0

GOT FOOD?

BORROWED OPINIONS
Editorial

A Surer Way to Feed the Hungry

Globally, about 800 million people are chronically hungry, and the number rises every year. The Bush administration is pushing what should be an obvious policy change to help those most acutely in need — victims of catastrophe or some other emergency. Instead of shipping American-grown food abroad, Washington would send American dollars to buy food from local farmers.

The present food aid system is a favorite of American farmers. But it is also cumbersome, slow, expensive and leaves people hungry who could easily be fed. President Bush has rightly proposed shifting $300 million from farm subsidies to enable governments and relief groups to buy food locally.

This plan struck a responsive chord almost everywhere except the Congress. The House omitted the idea from the farm bill it passed last week. And prospects for the Senate approving anything more than a pilot program seem dim.

This is sad but unsurprising. Farm policy continues to be dominated by farm-state legislators who prefer the traditional approach of sending surplus food abroad, further enriching heavily subsidized farmers as well as the shipping industry.

A recent article by The Times’s Celia Dugger shows why that makes so little sense. Starving Africans in the arid reaches of northwestern Kenya desperately needed food. Kenyan officials did not want surplus American corn because they feared driving down the prices for local farmers. The obvious answer was for the Americans to buy local corn, but American law prevented this. So the corn was never shipped and people continued to go hungry.

The United States is the world’s most generous provider of food aid, amounting to $2 billion annually. But too much of that aid is wasted in overhead, mainly shipping costs. At the other end of the pipeline, subsidized American food can hurt local farmers, while local procurement gives them a commercial outlet. Administration officials also note that food purchased here usually takes four months to reach its destination. Food purchased locally takes days.

The virtues of Mr. Bush’s idea are self-evident. What it needs is full Congressional support, not pilot programs. It would be nice if, for once, America’s farm bloc could think of interests other than its own.

Vaughn Tolle said:
 
This is one that the current Administration has right.
 
posted 840 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
Do we have family farms any longer? If so, are they also getting lots of government subsidies or are those going to big agricultural companies?

I'm sorry to be so ill informed on most every subject! I truly don't know where my head has been for 60 years and am constantly amazed at the issues I know nothing about.

It certainly makes sense to send American money to buy locally as pointed out above -- hungry people get fed faster with fresh foods, while local farmers have a market for their products and their farms are kept in business.

Are members of Congress bought and paid for by transportation companies and big agricultural concerns? What could be the reasoning for not doing it the logical way?

Why aren't Republicans screaming this to the public? Doesn't this administration need some publicity when they are right?
 
posted 840 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Linda: yes, there are still family farms, a dwindling number to be sure. They do receive subsidy payments, but in terms of total dollars, the family farms only receive about 30 to 35% of them, the rest goes to the "big boys". On the issue of Congress, and the Republicans, here is a "conflict of interest", as when one looks at the affiliations of the members of the House and Senators from "farm states", there are IIRC a lot more GOP Reps and Senators than Democrats.
 
posted 840 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
lindainks55 said:
 
IF we sent the money to buy locally would there be any assurance the money wouldn't stop at local politicians pockets? Look at the money that has been sent to Iraq in the name of doing all kinds of good things. Is Halliburton opening a new division called feed the hungry of the world?
 
posted 840 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 
Vaughn Tolle said:
 
Linda, that is a valid concern.Unfortunately, corruption is rampant in third-world governments. Halliburton would open such a division if it thought it would be profitable, I bet.
 
posted 840 days ago
Add Comment Reply to: this comment OR this thread
 

Search