Thank you Rep Clarke and others for voting yes on this. Contrary to what many people think, a famine is not necessarily the absence of food - it is often a case where the food that exists does not make it to the right places (and humanitarian aid can help it get there), or it could be that there is food but people don't have the cash to buy it (hence giving out cash), or it could be any number of other problems. So simply sending our wasted food doesn't solve the problem. Yes, the government is failing these people, and we should not be supporting them to continue to do so, but much of this money will not be going directly to the government. And finally, the idea that we should be spending money on people in the US, RATHER than people the most vulnerable people overseas is preposterous. We should absolutely be spending more money domestically to help our vulnerable communities and populations, but often when given the opportunity, we choose not to (we have the money to spend domestically and internationally). Why is it only when we attempt to provide support and aid to those who are in the most need overseas that we turn around and say we should spend money at home?