GIVE Act of 2008

Mr. President, I am pleased today to announce the introduction of the Global Food Security Act of 2008. I would like to thank my friend Senator Casey for lending his ideas and support to this bipartisan effort. I also thank USAID Administrator Henrietta Fore, who took an early interest in potential legislation. Her leadership is very much appreciated. Finally, I want to thank the members of USAID's informal food security team, who advised us on problems and possible legislative solutions.

As we know, food prices started a steep climb in the fall of 2007 and continued to increase during the spring of this year. The crisis has abated somewhat, largely due to the drop in energy prices. Nonetheless, this episode demonstrated that there are significant structural challenges to attaining global food security. The system is vulnerable to periodic disruptions that both expose and exacerbate deeper problems.

We live in a world where nearly 1 billion people suffer from chronic food insecurity. When droughts occur, hurricanes hit, or other disruptions arise, transitory food insecurity can put as many as 100 million people at a time in grave danger. In fact, the World Food Program reports that 25,000 people die each day from malnutrition- related causes. Health experts advise us that a diverse and secure food supply has major health benefits, including increasing child survival, improving cognitive and physical development of children, and increasing immune system function including resistance to HIV/AIDS.

Food insecurity is a global tragedy, but it is also an opportunity for the U.S. The U.S. is the indisputable world leader in agricultural production and technology. A more focused effort on our part to join with other nations to increase yields, improve food distribution, and broaden agricultural knowledge could begin a new era in U.S. diplomacy. Such an effort could solidify relationships with nations where, up to now, we have had few positive contacts. It could improve our broader trade relations and serve as a model for similar endeavors in the areas of energy and scientific cooperation. Achieving food security for all people also would have profound implications for peace and U.S. national security. Hungry people are desperate people, and desperation often sows the seeds of conflict and extremism.

The U.S. has always stood for big ideas--from the founding of the Republic on the basis of freedom to President Kennedy's vow to put a man on the moon. One of today's big ideas should be the eradication of hunger. We can bring America's dedication to science, innovation, technology, and education together to lead an effort devoted to overcoming the obstacles to food security.

The Global Food Security Act of 2008, is a 5-year authorization that seeks to provide solutions that will have the greatest effect. First, it creates a Special Coordinator for Global Food Security and puts that person in charge of developing a food security strategy. We call on the development of that strategy to take a whole-of-government approach and to work with other international donors, the NGO community, and the private sector.

Second, the bill authorizes additional resources for agricultural productivity and rural development. U.S. foreign assistance for agriculture has declined by nearly 70 percent since the 1980s. Globally, only four percent of official development assistance from all donors is allocated for agriculture. This amounts to neglect of what should be considered one of the most vital sectors in the alleviation of poverty. Food shortages are likely to recur frequently if the U.S. and the global community fail to invest in agricultural productivity in the developing world.

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, IN. 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.

Increasing acreage under production will not satisfy the growth in food demand, and these steps come with serious environmental and national security costs. We need a second green revolution that will benefit developed and developing nations alike.

Recent studies have demonstrated that funds spent in agriculture can be

up to four times more beneficial to economic growth than spending in other areas. It seems, therefore, that our overall foreign aid strategy would benefit from restoring agriculture programs to their former prominence. The bill increases funding for these programs in the first year by $750 million. The increase would reach $2.5 billion in year 5. Because those who subsist on less than one dollar a day spend at least half their incomes on food, according to the International Food Policy Research Institute, the bill highlights the need to focus on those living in extreme poverty.

In thinking about how to approach agricultural productivity, we tried to draw from the experience of U.S. land grant colleges and the contributions they have made to U.S. agriculture. The bill creates a new program that would strengthen institutions of higher education in the areas of agriculture sciences, research and extension programs. Investments in human capital and institutional capacity are important to developing a robust agricultural sector.

Universities and research centers can play an important role in achieving technological advances that are appropriate to local conditions. As such, the bill calls for increasing collaborative research on the full range of biotechnological advances including genetically modified technologies.

Third, the bill improves the U.S. emergency response to food crises by creating a separate Emergency Food Assistance Fund that can make local and regional purchases of food, where appropriate. Funds can be used for emergency food and agricultural assistance. The Government Accountability Office reports that it can often take 4 to 6 months from the time a crisis occurs until U.S. food shipments arrive. Our intention is to provide USAID with the flexibility to respond to emergencies more quickly, without supplanting other food programs such as P.L. 480.

I hope that our bill will begin a productive dialogue on how our government can be a more effective partner with NGO and private actors in promoting food security. There is no good reason why nearly a billion people should be food insecure or that the world should have to endure the social upheaval and risks of conflict that this insecurity causes.

I look forward to working with colleagues to improve the U.S. and global efforts to alleviate food insecurity and advance agricultural knowledge and technology worldwide.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill, the Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere Act. In today's economic climate, Americans need relief from sky-rocketing oil and gas prices. This applies to everyone, including people who engage in much-needed volunteer work. In July, I introduced a similar bill to help volunteers. It gave the Internal Revenue Service authority to change the mileage rate--currently set by statute at 14 cents per mile--for calculating the deductible cost of operating a vehicle for charitable purposes. We can't let an out-of-date mileage rate exacerbate the pinch at the pump for volunteers who selflessly provide so many vital goods and services in every community across America. After working with Congressman Lewis and Congressman Ramstad on compromise language we have improved the original bill. This compromise legislation will provide immediate relief for volunteers serving our elderly, poor, frail, and at-risk Americans. I am pleased that the

senior Senator from Maine, Senator Snowe, and my other colleagues, the senior Senator from New York, Senator Schumer, the junior Senator from Nevada, Senator Ensign, the senior Senator from Maryland, Senator Mikulski, and the senior Senator from Iowa, Senator Grassley, and the junior Senator from Wisconsin, Senator Feingold, are original cosponsors of this bill and I thank all of them for their support.

The Internal Revenue Code does not fix a rate for individuals who are required to use their own vehicle for work, or for individuals taking a mileage deduction for moving purposes. The IRS is able to increase the deduction amount for these purposes to reflect the current economic climate and dramatically higher fuel prices. This is exactly what the IRS recently did.

As of July 1st, the IRS modified the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. The revised standard mileage rate for business purposes increased from 50.5 cents per mile to 58.5 cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS increased the rate from 19 cents per mile to 27 cents per mile. I think the Nation's volunteers who travel on behalf of charitable organizations deserve an increase in their mileage rate, too.

My bill gives the IRS flexibility in setting the rate so that volunteers for charitable organizations could be given the same tax benefit accruing for moving, medical, and business expenses. It also provides a floor for volunteers, not allowing their rate to be set lower than moving and medical rate. In today's climate of increasing food and fuel prices, this bill will help relieve some of the pressure on charitable organizations and their volunteers. Additionally, this bill will allow the organization to reimburse the volunteer up to the business rate without any tax impact to volunteers.

Take Meals on Wheels, for example. This organization delivers nutritious meals and other nutrition services to men and women who are elderly, homebound, disabled, frail, or otherwise at-risk. The services Meals on Wheels provides significantly improve the recipients' quality of life and health, and often help to postpone institutionalization.

Over the past year, there has been nearly a 20 percent increase in fuel and food prices, coupled with reduced Government funding and fewer donations across the country. Nearly 60 percent of the estimated 5,000 programs that operate under the auspices of the Meals on Wheels Association of America have lost volunteers, in large part because it is too expensive for the volunteers to drive back and forth. Nearly half the programs have eliminated routes or consolidated meal services. About 38 percent of the programs have switched to delivering frozen meals, and about 30 percent are cutting personal visits from 5 days a week to one.

In Maryland, the Central Maryland Meals on Wheels has experienced an increase of 7 percent in food costs and suppliers are charging higher delivery fees. The cost to fill up the vans with gas has increased. Fuel costs averaged $72,538.70 in fiscal year 2007; this year, the costs have jumped to $86,790.63. This is an organization with volunteers serving over 3,100 elderly, disabled, frail and at-risk Marylanders. Its volunteers deserve relief from high gas prices just as much as people who use their car for work or for medical purposes or for moving.

Throughout the U.S., Meals on Wheels served over 3 million people and more than 250 million meals in fiscal year 2006. This is just one of thousands of charitable organizations. We need to encourage and support the Meals on Wheels volunteers and all other volunteers who need their cars to help their neighbors and communities. The Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere bill will do just that, and I hope my colleagues will support it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce a bill, the Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere Act. In today's economic climate, Americans need relief from sky-rocketing oil and gas prices. This applies to everyone, including people who engage in much-needed volunteer work. In July, I introduced a similar bill to help volunteers. It gave the Internal Revenue Service authority to change the mileage rate--currently set by statute at 14 cents per mile--for calculating the deductible cost of operating a vehicle for charitable purposes. We can't let an out-of-date mileage rate exacerbate the pinch at the pump for volunteers who selflessly provide so many vital goods and services in every community across America. After working with Congressman Lewis and Congressman Ramstad on compromise language we have improved the original bill. This compromise legislation will provide immediate relief for volunteers serving our elderly, poor, frail, and at-risk Americans. I am pleased that the

senior Senator from Maine, Senator Snowe, and my other colleagues, the senior Senator from New York, Senator Schumer, the junior Senator from Nevada, Senator Ensign, the senior Senator from Maryland, Senator Mikulski, and the senior Senator from Iowa, Senator Grassley, and the junior Senator from Wisconsin, Senator Feingold, are original cosponsors of this bill and I thank all of them for their support.

The Internal Revenue Code does not fix a rate for individuals who are required to use their own vehicle for work, or for individuals taking a mileage deduction for moving purposes. The IRS is able to increase the deduction amount for these purposes to reflect the current economic climate and dramatically higher fuel prices. This is exactly what the IRS recently did.

As of July 1st, the IRS modified the standard mileage rates for computing the deductible costs of operating an automobile for business, medical, or moving expenses. The revised standard mileage rate for business purposes increased from 50.5 cents per mile to 58.5 cents. For medical and moving expenses, the IRS increased the rate from 19 cents per mile to 27 cents per mile. I think the Nation's volunteers who travel on behalf of charitable organizations deserve an increase in their mileage rate, too.

My bill gives the IRS flexibility in setting the rate so that volunteers for charitable organizations could be given the same tax benefit accruing for moving, medical, and business expenses. It also provides a floor for volunteers, not allowing their rate to be set lower than moving and medical rate. In today's climate of increasing food and fuel prices, this bill will help relieve some of the pressure on charitable organizations and their volunteers. Additionally, this bill will allow the organization to reimburse the volunteer up to the business rate without any tax impact to volunteers.

Take Meals on Wheels, for example. This organization delivers nutritious meals and other nutrition services to men and women who are elderly, homebound, disabled, frail, or otherwise at-risk. The services Meals on Wheels provides significantly improve the recipients' quality of life and health, and often help to postpone institutionalization.

Over the past year, there has been nearly a 20 percent increase in fuel and food prices, coupled with reduced Government funding and fewer donations across the country. Nearly 60 percent of the estimated 5,000 programs that operate under the auspices of the Meals on Wheels Association of America have lost volunteers, in large part because it is too expensive for the volunteers to drive back and forth. Nearly half the programs have eliminated routes or consolidated meal services. About 38 percent of the programs have switched to delivering frozen meals, and about 30 percent are cutting personal visits from 5 days a week to one.

In Maryland, the Central Maryland Meals on Wheels has experienced an increase of 7 percent in food costs and suppliers are charging higher delivery fees. The cost to fill up the vans with gas has increased. Fuel costs averaged $72,538.70 in fiscal year 2007; this year, the costs have jumped to $86,790.63. This is an organization with volunteers serving over 3,100 elderly, disabled, frail and at-risk Marylanders. Its volunteers deserve relief from high gas prices just as much as people who use their car for work or for medical purposes or for moving.

Throughout the U.S., Meals on Wheels served over 3 million people and more than 250 million meals in fiscal year 2006. This is just one of thousands of charitable organizations. We need to encourage and support the Meals on Wheels volunteers and all other volunteers who need their cars to help their neighbors and communities. The Giving Incentives to Volunteers Everywhere bill will do just that, and I hope my colleagues will support it.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill be printed in the Record.

Mr. President, I rise today to introduce the Vision Preservation Act of 2008 with my colleague Sen. George Voinovich. The goal of this legislation is to help Americans avoid the personal tragedy of unnecessary, preventable vision loss. This important legislation is supported by Prevent Blindness America, the American Foundation for the Blind, the American Academy of Ophthalmology, and the American Optometric Association

Right now there are an estimated 80 million Americans suffering from potentially blinding eye disease. Three million more Americans struggle with low vision. 1.1 million more are legally blind. Glaucoma, diabetic retinopathy, cataract and age-related macular degeneration, AMD, and other vision problems are costing tens of thousands of people in the United States their ability to see each year. With the aging baby boom generation moving toward retirement age, these numbers are expected to grow considerably. It is estimated that by 2030, the number of blind and visually impaired people will double if nothing is done.

Unsurprisingly, ``The Economic Impact of Vision Problems: The Toll of Major Adult Eye Disorders, Visual Impairment, and Blindness on the U.S. Economy,'' a study conducted by Prevent Blindness America, reveals that vision loss carries significant cost to individuals, private insurers, health care providers, and the Federal government. The study indicates that the direct and indirect costs of vision loss among adults are $51.4 billion. And over a lifetime, the cost for just one

person dealing with this terrible condition is $566,000. The lifetime costs associated with just those Americans born with vision loss in 2000 is $2.5 billion.

But what makes vision loss even more tragic is that half of all blindness is preventable if action is taken soon enough. There are many health and financial challenges our nation is facing that we may just have to weather. But here is one we can do something about--and we should. That is why Sen. Voinovich and I are introducing the Vision Preservation Act. This legislation would improve and strengthen important public health programs at the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, the National Institutes of Health, and the Health Resources and Services Administration, HRSA. Specifically, it would expand existing public education and awareness efforts to empower Americans to do what is necessary to protect their own vision. This legislation would also incorporate vision screening, prevention, and rehabilitation into the Maternal and Child Health Block Grants and the Community Health Centers so low income Americans who are most likely to go without needed prevention and screening can be alerted to the early warning signs of vision loss. It would improve the training and education of health professionals so that they are better prepared to help their patients identify and deal with conditions that could lead to vision loss.

These are simple steps that we in the Senate can take to help make sure that millions of Americans can live without fear of losing their sight. I urge my colleagues to join us in supporting this legislation.

Mr. President, I ask unanimous consent that the text of the bill and a letter of support be printed in the Record.