and reduce the loss of biodiversity. However, these 
     positive environmental trends are not found in the developing 
     countries, where environmental degradation, especially in 
     Africa, threatens ecological stability if not reversed.
       There is often a deadlock between agriculturalists and 
     environmentalists over what constitutes ``sustainable 
     agriculture'' in the Third World. This debate has confused--
     if not paralyzed--many in the international donor community 
     who, afraid of antagonizing powerful environmental lobbying 
     groups, have turned away from supporting science-based 
     agricultural modernization projects still needed in much of 
     smallholder Asia, sub-Saharan Africa, and Latin America. This 
     deadlock must be broken.
       We cannot lose sight of the enormous job before us to feed 
     10 billion people, 90 percent of whom will begin life in a 
     developing country, and many in poverty. Only through dynamic 
     agricultural development will there be any hope to alleviate 
     poverty and improve human health and productivity, and 
     reducing political instability.
     Closing comments
       Thirty-seven years ago, in my acceptance speech for the 
     Nobel Peace Prize, I said that the Green Revolution had won a 
     temporary success in man's war against hunger, which if fully 
     implemented, could provide sufficient food for humankind 
     through the end of the 20th century. But I warned that unless 
     the frightening power of human reproduction was curbed, the 
     success of the Green Revolution would only be ephemeral.
       It took some 10,000 years to expand food production to the 
     current level of about 5 billion tons per year. By 2050, we 
     will likely need to nearly double current production again. 
     This cannot be done unless farmers across the world have 
     access to high-yielding crop production methods as well as 
     new biotechnological breakthroughs that can increase the crop 
     yields, dependability, and nutritional quality. Indeed, it is 
     higher farm incomes that will permit small-scale farmers in 
     the Third World to make desperately needed investments to 
     protect their natural resources. As Kenyan archeologist 
     Richard Leakey likes to reminds us, ``you have to be well-fed 
     to be a conservationist.'' We have to bring common sense into 
     the debate on agricultural science and technology and the 
     sooner the better!
       The United States is the greatest agricultural success 
     story of the 20th Century. Through science and technology and 
     farmer ingenuity, American agriculture has achieved levels of 
     productivity second to none. We also have a great tradition, 
     especially in earlier decades, of helping low-income; food-
     deficit nations to get their own agricultural systems moving. 
     Our private agri-businesses have invested heavily in the 
     development of productivity-enhancing technology, not only to 
     the benefit of this country but also around the world. 
     American public institutions--the land-grant universities and 
     colleges, the USDA, and the U.S. Department of State--have 
     played key roles in the transformation of subsistence 
     agriculture, especially in Asia and Latin America. This has 
     been good for the American people and the world. Lest we 
     forget, world peace will not be built on empty stomachs or 
     human misery.
       I would be remiss if I did not thank the Administration for 
     establishing the USDA Borlaug Fellows program in 2004, in my 
     honor, at the time of my 90th birthday. This is an 
     international program that actively engages universities like 
     my own Texas A & M University, my alma mater, the University 
     of Minnesota, and many other of our fine land grant 
     universities and colleges. The Borlaug fellows program also 
     has links to the international agricultural research centers 
     located abroad and to private agro-industry. The aim is to 
     provide relatively young scientists from developing countries 
     with opportunities to travel to the USA to gain practical 
     experience and upgrade their technical skills at advanced 
     agricultural laboratories. So far, USDA has been able, with 
     the assistance of USAID, to piece together funding for about 
     150 Borlaug fellows to come to the United States each year. 
     With more permanent funding, along the lines of the Fulbright 
     program, USDA and the partner universities could implement a 
     more substantial range of learning and personal development 
     opportunities for young scientists and agricultural leaders 
     from developing countries. This would be good for the 
     individual recipients, their sponsoring institutions and 
     countries, and also, I believe, for America. Texas A&M 
     University and Ohio State University have been working 
     through the National Association of State Universities and 
     Land Grant Colleges (NASULGC) to prepare a more substantial 
     proposal for consideration by Congress.
       My plea today to the members of Congress and to the 
     Administration is to re-commit the United States to more 
     dynamic and generous programs of official development 
     assistance in agriculture for Third World nations, as was 
     done in the 1960s and 1970s. Ever-shrinking foreign aid 
     budgets in support of smallholder agriculture, and especially 
     to multilateral research and development organizations such 
     as the International Maize and Wheat Improvement Center 
     (CIMMYT) where I have worked for 40 years, as well as its 
     sister research institutes under the Consultative Group for 
     International Agricultural Research (CGIAR), are not in our 
     nation's best interest, nor do they represent our finest 
     traditions.
       As you chart the course of this great nation for the future 
     benefit of our children, grand-children, and great-
     grandchildren, I ask you to think more boldly and humanely 
     about the Third World and develop a new version of the 
     Marshall plan, this time not to rescue a war-torn Europe, but 
     now to help the nearly one billion, mostly rural poor people 
     still trapped in hunger and misery. It is within America's 
     technical and financial power to help end this human tragedy 
     and injustice, if we set our hearts and minds to the task.

  Mr. HARKIN. I yield the floor.
  Mr. GRASSLEY. Mr. President, earlier today in the Capitol Rotunda we 
honored Dr. Norman Borlaug with the Congressional Gold Medal. This is 
the highest expression of national appreciation.
  At least two-thirds of Federal lawmakers must sign on to support a 
nominee before his or her nomination is allowed to advance through 
Committees in the House and Senate. Previous recipients include 
distinguished public servants, military heroes, humanitarians, 
entertainers, musicians, authors, athletes, religious leaders and 
pioneers in the fields of medicine, science, and aeronautics including 
our Nation's first President, George Washington.
  Many of you know that I farm in Iowa with my son Robin.
  Those of us farming take satisfaction in feeding people through our 
labors.
  Through his labors, Dr. Borlaug has been able to feed many more 
people that Robin and I will ever be able to, even if we worked day and 
night.
  He has spared more people from the sharp hunger pains that strike an 
empty stomach than anyone of us could ever dream of doing.
  He has saved more lives than any other person in history.
  An extraordinary man, with a brilliant vision, and the common sense 
to turn his dreams into a reality--that's Norm Borlaug.
  I am grateful, but not surprised, that it didn't take long for 
Congress to advance the legislation giving Dr. Borlaug this award.
  A few years ago, I spoke with Dr. Borlaug just outside the Senate 
Chamber.
  It was overwhelming just how many Senators came off the Senate floor 
to shake hands with him.
  I was glad to be able to claim Dr. Borlaug as a native Iowan who has 
become a true citizen of the world--from a boyhood on a farm in 
northeast Iowa--a one-room schoolhouse--to a PhD in plant pathology, to 
decades in the poorest areas of rural Mexico, and a life of scientific 
breakthroughs to ease malnutrition and famine all over the world. His 
work in biotechnology has vastly improved food security for countries 
including India, Pakistan, and Mexico. This humanitarian hero has been 
instrumental in seeking social justice and promoting peace around the 
world.
  Far from resting on his laurels, Dr. Borlaug continues to inspire 
future

[[Page 19302]]

generations of scientists and farmers to innovate and lift those mired 
in poverty.
  As a fellow Iowan said, ``If you never stick your neck out, you'll 
never get your head above the crowd.''
  Dr. Borlaug stuck his neck out and became a hero and a legend.
  He deserves every bit of recognition and gratitude we can find to 
offer him.
  Mr. CORNYN. Mr. President, I ask my colleagues to join me today in 
honoring Dr. Norman Borlaug of Dallas, TX.
  Today, Dr. Borlaug receives the Congressional Gold Medal--the 
Nation's highest civilian decoration.
  Dr. Borlaug's service to the world's hungry was cultivated on his 
boyhood farm in Iowa where he learned the value of hard work. He 
sharpened his knowledge of agriculture and science at the University of 
Minnesota and later applied his farm and classroom experiences to 
researching and developing high-yield wheat varieties in Mexico that 
thrived in arid conditions. Under his leadership, these innovative 
crops were introduced into India, Pakistan, and later Africa, having 
since fed the hungry in astonishing numbers.
  Never allowing himself to become satisfied with the status quo, Dr. 
Borlaug continued his humanitarian efforts, paving the way for other 
scientists to fight hunger and to feed the world's increasing 
population. Dr. Borlaug created the annual World Food Prize to 
recognize and reward those who advance human development by improving 
the quality, quantity, and availability of food in the world.
  Each fall semester, Dr. Borlaug returns to Texas A&M University to 
teach those who would follow in his footsteps and continue to innovate. 
In his role as distinguished professor of international agriculture in 
the Department of Soil & Crop Sciences, aspiring Aggie students have 
the opportunity to witness hard-working benevolence and learn from one 
of mankind's greatest and most humble benefactors.
  There are many lessons we can learn from Dr. Borlaug's service. This 
man saw a need and applied his education to the realities of poverty 
and hunger. He chose to put his hands in the soil and work to make a 
vision become reality.
  Dr. Borlaug reminds us that a single individual with the knowledge 
and courage to make a difference can indeed change the world.
  The Congressional Gold Medal is the most recent addition to a long 
list of accolades that Dr. Borlaug has earned throughout his lifetime, 
including the 1970 Nobel Peace Prize for his innovative work in 
agriculture. It has been suggested that Dr. Borlaug's humanitarian 
efforts have saved the lives of perhaps one billion of the world's 
hungry, and through his ongoing legacy of leadership his work will feed 
many more.
  We join in gratitude for his consistent dedication in applying the 
agricultural sciences to benefit so many. I am honored to have been 
able to cosponsor this award for Dr. Borlaug.

                          ____________________