Posted:
February 25, 2013
In a letter to President Obama dated Feb. 21, 2013, a broad range of unions, companies and organizations spanning several sectors of the U.S. economy expressed overwhelming support for sustained funding of the Food for Peace (PL 480) and Food for Progress programs, and strong opposition to proposals of shifting resources for these programs to the procurement of commodities overseas.
American Maritime Officers and American Maritime Officers Service were among 70 signing the letter, which included maritime labor, U.S.-flag carriers, U.S. food producers and exporters, U.S. farming and agricultural organizations, U.S. humanitarian relief organizations, and trade associations representing these sectors.
The letter is available on the AMO Currents website.
Separately, 26 organizations and associations from the farming, food production and agricultural sectors sent a letter dated Feb. 21, 2013, to the Senate Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Chairman Mark Pryor (D-AR) and Ranking Member Roy Blunt (R-MO). The letter expressed similar strong support for sustained funding of Food for Peace and Food for Progress, and opposition to shifting program resources to purchase food aid from foreign suppliers.
"The unified and staunch support of Food for Peace and Food for Progress demonstrates the significance of these keystone food-aid programs throughout the U.S. economy," said AMO National President Tom Bethel. "These programs are critical to national security, as the U.S. merchant mariners who transport U.S. food-aid onboard U.S.-flagged ships are available to serve in military sealift missions in times of war and crisis. Every aspect of these programs generates and sustains jobs here in America while combating hunger in the world's poorest countries."
As noted in the letter to the President: "Growing, manufacturing, bagging, shipping, and transporting nutritious U.S. food creates jobs and economic activity here at home, provides support for our U.S. merchant marine, essential to our national defense sealift capability, and sustains a robust domestic constituency for these programs not easily replicated in alternative foreign aid programs. Overseas, Food for Peace has a strong track record of reducing child malnutrition and increasing incomes and food supplies for very poor and vulnerable populations. Food for Progress expands business and income opportunities along the agriculture value chain and improves the quality and quantity of food supplies. Both of those programs are proven models for addressing global food insecurity."
As noted in the letter to Senators Pryor and Blunt: "In addition to fighting global hunger and facilitating developmental programs, the program is one of our most effective, lowest-cost national security tools. Bags of U.S.-grown food bearing the U.S. flag and stamped as 'From the American People' serve as ambassadors of our nation's goodwill, which can help to address the root causes of instability. We doubt that less reliable foreign-procured food products - whose quality and safety are unknown but paid for by American taxpayers - would have the same impact.
"Proposals to slash funding for the program, or shift to purchases of food aid from foreign (sometimes called 'local and regional') suppliers instead of American farmers would be detrimental to our economy and bad national security policy."
Maritime, labor, farming, humanitarian relief, food supply sectors support Food for Peace and Food for Progress, oppose shifting program resources
In a letter to President Obama dated Feb. 21, 2013, a broad range of unions, companies and organizations spanning several sectors of the U.S. economy expressed overwhelming support for sustained funding of the Food for Peace (PL 480) and Food for Progress programs, and strong opposition to proposals of shifting resources for these programs to the procurement of commodities overseas.
American Maritime Officers and American Maritime Officers Service were among 70 signing the letter, which included maritime labor, U.S.-flag carriers, U.S. food producers and exporters, U.S. farming and agricultural organizations, U.S. humanitarian relief organizations, and trade associations representing these sectors.
The letter is available on the AMO Currents website.
Separately, 26 organizations and associations from the farming, food production and agricultural sectors sent a letter dated Feb. 21, 2013, to the Senate Appropriations Committee's Subcommittee on Agriculture, Rural Development, Food and Drug Administration, and Related Agencies Chairman Mark Pryor (D-AR) and Ranking Member Roy Blunt (R-MO). The letter expressed similar strong support for sustained funding of Food for Peace and Food for Progress, and opposition to shifting program resources to purchase food aid from foreign suppliers.
"The unified and staunch support of Food for Peace and Food for Progress demonstrates the significance of these keystone food-aid programs throughout the U.S. economy," said AMO National President Tom Bethel. "These programs are critical to national security, as the U.S. merchant mariners who transport U.S. food-aid onboard U.S.-flagged ships are available to serve in military sealift missions in times of war and crisis. Every aspect of these programs generates and sustains jobs here in America while combating hunger in the world's poorest countries."
As noted in the letter to the President: "Growing, manufacturing, bagging, shipping, and transporting nutritious U.S. food creates jobs and economic activity here at home, provides support for our U.S. merchant marine, essential to our national defense sealift capability, and sustains a robust domestic constituency for these programs not easily replicated in alternative foreign aid programs. Overseas, Food for Peace has a strong track record of reducing child malnutrition and increasing incomes and food supplies for very poor and vulnerable populations. Food for Progress expands business and income opportunities along the agriculture value chain and improves the quality and quantity of food supplies. Both of those programs are proven models for addressing global food insecurity."
As noted in the letter to Senators Pryor and Blunt: "In addition to fighting global hunger and facilitating developmental programs, the program is one of our most effective, lowest-cost national security tools. Bags of U.S.-grown food bearing the U.S. flag and stamped as 'From the American People' serve as ambassadors of our nation's goodwill, which can help to address the root causes of instability. We doubt that less reliable foreign-procured food products - whose quality and safety are unknown but paid for by American taxpayers - would have the same impact.
"Proposals to slash funding for the program, or shift to purchases of food aid from foreign (sometimes called 'local and regional') suppliers instead of American farmers would be detrimental to our economy and bad national security policy."