Emergency food aid over 2 billion annually. Sadly, despite the generosity there are shortfalls from what is needed due to other nations not fully meeting the challenge. And next years deliberations we have an opportunity to do more with having, without having to spend more money. Half of which must be shipped according to cargo preference rules. These restrictions result in spending as little as 35 to 40 cents on the dollar on food. Let me say this one more time. Because of these ridiculous requirements, only 35 to 40 cents of each dollar is actually used to provide food to people who are starving. If we relax the preference to meet the needs overseas, the overhead costs would drop dramatically. U. S. Farmers would still play a vital role in th the program ane would free up over 300 million in taxes to feed up to 9. 5 million more starving people each year. One of the major obstacles to modernizing food for peace are those who continue to support and profit from cargo preference rules.
For Peace Program is the focus on the Senate Foreign relations hearing. We will hear from the director, Catholic Relief Services an official from the Government Accountability office. This runs about an hour and a half. Foreign Relations Committee will come to order. We are currently facing a humanitarian crisis with over 800 Million People worldwide in need of food aid. The us continues to be the world leader providing more than a third of all food aid. Over 2 billion annually. Sadly despite our generosity there are shortfalls for whats needed due to other donor nations not meeting the challenge and in next years farm bill deliberations women opportunity to do more without having to spend more money. A little over half of our food aid is provided through the farm bill with our food for Peace Program. The farm bill requires aid to be sourced almost entirely from us farmers after which must be shipped on us vessels according to cargo preference rules. Of these restrictions resulting spe
Please join me for a flying dog beer. I announcer cspans washington journal, live every day with news and policy issues that impact you. Georgetown associate law professor will join us to tolain his path from prison georgetown law and his fight for prison reform. Been talking about the real reason why nfl players neil during the National Anthem to policewareness about brutality. Join the discussion. Closure eyes for a moment. Stretch. Closure eyes. I see you. Trust me. Empathy. I want you to stretch your imagination. [crushing, crashing] thats a fast it happens. In a blink. No warning. A paralyzed veteran talks about his own accident. I am talking about what i see from a patient perspective, policy the United States continues to be the world leader in providing more than a third of all emergency food aid. Ver 2 million annually sadly, despite our generosity, there are shortfalls. A little over half of our food aid is provided through the farm bill. These restrictions result in spending
Challenge. Next years farm bill deliberations, we have an opportunity to do more with out having to spend your money. Little over half of our food aid is provided through the farm bill in our food for Peace Program. The farm bill requires aid to be sourced almost entirely from u. S. Farmers. Half of which must be shipped on u. S. Flagged vessels according to the rules. These restrictions result in spending as little as 35 35 40 cents on the dollar on food. Let me say this one more time. Because of these ridiculous requirements, only 35 or 40 cents of each dollar is actually used to provide food to people who are starving. If we relax the preference to meet the needs overseas, the cost would drop dramatically. U. S. Farmers would still play a vital role in the program and we would free up over 300 million in taxes to be used to feed up to nine and half million more starving people each year. One of the major obstacles to modernizing food for peace are those who continue to support and p
Its merely an Administrative Task they lost track of. That doesnt sound like a very credible explanation either, does it . I fear theyre trying to come wake up some way to remand it and give an opening for the pto or give time for the government to renarrow the law and rejustify the results. That would be all i would have to say about the redskins case. It is literally impossible to distinguish from the tam case other than the quality of Workplace Environment and quality accommodation. Theres much to be encouraged about the tam case applying to things like redskins and campus speech and a good marker for hate speech. Just because youre offended doesnt mean you cant ban it. I worry about the hostile environment competing line of cases and where that would go. I guess ill stop there and let you guys have a chance for questions. Theres a lot more i can say about government speech but if anyone cares we will talk about it in the questions. Questions . Two questions although i dont want to