Title--Farmers, Charities Join Forces to Block Famine-Relief Revamp
Author--Roger Thurow
Publication--Wall Street Journal, October 26, 2005 issue (A1)
- Around 2006, U.S. wants to spend 25% of their food-aid budget to buy overseas goods to feed those starving and in need--currently 100% of this food-aid budget comes from American farmers--but buying even 25% from overseas markets will save more than 50,000 more lives a year and save everyone money
- but of course, this pisses American farmers off and some think it may turn them off towards the food-aid idea...some think that the farmers will strongly oppose this turn in fear of their own financial loss
- aid groups also fear that the money will shift away from long-term agricultural project to short-term relief efforts--a prominent problem
- so farmers really do not support the change--many in the situation (not the farmers) call this decision by the farmers morally indefensible (because it is)
- the change will allow more lives to be saved and money to be saved for everybody but the farmers involved...who will lose a portion of their annual revenue
- in the past, shipping the U.S. farmers food has been by U.S. vessels and that will change with the new proposal--Americans in the business will be the main one's that suffer financial loss--even though it is for a better cause
- Mr. Nastios, head of the USAID proposed that $300 million of the $1.2 billion from the 'Food for Peace' program be used to buy food as close as possible to the countries that are in need in 2001
- Nastios said, "The fact that U.S. farmers and shippers benefit from the Food for Peace is an important, but secondary benefit."
- He got a very hostile response from farmers and shippers involved
- Most groups support Nastios' proposed local buying of food-aid as long as it does not cut into their gain--a travesty to almost every other person that objectively looks at this situation
No comments:
Post a Comment