Vilsack announces food aid projects just as program debate heats up
WASHINGTON, April 10, 2014 – Agriculture Secretary Tom
Vilsack yesterday announced at a Council on Foreign Relations event that the
department would provide $183 million in U.S. agricultural commodities to feed hungry
children abroad through the McGovern-Dole
program.
It’s not exactly news – the funds for the projects were
appropriated in the 2014 budget – but the announcement was well timed. As
Congress goes through the process of adopting a budget for the next fiscal
year, it appears that food aid is once again on the table.
“The McGovern-Dole program doesn't just feed hungry
children, it invests in their future potential," Vilsack said at the event
in New York. “Supporting healthy families and improving access to education
helps to combat the root causes of poverty and fosters sustainable economic
growth in developing nations.”
According
to the Foreign Agricultural Service (FAS), the disbursed funds will benefit
over 2.5 million young people in 10 developing countries. Supported projects
include Kansas State University efforts in Tanzania, World Food Program work in Laos, Nepal and
Bangladesh, and Catholic Relief Services programs
in Benin and Burkina Faso.
For 2015, the administration proposes to fund the McGovern-Dole
International Food for Education and Child Nutrition Program (IFEP) at $185
million for 2015. According to government officials, the funding level would
assist more than 4 million women and children. The program, first authorized in
the 2002 Farm Bill, allows the country to send U.S. commodities and financial
and technical assistance to school feeding programs in foreign countries.
But while feeding hungry people sounds like it would stir
little political controversy, the Obama administration’s 2015 food aid budget
proposals have rankled some in the agriculture community, including a number of
lawmakers.
At issue is not the McGovern-Dole program, but the so-called
Food for Peace
international food assistance program. The administration has asked for a new
authority to use up to 25 percent of the proposed $350 million program
appropriation to buy agricultural commodities in the country or region where
they will be donated – meaning some communities will no longer receive their
aid in the form of U.S.-produced foods.
USDA and the U.S. Agency for
International Development (USAID) – the agencies responsible for administering
food aid programs – would use cash vouchers to purchase local food to feed hungry
people who face emergencies like natural disasters.
But many feel the reform
would threaten U.S. agriculture and shipping interests, who favor shipping
commodities over cash. Other critics say local procurement schemes are
inefficient and prone to corruption and abuse.
The issue was at least
partially settled by the farm bill, which funded the local procurement of
agricultural goods with $80 million. The program, previously a pilot, will now
be permanent, though it falls short of the Obama’s administration original request
to shift a full 45 percent of the country’s $1.5 billion food aid budget to the
new disbursement plan.
“Why did the budget
propose this change when we litigated this issue in the farm bill debate?” Rep.
Kevin Yoder, R-Kan., asked USDA officials at a budget hearing Tuesday. Yoder used the hearing to make the case for
commodity-based food aid. The president’s budget would allow 25 percent – $282
million – in cash assistance instead of U.S.-produced commodities, he said.
“That’s $282 million in cash assistance rather than $282 million in Kansas farmers
producing crops.”
Michael Scuse, the USDA
official who oversees FSA operations, defended his administration’s proposal. “What
we believe is that this will allow us to provide assistance much faster,” he
said.
#30
For more news, visit www.agri-pulse.com.