Posted:
May 28, 2013
In a letter to the editor of the New York Times, retired U.S. merchant mariner Harry Scholer challenged the administration's proposal to restructure the PL-480 Food for Peace program and related his first-hand experience with the success of U.S. food-aid shipments.
"Whether you are a supporter of the U.S. merchant marine or not," the Obama administration's proposal to provide "cash payments to poor countries in lieu of food shipments from the U.S. makes no sense," Scholer wrote.
"I, along with countless other sailors, have seen first hand the effects of our food shipments worldwide," he continued. "We've been ashore and talked with the people who benefit directly from this program - mothers, fathers, local officials and the children. It works and it's simple. We ship food. They receive food."
Scholer wrote: "During the civil war in Ethiopia, we were the one American ship with food. The Russians had seven in port, all carrying tanks and ammunition. Whose side do you think the civilian population supported?"
In his letter, Scholer cited an earlier letter to the editor sent to the Times by American Maritime Officers National President Tom Bethel. In the letter dated April 30, Bethel wrote: "PL-480 works as intended by guaranteeing that hungry people the world over get the food they need so desperately. By contrast, the radical restructuring of food aid proposed by the President and the Times would guarantee only doubt - about the safety of food obtained from overseas sources, about the quality and consistency of delivery systems, and about transparency and accountability. It would also cede control of important U.S. spending to private charities that sometimes appear more interested in greater international political influence than in famine relief worldwide."
Scholer concluded: "Third world countries are not always the best stewards of their peoples' needs. The cash given to some countries will just disappear. Is that a surprise? Or the idea that these countries can buy (food) locally - really? The last paragraph by Tom Bethel says it all. PL-480 works and his argument is irrefutable."
Restructuring PL-480 Food for Peace 'makes no sense'
In a letter to the editor of the New York Times, retired U.S. merchant mariner Harry Scholer challenged the administration's proposal to restructure the PL-480 Food for Peace program and related his first-hand experience with the success of U.S. food-aid shipments.
"Whether you are a supporter of the U.S. merchant marine or not," the Obama administration's proposal to provide "cash payments to poor countries in lieu of food shipments from the U.S. makes no sense," Scholer wrote.
"I, along with countless other sailors, have seen first hand the effects of our food shipments worldwide," he continued. "We've been ashore and talked with the people who benefit directly from this program - mothers, fathers, local officials and the children. It works and it's simple. We ship food. They receive food."
Scholer wrote: "During the civil war in Ethiopia, we were the one American ship with food. The Russians had seven in port, all carrying tanks and ammunition. Whose side do you think the civilian population supported?"
In his letter, Scholer cited an earlier letter to the editor sent to the Times by American Maritime Officers National President Tom Bethel. In the letter dated April 30, Bethel wrote: "PL-480 works as intended by guaranteeing that hungry people the world over get the food they need so desperately. By contrast, the radical restructuring of food aid proposed by the President and the Times would guarantee only doubt - about the safety of food obtained from overseas sources, about the quality and consistency of delivery systems, and about transparency and accountability. It would also cede control of important U.S. spending to private charities that sometimes appear more interested in greater international political influence than in famine relief worldwide."
Scholer concluded: "Third world countries are not always the best stewards of their peoples' needs. The cash given to some countries will just disappear. Is that a surprise? Or the idea that these countries can buy (food) locally - really? The last paragraph by Tom Bethel says it all. PL-480 works and his argument is irrefutable."