At long last! The children's health care bill is law! This was in the Chicago Tribune yesterday-ccyl
------------------
Obama signs into law expansion of SCHIP health-care program for children
Passage of $33 billion bill marks historic shift in Washington's political landscape and provides the White House its biggest victory since Obama took office
By Noam N. Levey | Washington Bureau
February 5, 2009
WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama signed legislation Wednesday to expand publicly funded health insurance for children, marking a historic shift in Washington's political landscape and providing the White House its biggest victory since Obama took office.
Less than 18 months ago, President George W. Bush had blocked similar bills by congressional Democrats, labeling the proposed expansion of the State Children's Health Insurance Program as a step toward government-run health care.
But with Democrats now firmly in control of the White House and Congress, the party's leaders easily pushed through a $33 billion bill that is expected to provide government-subsidized insurance to 4 million mostly low-income children.
That would reduce the number of uninsured children in America by about half over the next 41/2 years and boost the number covered by the program to 11 million.
The measure—funded primarily by boosting the federal tax on cigarettes by 61 cents, to $1 a pack—sailed through the House earlier Wednesday on a largely party-line vote of 290-135. The Senate approved the bill last week.
The swift passage came in marked contrast to the economic recovery package, which is mired in debate on Capitol Hill despite pleas from Obama for congressional action.
The children's health bill was an early benchmark in the planned Democratic campaign to reshape the nation's health-care system over the next two years.
"The way I see it, providing coverage to 11 million children … is a down payment on my commitment to cover every single American," Obama said before signing the bill in the White House.
The new president also drew on language from an era decades earlier, when Washington more openly embraced the expansion of the government-funded safety net. "We're not a nation that leaves struggling families to fend for themselves," he said.
SCHIP, as the program is called, was created in the late 1990s whenPresident Bill Clinton and a Republican Congress addressed concerns that families who earned too much to qualify for public assistance through Medicaid nonetheless could not afford insurance for their children.
The federal poverty line for a family of four was $21,200 in 2008, while family insurance premiums averaged about $12,680, according to the Kaiser Commission on Medicaid and the Uninsured in Washington.
Most of the 7 million children now enrolled in SCHIP programs nationwide come from families with incomes less than twice that of the poverty line. However, several states have opened the program to families making more.
About 30 million of the nation's poorest children receive health care through Medicaid.
Democrats made expanding the popular SCHIP program a top priority when they took control of Congress in 2007 following 12 years of mostly Republican control.
Bush vigorously opposed the move, twice vetoing SCHIP legislation despite substantial GOP support for the bills. He vetoed just 10 bills during his presidency.
On Wednesday, Republican lawmakers echoed many of the former president's critiques.
"The Democrats continue to push their government-run health-care agenda—universal coverage, as they call it," said Rep. Pete Sessions (R-Texas), who helped lead opposition to the bill.
Republicans also chafed at provisions that would allow states to provide insurance to the children of legal immigrants who have been in the country for less than five years and loosen identification requirements for those enrolling.
GOP lawmakers said that would result in illegal immigrants also receiving taxpayer assistance.
They also complained that the bill did not do enough to ensure that the most needy children receive coverage.
Republicans called for rules that would prohibit states from offering insurance to middle-income families unless states could ensure that more lower-income children had been enrolled, a requirement that many SCHIP advocates said was unworkable.
Facing overwhelming support for the SCHIP expansion, GOP lawmakers could do little to slow the momentum for the bill.
Groups ranging from the insurance industry to organized labor to the March of Dimes rallied behind the legislation.
Immigrant advocates applauded the end of the five-year waiting period that they said had prevented hundreds of thousands of children from gaining access to preventive care and driven up health-care costs by forcing many to rely on emergency rooms for health care.
But there also were signs of the difficulties that may confront Obama and his Democratic allies in their push to win GOP support for overhauling the nation's health-care system.
The SCHIP bill attracted 40 Republican votes in the House on Wednesday, fewer than the number won for similar legislation in 2007.
Showing posts with label Good News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Good News. Show all posts
Friday, February 6, 2009
Sunday, February 1, 2009
Is the End of Poverty Actually in Sight?: Microfinance op-ed
An op-ed by Eliot Daley about recent successes in microfinance...
-------------------------------------------------
Is the End of Poverty Actually in Sight?
“Whatever banks did, I did the opposite.” With that contrarian resolve, a young professor of economics named Muhammad Yunus launched the world’s first microcredit program in Bangladesh some thirty years ago, triggering a global cascade of micro-prosperity that earned him the Nobel Prize for Peace two years ago. Unlike the big banks, he gave unsecured loans to the poorest women in the most remote villages, eschewing collateral in favor of trust in their resourcefulness and determination and honor. With their tiny fistfuls of capital, these enterprising women purchased what they needed to become self-employed: enough rattan to weave a chair to sell, or a sewing machine to set up shop as a seamstress, or, more recently, a cell phone that created a one-person telephone company selling individual calls to others.
Also the opposite of today’s miserably failed big banks, microcredit worked—spectacularly well. Recently Dr. Yunus and Sam Daley-Harris, founder of the Microcredit Summit Campaign which supports the global spread of microcredit programs, announced that in 2007 an astounding 100,000,000 borrowers held microloans. These loans enabled them to start on a path toward becoming financially self-sufficient and in the process start lifting themselves and their families (and neighbors they employ) above the poverty level. Taken together, this means that half a billion people are on track to escaping the relentless, heartless undertow that forever has sucked them and their ancestors down into daily misery and pinned them there.
The wisdom of Dr. Yunus’ mantra seems all the more prescient and wise given the troubling behavior of big banks today. All they seem to be doing in the midst of a nearly unprecedented crisis is sucking up billions in public funds and hoarding them for a rainy day, as if the monsoon drowning companies and jobs all around them doesn’t suggest that bad weather is already upon us. While they perpetuate the infamous “credit crunch”, the purveyors of microcredit are busily handing out loans every day to nurture millions and millions and millions of small-business startups all around the globe. More than one hundred million in 2007. Imagine that. And the new goal of the Microcredit Summit Campaign is 175,000,000 borrowers by 2015. Incredible though it seems, we may actually be witnessing the beginning of the end of global poverty.
With such a conspicuous and undeniable success sparking new prosperity and happiness in locales all across the globe, maybe it’s time for the rest of us to start doing the opposite of what we ourselves have been doing. For example:
We have believed that poverty is inevitable. (There’s even offhanded Biblical support for such a notion.) But we can change our minds about that. That’s the first opposite-course to adopt: stop accepting poverty, and start believing that we ourselves can be part of ending it forever.
We have believed (implicitly, at least) that poverty is the fault of the poor. The opposite: Recognize that the most resourceful, entrepreneurial people in the world are those who must scratch out their survival every day in the bleakest of circumstances. But their poverty, we now know, is caused not by them but by the inequitable distribution of capital. Microloans fuel their fierce will to thrive, and the results are stunning.
We have paid scant attention to how U.S foreign aid is spent or misspent. That’s the opposite of what is needed: Tell your representative in Congress that their colleagues who have pledged to reform U.S. foreign assistance should learn from the lessons of the Microcredit Summit Campaign: 1) focus on the poorest, 2) set targets to achieve bold and measurable outcomes such as the Millennium Development Goals and those of the Microcredit Summit, and 3) monitor progress to ensure we achieve results.
Taking that action will honor our own best impulses in working to drive poverty from the face of the earth in our lifetimes. It would also get us to another of Muhammad Yunus’ visions: putting poverty in the museums, where it belongs.
Eliot Daley is a writer based in Princeton, New Jersey, with a longtime interest in the microfinance movement. His writings are posted on www.eliotdaley.com. He welcomes reader responses at eliot@eliotdaley.com.
-------------------------------------------------
Is the End of Poverty Actually in Sight?
“Whatever banks did, I did the opposite.” With that contrarian resolve, a young professor of economics named Muhammad Yunus launched the world’s first microcredit program in Bangladesh some thirty years ago, triggering a global cascade of micro-prosperity that earned him the Nobel Prize for Peace two years ago. Unlike the big banks, he gave unsecured loans to the poorest women in the most remote villages, eschewing collateral in favor of trust in their resourcefulness and determination and honor. With their tiny fistfuls of capital, these enterprising women purchased what they needed to become self-employed: enough rattan to weave a chair to sell, or a sewing machine to set up shop as a seamstress, or, more recently, a cell phone that created a one-person telephone company selling individual calls to others.
Also the opposite of today’s miserably failed big banks, microcredit worked—spectacularly well. Recently Dr. Yunus and Sam Daley-Harris, founder of the Microcredit Summit Campaign which supports the global spread of microcredit programs, announced that in 2007 an astounding 100,000,000 borrowers held microloans. These loans enabled them to start on a path toward becoming financially self-sufficient and in the process start lifting themselves and their families (and neighbors they employ) above the poverty level. Taken together, this means that half a billion people are on track to escaping the relentless, heartless undertow that forever has sucked them and their ancestors down into daily misery and pinned them there.
The wisdom of Dr. Yunus’ mantra seems all the more prescient and wise given the troubling behavior of big banks today. All they seem to be doing in the midst of a nearly unprecedented crisis is sucking up billions in public funds and hoarding them for a rainy day, as if the monsoon drowning companies and jobs all around them doesn’t suggest that bad weather is already upon us. While they perpetuate the infamous “credit crunch”, the purveyors of microcredit are busily handing out loans every day to nurture millions and millions and millions of small-business startups all around the globe. More than one hundred million in 2007. Imagine that. And the new goal of the Microcredit Summit Campaign is 175,000,000 borrowers by 2015. Incredible though it seems, we may actually be witnessing the beginning of the end of global poverty.
With such a conspicuous and undeniable success sparking new prosperity and happiness in locales all across the globe, maybe it’s time for the rest of us to start doing the opposite of what we ourselves have been doing. For example:
We have believed that poverty is inevitable. (There’s even offhanded Biblical support for such a notion.) But we can change our minds about that. That’s the first opposite-course to adopt: stop accepting poverty, and start believing that we ourselves can be part of ending it forever.
We have believed (implicitly, at least) that poverty is the fault of the poor. The opposite: Recognize that the most resourceful, entrepreneurial people in the world are those who must scratch out their survival every day in the bleakest of circumstances. But their poverty, we now know, is caused not by them but by the inequitable distribution of capital. Microloans fuel their fierce will to thrive, and the results are stunning.
We have paid scant attention to how U.S foreign aid is spent or misspent. That’s the opposite of what is needed: Tell your representative in Congress that their colleagues who have pledged to reform U.S. foreign assistance should learn from the lessons of the Microcredit Summit Campaign: 1) focus on the poorest, 2) set targets to achieve bold and measurable outcomes such as the Millennium Development Goals and those of the Microcredit Summit, and 3) monitor progress to ensure we achieve results.
Taking that action will honor our own best impulses in working to drive poverty from the face of the earth in our lifetimes. It would also get us to another of Muhammad Yunus’ visions: putting poverty in the museums, where it belongs.
Eliot Daley is a writer based in Princeton, New Jersey, with a longtime interest in the microfinance movement. His writings are posted on www.eliotdaley.com. He welcomes reader responses at eliot@eliotdaley.com.
Friday, January 30, 2009
Senate passed SCHIP, Obama to sign soon?
news about children's health...
The Senate has passed their version of the SCHIP bill, including health coverage for over 4 million uninsured children and legal immigrant kids. The final vote is posted here so you can thank or not thank your Senator as you are inclined. The House and the Senate have to reconcile their versions, but this is a big step forward and Obama might get to sign this one in next week. Here is a Washington Post article about it posted below which does note that it could have been done in a more bipartisan manner. The last line "once the program is fully implemented about 5 million youngsters will remain uninsured" calls attention to the fact that the work is not completely done to insure all children!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Passes Health Insurance Bill for Children
Immigrant Clause Opens Rift
By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 30, 2009; A01
The Senate overwhelmingly approved legislation yesterday to provide health insurance to 11 million low-income children, a bill that would for the first time open the program to legal immigrant children and pregnant women.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program, which is aimed at families earning too much money to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance, currently covers close to 7 million youngsters at a cost of $25 billion.
Lawmakers voted 63 to 32, largely along party lines, to renew the joint state-federal program and spend an additional $32.8 billion to expand coverage to 4 million more children. The expansion would be paid for by raising the cigarette tax from 39 cents a pack to $1.
The House approved similar legislation on Jan. 14, and President Obama is expected to sign a final version as early as next week.
Democratic lawmakers, noting that President George W. Bush twice vetoed similar legislation, praised the vote as evidence of the changing Washington landscape.
"Low-income, uninsured kids all across America have been waiting for Congress to fulfill the promise of the Children's Health Insurance Program for them," said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (Mont.). The program "works to get low-income, uninsured kids the doctor's visits and medicines they need to stay healthy, and approval of this bill opens the door of the doctor's office to millions of children who live without proper health care today."
But the political victory may come at a price. The rancorous debate -- on a program that once basked in bipartisan popularity -- raised doubts about whether the two parties can unite to pass broader health reform later this year, said several moderate Republicans.
"This is a very unfortunate beginning," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa). The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, a stalwart supporter of the program, said he was "disgusted" by the way Democratic leaders handled the debate. "It does not bode well for cooperative work in the coming months," he said.
As the vote came just one day after the House passed an $819 billion economic stimulus package without a single Republican vote, some longtime lawmakers questioned the president's ability to forge a new era of cooperation in the capital.
"If they wanted a nice signing ceremony that showed bipartisanship and carried through on the president's language, this would have been a good vehicle to do it on," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.).
Since its creation in 1997 under a Republican-led Senate, the children's health program has enjoyed broad bipartisan support.
"Few government programs in our time have enjoyed such great success, as acknowledged by members of both parties and all bipartisan health-care experts," said Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).
Governors, business executives and consumer advocates lobbied for the expansion, arguing that more and more families have sought the assistance in this weakened economy.
"During this economic turmoil, it is critical that we maintain and strengthen this important lifeline to our nation's children and that we help financially strapped states respond to the growing need for affordable health-care coverage," said Cindy Mann, executive director of Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families.
In 2007, prominent Republicans such as Grassley and Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah) bucked Bush to support renewal of the program.
"We carried a lot of water and took a lot of flak" for that stand, Hatch said. To push through a different version now is "not only unfair," he said, "but a slap in the face to those of us who worked so strongly with our friends on the other side."
The bill approved last night closely resembles the versions many Republicans supported in the past, countered Democrats.
GOP lawmakers objected to the new provision allowing states to enroll legal immigrants. Until now, immigrants' families have been forced to wait five years for coverage.
"The bottom line is: This is a debate about children's health coverage," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). "This is not a debate about immigration."
In two-plus days of debate -- in unusually personal and emotional language -- Republicans expressed a sense of betrayal that Democrats had dropped the 2007 compromise.
"We could have had 95 votes," Hatch said. "That would have sent a tremendous, tremendous message that hasn't been sent around here for a long time."
Both sides had hoped, and even predicted, that early bipartisan action on children's coverage would demonstrate that Washington's elected officials can cooperate on critical issues such as health care.
"This is on something for which there is so much agreement and something that almost no one argues about," said Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health, which represents 300 large employers. "For the tough things like real national health-care reform, it unfortunately portends a really rocky road."
Compared to the daunting task of overhauling the entire U.S. health system, the debate on the children's health program should have been easy, said Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine).
"You would have thought this issue would have been clear sailing on both sides," she said.
Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, agreed that "we're not seeing bipartisanship" but said she is optimistic that the public's overwhelming desire for improvement in the health system will force the two parties to the bargaining table. "People are talking about how to do it as opposed to whether to do it," she said.
During the presidential campaign, Obama pledged to provide coverage to every American child. Experts estimate that once the program is fully implemented about 5 million youngsters will remain uninsured.
The Senate has passed their version of the SCHIP bill, including health coverage for over 4 million uninsured children and legal immigrant kids. The final vote is posted here so you can thank or not thank your Senator as you are inclined. The House and the Senate have to reconcile their versions, but this is a big step forward and Obama might get to sign this one in next week. Here is a Washington Post article about it posted below which does note that it could have been done in a more bipartisan manner. The last line "once the program is fully implemented about 5 million youngsters will remain uninsured" calls attention to the fact that the work is not completely done to insure all children!
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
Senate Passes Health Insurance Bill for Children
Immigrant Clause Opens Rift
By Ceci Connolly
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, January 30, 2009; A01
The Senate overwhelmingly approved legislation yesterday to provide health insurance to 11 million low-income children, a bill that would for the first time open the program to legal immigrant children and pregnant women.
The State Children's Health Insurance Program, which is aimed at families earning too much money to qualify for Medicaid but not enough to afford private insurance, currently covers close to 7 million youngsters at a cost of $25 billion.
Lawmakers voted 63 to 32, largely along party lines, to renew the joint state-federal program and spend an additional $32.8 billion to expand coverage to 4 million more children. The expansion would be paid for by raising the cigarette tax from 39 cents a pack to $1.
The House approved similar legislation on Jan. 14, and President Obama is expected to sign a final version as early as next week.
Democratic lawmakers, noting that President George W. Bush twice vetoed similar legislation, praised the vote as evidence of the changing Washington landscape.
"Low-income, uninsured kids all across America have been waiting for Congress to fulfill the promise of the Children's Health Insurance Program for them," said Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus (Mont.). The program "works to get low-income, uninsured kids the doctor's visits and medicines they need to stay healthy, and approval of this bill opens the door of the doctor's office to millions of children who live without proper health care today."
But the political victory may come at a price. The rancorous debate -- on a program that once basked in bipartisan popularity -- raised doubts about whether the two parties can unite to pass broader health reform later this year, said several moderate Republicans.
"This is a very unfortunate beginning," said Sen. Charles E. Grassley (Iowa). The top Republican on the Senate Finance Committee, a stalwart supporter of the program, said he was "disgusted" by the way Democratic leaders handled the debate. "It does not bode well for cooperative work in the coming months," he said.
As the vote came just one day after the House passed an $819 billion economic stimulus package without a single Republican vote, some longtime lawmakers questioned the president's ability to forge a new era of cooperation in the capital.
"If they wanted a nice signing ceremony that showed bipartisanship and carried through on the president's language, this would have been a good vehicle to do it on," said Sen. Judd Gregg (R-N.H.).
Since its creation in 1997 under a Republican-led Senate, the children's health program has enjoyed broad bipartisan support.
"Few government programs in our time have enjoyed such great success, as acknowledged by members of both parties and all bipartisan health-care experts," said Senate Majority Leader Harry M. Reid (D-Nev.).
Governors, business executives and consumer advocates lobbied for the expansion, arguing that more and more families have sought the assistance in this weakened economy.
"During this economic turmoil, it is critical that we maintain and strengthen this important lifeline to our nation's children and that we help financially strapped states respond to the growing need for affordable health-care coverage," said Cindy Mann, executive director of Georgetown University's Center for Children and Families.
In 2007, prominent Republicans such as Grassley and Sen. Orrin G. Hatch (Utah) bucked Bush to support renewal of the program.
"We carried a lot of water and took a lot of flak" for that stand, Hatch said. To push through a different version now is "not only unfair," he said, "but a slap in the face to those of us who worked so strongly with our friends on the other side."
The bill approved last night closely resembles the versions many Republicans supported in the past, countered Democrats.
GOP lawmakers objected to the new provision allowing states to enroll legal immigrants. Until now, immigrants' families have been forced to wait five years for coverage.
"The bottom line is: This is a debate about children's health coverage," said Sen. Richard J. Durbin (D-Ill.). "This is not a debate about immigration."
In two-plus days of debate -- in unusually personal and emotional language -- Republicans expressed a sense of betrayal that Democrats had dropped the 2007 compromise.
"We could have had 95 votes," Hatch said. "That would have sent a tremendous, tremendous message that hasn't been sent around here for a long time."
Both sides had hoped, and even predicted, that early bipartisan action on children's coverage would demonstrate that Washington's elected officials can cooperate on critical issues such as health care.
"This is on something for which there is so much agreement and something that almost no one argues about," said Helen Darling, president of the National Business Group on Health, which represents 300 large employers. "For the tough things like real national health-care reform, it unfortunately portends a really rocky road."
Compared to the daunting task of overhauling the entire U.S. health system, the debate on the children's health program should have been easy, said Sen. Olympia J. Snowe (R-Maine).
"You would have thought this issue would have been clear sailing on both sides," she said.
Karen Ignagni, president of America's Health Insurance Plans, agreed that "we're not seeing bipartisanship" but said she is optimistic that the public's overwhelming desire for improvement in the health system will force the two parties to the bargaining table. "People are talking about how to do it as opposed to whether to do it," she said.
During the presidential campaign, Obama pledged to provide coverage to every American child. Experts estimate that once the program is fully implemented about 5 million youngsters will remain uninsured.
Thursday, January 29, 2009
House Passes American Recovery and Reinvestment Act
from Bread for the World...
-------------------------
Late last night, the House of Representatives passed the $819 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. An unprecedented recession demands bold action; and the House bill provides that.
Roughly half of the funding in the $819 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is for programs that benefit low-income people, such as SNAP (food stamp) benefits, unemployment insurance, and refundable tax credits. This bill provides support to people hit the hardest by the recession and will help low-income families put food on the table.
Thank you for your phone calls, letters, and emails. They make a difference.
However, our work is not yet finished. The Senate will start debating their version of the economic stimulus plan on Monday, Feb. 2, 2009. All of us can contact our senators and urge them to act boldly. Encourage them to speedily pass a similar economic stimulus bill that will protect hungry and poor people who are suffering the most from the current recession as well as stimulate the economy to produce and retain jobs. You can find out how to contact your Senator at our Web site, www.bread.org.
Grace and peace,
David Beckmann
President
-------------------------
Late last night, the House of Representatives passed the $819 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act. An unprecedented recession demands bold action; and the House bill provides that.
Roughly half of the funding in the $819 billion American Recovery and Reinvestment Act is for programs that benefit low-income people, such as SNAP (food stamp) benefits, unemployment insurance, and refundable tax credits. This bill provides support to people hit the hardest by the recession and will help low-income families put food on the table.
Thank you for your phone calls, letters, and emails. They make a difference.
However, our work is not yet finished. The Senate will start debating their version of the economic stimulus plan on Monday, Feb. 2, 2009. All of us can contact our senators and urge them to act boldly. Encourage them to speedily pass a similar economic stimulus bill that will protect hungry and poor people who are suffering the most from the current recession as well as stimulate the economy to produce and retain jobs. You can find out how to contact your Senator at our Web site, www.bread.org.
Grace and peace,
David Beckmann
President
Friday, January 16, 2009
House passed SCHIP
Congress took at big step in covering uninsured children on Jan 14. The House passed legislation to reauthorize the State Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP), 289-139 . This bill would extend the program by 4½ years and would cover an estimated 4.1 million uninsured children. As you recall, in 2007, Congress passed a similar bill but it was later vetoed by President Bush. One key aspect of this legislation is language to allow states the option to immediately begin covering documented immigrant children and pregnant women (they currently have to wait 5 years before they are eligible). It is estimated that between 400,000 and 600,000 children would become eligible by simply lifting the ban.
I'm not sure what happened in the Senate, but I will let you know when I do!
I'm not sure what happened in the Senate, but I will let you know when I do!
Wednesday, January 14, 2009
Clinton's statements on global poverty in Confirmation Hearing
Below is an excerpt of Senator Clinton's testimony in her confirmation
hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in
which she outlines her perspective on global poverty and development.
"In Africa, the foreign policy objectives of the Obama administration
are rooted in security, political, economic, and humanitarian
interests, including: combating al Qaeda's efforts to seek safe havens
in failed states in the Horn of Africa; helping African nations to
conserve their natural resources and reap fair benefits from them;
stopping war in Congo; ending autocracy in Zimbabwe and human
devastation in Darfur; supporting African democracies like South
Africa and Ghana-which just had its second change of power in
democratic elections; and working aggressively to reach the Millennium
Development Goals in health, education, and economic opportunity.
Many significant problems we face challenge not just the United
States, but all nations and peoples. You, Mr. Chairman, were among the
first, in a growing chorus from both parties, to recognize that
climate change is an unambiguous security threat. At the extreme it
threatens our very existence, but well before that point, it could
very well incite new wars of an old kind-over basic resources like
food, water, and arable land. The world is in need of an urgent,
coordinated response to climate change and, as President- Elect Obama
has said, America must be a leader in developing and implementing it.
We can lead abroad through participation in international efforts like
the upcoming UN Copenhagen Climate Conference and a Global Energy
Forum. We can lead at home by pursuing an energy policy that reduces
our carbon emissions while reducing our dependence on foreign oil and
gas-which will benefit the fight against climate change and enhance
our economy and security.
The great statesman and general George Marshall noted that our gravest
enemies are often not nations or doctrines, but "hunger, poverty,
desperation, and chaos." To create more friends and fewer enemies, we
can't just win wars. We must find common ground and common purpose
with other peoples and nations so that together we can overcome
hatred, violence, lawlessness, and despair.
The Obama administration recognizes that, even when we cannot fully
agree with some governments, we share a bond of humanity with their
people. By investing in that common humanity we advance our common
security because we pave the way for a more peaceful, prosperous world.
Mr. Chairman, you were one of the first to underscore the importance
of our involvement in the global AIDS fight. And you have worked very
hard on this issue for many years. Now, thanks to a variety of
efforts - including President Bush's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief as
well as the work of NGOs and foundations-the United States enjoys
widespread support in public opinion polls in many African countries.
This is true even among Muslim populations in Tanzania and Kenya,
where America is seen as a leader in the fight against AIDS, malaria,
and TB.
We have an opportunity to build on this success by partnering with
NGOs to help expand the infrastructure of health clinics in Africa so
that more people can have access to life-saving drugs, fewer mothers
transmit HIV to their children, and fewer lives are lost. And we can
generate even more goodwill through other kinds of social investment,
by working effectively with international organizations and NGO
partners to build schools and train teachers, and by ensuring that
children are free from hunger and exploitation so that they can attend
those schools and pursue their dreams for the future. This is why the
President-Elect supports a Global Education Fund to bolster secular
education around the world.
I want to take a moment to emphasize the importance of a "bottom-up"
approach to ensuring that America remains a positive force in the world.
The President-elect and I believe in this strongly. Investing in our
common humanity through social development is not marginal to our
foreign policy but integral to accomplishing our goals. Today more
than two billion people worldwide live on less than $2 a day. They are
facing rising food prices and widespread hunger. Calls for expanding
civil and political rights in countries plagued by mass hunger and
disease will fall on deaf ears unless democracy actually delivers
material benefits that improve people's lives while weeding out the
corruption that too often stands in the way of progress.
Our foreign policy must reflect our deep commitment to the cause of
making human rights a reality for millions of oppressed people around
the world. Of particular concern to me is the plight of women and
girls, who comprise the majority of the world's unhealthy, unschooled,
unfed, and unpaid. If half of the world's population remains
vulnerable to economic, political, legal, and social marginalization,
our hope of advancing democracy and prosperity will remain in serious
jeopardy. We still have a long way to go and the United States must
remain an unambiguous and unequivocal voice in support of women's
rights in every country, every region, on every continent."
hearing before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee in
which she outlines her perspective on global poverty and development.
"In Africa, the foreign policy objectives of the Obama administration
are rooted in security, political, economic, and humanitarian
interests, including: combating al Qaeda's efforts to seek safe havens
in failed states in the Horn of Africa; helping African nations to
conserve their natural resources and reap fair benefits from them;
stopping war in Congo; ending autocracy in Zimbabwe and human
devastation in Darfur; supporting African democracies like South
Africa and Ghana-which just had its second change of power in
democratic elections; and working aggressively to reach the Millennium
Development Goals in health, education, and economic opportunity.
Many significant problems we face challenge not just the United
States, but all nations and peoples. You, Mr. Chairman, were among the
first, in a growing chorus from both parties, to recognize that
climate change is an unambiguous security threat. At the extreme it
threatens our very existence, but well before that point, it could
very well incite new wars of an old kind-over basic resources like
food, water, and arable land. The world is in need of an urgent,
coordinated response to climate change and, as President- Elect Obama
has said, America must be a leader in developing and implementing it.
We can lead abroad through participation in international efforts like
the upcoming UN Copenhagen Climate Conference and a Global Energy
Forum. We can lead at home by pursuing an energy policy that reduces
our carbon emissions while reducing our dependence on foreign oil and
gas-which will benefit the fight against climate change and enhance
our economy and security.
The great statesman and general George Marshall noted that our gravest
enemies are often not nations or doctrines, but "hunger, poverty,
desperation, and chaos." To create more friends and fewer enemies, we
can't just win wars. We must find common ground and common purpose
with other peoples and nations so that together we can overcome
hatred, violence, lawlessness, and despair.
The Obama administration recognizes that, even when we cannot fully
agree with some governments, we share a bond of humanity with their
people. By investing in that common humanity we advance our common
security because we pave the way for a more peaceful, prosperous world.
Mr. Chairman, you were one of the first to underscore the importance
of our involvement in the global AIDS fight. And you have worked very
hard on this issue for many years. Now, thanks to a variety of
efforts - including President Bush's Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief as
well as the work of NGOs and foundations-the United States enjoys
widespread support in public opinion polls in many African countries.
This is true even among Muslim populations in Tanzania and Kenya,
where America is seen as a leader in the fight against AIDS, malaria,
and TB.
We have an opportunity to build on this success by partnering with
NGOs to help expand the infrastructure of health clinics in Africa so
that more people can have access to life-saving drugs, fewer mothers
transmit HIV to their children, and fewer lives are lost. And we can
generate even more goodwill through other kinds of social investment,
by working effectively with international organizations and NGO
partners to build schools and train teachers, and by ensuring that
children are free from hunger and exploitation so that they can attend
those schools and pursue their dreams for the future. This is why the
President-Elect supports a Global Education Fund to bolster secular
education around the world.
I want to take a moment to emphasize the importance of a "bottom-up"
approach to ensuring that America remains a positive force in the world.
The President-elect and I believe in this strongly. Investing in our
common humanity through social development is not marginal to our
foreign policy but integral to accomplishing our goals. Today more
than two billion people worldwide live on less than $2 a day. They are
facing rising food prices and widespread hunger. Calls for expanding
civil and political rights in countries plagued by mass hunger and
disease will fall on deaf ears unless democracy actually delivers
material benefits that improve people's lives while weeding out the
corruption that too often stands in the way of progress.
Our foreign policy must reflect our deep commitment to the cause of
making human rights a reality for millions of oppressed people around
the world. Of particular concern to me is the plight of women and
girls, who comprise the majority of the world's unhealthy, unschooled,
unfed, and unpaid. If half of the world's population remains
vulnerable to economic, political, legal, and social marginalization,
our hope of advancing democracy and prosperity will remain in serious
jeopardy. We still have a long way to go and the United States must
remain an unambiguous and unequivocal voice in support of women's
rights in every country, every region, on every continent."
Friday, October 3, 2008
Chil Tax Credit Passes w/ Bailout bill
In case some of you were thinking the additional riders attached to the Wall Street bailout bill were all sweeteners for the Rich and Famous, here is some good news from RESULTS today...
------------------------------
As you have probably heard, the House of Representatives passed the Wall Street bailout bill this afternoon, 263-171. President Bush has signed the bill into law. The bill does include the $8,500 threshold for the Child Tax Credit that RESULTS has championed these last few months, which will benefit 13 million children and their families in 2008. Also, in a separate bill, the House approved an extension of unemployment benefits (an additional seven weeks of benefits), 368-28, an issue RESULTS has also pushed as part of an economic recovery package in recent months. That bill now goes to the Senate, which is not expected to act on it until after the election.
------------------------------
As you have probably heard, the House of Representatives passed the Wall Street bailout bill this afternoon, 263-171. President Bush has signed the bill into law. The bill does include the $8,500 threshold for the Child Tax Credit that RESULTS has championed these last few months, which will benefit 13 million children and their families in 2008. Also, in a separate bill, the House approved an extension of unemployment benefits (an additional seven weeks of benefits), 368-28, an issue RESULTS has also pushed as part of an economic recovery package in recent months. That bill now goes to the Senate, which is not expected to act on it until after the election.
Wednesday, July 16, 2008
Global Health Bill PASSED!!!!
I'll write more about this later, but suffice it to say that I am beyond ecstatic that the Lantos-Hyde bill passed today!!! It was my extreme pleasure to be lobbying for it with about 200 other RESULTS activists on the Hill the morning it went up for votes in the Senate. I was in Obama and Durbin's office voicing last minute concerns about the amendments and a potentially damaging point of order that could have killed the whole $50B bill. Now, I'm all heady with the feeling that one person can really make a positive difference in the world!!!!
Sunday, June 22, 2008
Ghana to be among 1st African countries to acheive MDG #1
From ModernGhana.com
---------------------------------------
Accra, June 20, GNA – Dr. Daouda Toure, UNDP Resident Representative in Ghana, on Friday noted that Ghana would be among the very first African countries that have achieved the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of halving poverty.
He, however, pointed out that there were other goals such as high infant mortality, high maternal mortality, among others, which were still high in the country and there was the need to take steps to achieve those targets by 2015. The MDGs were signed by 189 countries in September 2000.
The Millennium Development Goals are a set of objectives set by the United Nations to help all peoples in the world to live with minimum dignity.
Dr. Toure was speaking at the launch of the Global Monitoring Report, 2008 on the theme: “MDGs and the Environment – Agenda for Inclusive and Sustainable Development,” organized by the Christian Council of Ghana in collaboration with the International Monetary Fund, The United Nations Development Programme and the World Bank, Ghana Office.
The programme brought together policy makers, civil society groups and individuals to dialogue about development and its relation to the environment.
Dr. Toure said there was the need for policy makers and advocacy groups to relate the MDGs to the needs and priorities of the local communities, adding, “localize the goals” to suit the needs of the people.
He also noted that Ghana was one of the 10 pilot countries that the World Bank, IMF, African Development Bank (AfDB), the European Union and the UN used to test government structure and to look at areas where there was the need to seal loopholes.
Responding to questions that the level of awareness about the MDGs among the populace was low, Dr Toure said the MDGs was not supposed to be a slogan that people would recite but how they related to them.
He stressed that the MDGs were only a minimal package that the world owed to humanity.
Ms. Punam Chuhan-Pole, Economist at the World Bank, who launched the report, said Ghana was on track to achieve the goals of gender equality and access to water and there was the need for a good investment climate.
She said the world was on track to achieve the poverty reduction and gender parity goals but there were also serious shortfalls in the areas of nutrition, education, health and sanitation goals.
“Africa lags behind on all the MDGs; South Asia on most human development goals,” she said, and expressed hope that most MDGs were still achievable in most countries.
Ms Chuhan-Pole noted that, it was critical that developing countries managed their natural resources well since most of them depended such resources.
She suggested an increase in agricultural production in Africa as a way to achieve growth.
She further pointed out that one-third of the developing world’s population representing about 1.6 billion people did not have access to electricity and noted that even though aid to Africa had risen, it was mostly in the form of debt relief.
“The time to act is now,” she said, and reminded the people that it was only a few years to 2015.
Mrs Bernice Sam, National Programmes Coordinator for Women in Law and Development in Africa, a non-governmental organization of women lawyers, said achieving the MDGs was everybody’s business and called on individuals as well as government officials to make efforts to help achieve the goals by 2015.
Mr Arnold McIntyre, IMF Resident Representative, noted that it was important for countries to understand what international cooperation meant for them.
Professor Kwaku Appiah-Adu, Head of Policy Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and the Director of Governance Project at the Office of the President, said government was doing all it could to ensure that Ghana achieved the MDGs.
He mentioned energy, water and roads as the current government priority areas and urged developed partners to combine their poverty reduction programmes in Africa with growth-related activities where the country’s human resource base would grow.
Prof. Appiah-Adu called on stakeholders to join in the campaign to achieve the MDGs and said civil society groups could challenge the government of strategies to help facilitate the achievement of MDGs.
Source website:http://www.modernghana.com/news/170863/1/ghana-among-countries-to-halve-poverty-undp.html
---------------------------------------
Accra, June 20, GNA – Dr. Daouda Toure, UNDP Resident Representative in Ghana, on Friday noted that Ghana would be among the very first African countries that have achieved the Millennium Development Goal (MDG) of halving poverty.
He, however, pointed out that there were other goals such as high infant mortality, high maternal mortality, among others, which were still high in the country and there was the need to take steps to achieve those targets by 2015. The MDGs were signed by 189 countries in September 2000.
The Millennium Development Goals are a set of objectives set by the United Nations to help all peoples in the world to live with minimum dignity.
Dr. Toure was speaking at the launch of the Global Monitoring Report, 2008 on the theme: “MDGs and the Environment – Agenda for Inclusive and Sustainable Development,” organized by the Christian Council of Ghana in collaboration with the International Monetary Fund, The United Nations Development Programme and the World Bank, Ghana Office.
The programme brought together policy makers, civil society groups and individuals to dialogue about development and its relation to the environment.
Dr. Toure said there was the need for policy makers and advocacy groups to relate the MDGs to the needs and priorities of the local communities, adding, “localize the goals” to suit the needs of the people.
He also noted that Ghana was one of the 10 pilot countries that the World Bank, IMF, African Development Bank (AfDB), the European Union and the UN used to test government structure and to look at areas where there was the need to seal loopholes.
Responding to questions that the level of awareness about the MDGs among the populace was low, Dr Toure said the MDGs was not supposed to be a slogan that people would recite but how they related to them.
He stressed that the MDGs were only a minimal package that the world owed to humanity.
Ms. Punam Chuhan-Pole, Economist at the World Bank, who launched the report, said Ghana was on track to achieve the goals of gender equality and access to water and there was the need for a good investment climate.
She said the world was on track to achieve the poverty reduction and gender parity goals but there were also serious shortfalls in the areas of nutrition, education, health and sanitation goals.
“Africa lags behind on all the MDGs; South Asia on most human development goals,” she said, and expressed hope that most MDGs were still achievable in most countries.
Ms Chuhan-Pole noted that, it was critical that developing countries managed their natural resources well since most of them depended such resources.
She suggested an increase in agricultural production in Africa as a way to achieve growth.
She further pointed out that one-third of the developing world’s population representing about 1.6 billion people did not have access to electricity and noted that even though aid to Africa had risen, it was mostly in the form of debt relief.
“The time to act is now,” she said, and reminded the people that it was only a few years to 2015.
Mrs Bernice Sam, National Programmes Coordinator for Women in Law and Development in Africa, a non-governmental organization of women lawyers, said achieving the MDGs was everybody’s business and called on individuals as well as government officials to make efforts to help achieve the goals by 2015.
Mr Arnold McIntyre, IMF Resident Representative, noted that it was important for countries to understand what international cooperation meant for them.
Professor Kwaku Appiah-Adu, Head of Policy Coordination, Monitoring and Evaluation and the Director of Governance Project at the Office of the President, said government was doing all it could to ensure that Ghana achieved the MDGs.
He mentioned energy, water and roads as the current government priority areas and urged developed partners to combine their poverty reduction programmes in Africa with growth-related activities where the country’s human resource base would grow.
Prof. Appiah-Adu called on stakeholders to join in the campaign to achieve the MDGs and said civil society groups could challenge the government of strategies to help facilitate the achievement of MDGs.
Source website:http://www.modernghana.com/news/170863/1/ghana-among-countries-to-halve-poverty-undp.html
Monday, May 26, 2008
Saudis donate $500M for food crisis
Printed in the Chicago Trib. I do not know how much the US contributed in the response to the UN emergency appeal.
-----------------------------------------
Saudis donate $500M for food crisis
By EDITH M. LEDERER
Associated Press Writer
4:59 PM CDT, May 23, 2008
UNITED NATIONS
Saudi Arabia made an unprecedented contribution of $500 million to the U.N. World Food Program to respond to rising prices, meaning the agency won't have to cut rations to the world's needy, the United Nations announced Friday.
The contribution the world's biggest oil producing nation was by far the largest response to the U.N. food agency's emergency appeal for $755 million to cover increased costs that threatened critical aid to millions of needy people.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon "warmly welcomes the offer of the landmark contribution," U.N. deputy spokeswoman Marie Okabe said.
"The secretary-general notes that this contribution of an unprecedented size and generosity comes not a moment too soon, given the needs of millions of people dependent on food rations," she said.
The Saudi contribution means the agency, which operates the world's largest humanitarian program, will now have the money it needs to carry on its activities without cutting the amount of food given to the needy, Okabe said.
Josette Sheeran, the agency's executive director, said donations actually topped the appeal target -- reaching $960 million from 32 countries -- which means WFP will have $205 million to use for other urgent needs.
"We turned to the world to help the hungry and the world has been generous," Sheeran said in a statement issued at the agency's Rome headquarters.
According to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Saudi Arabia produces about 9 million barrels of oil a day. Oil prices have now topped $130 a barrel.
The WFP describes higher food prices as its biggest challenge ever and estimates the rising prices are pushing 130 million people into hunger.
Ban warned last month that the rapidly escalating global food crisis has reached emergency proportions and threatens to wipe out seven years of progress in the fight against global poverty. Ban has established a top-level task force to tackle the world food crisis.
-----------------------------------------
Saudis donate $500M for food crisis
By EDITH M. LEDERER
Associated Press Writer
4:59 PM CDT, May 23, 2008
UNITED NATIONS
Saudi Arabia made an unprecedented contribution of $500 million to the U.N. World Food Program to respond to rising prices, meaning the agency won't have to cut rations to the world's needy, the United Nations announced Friday.
The contribution the world's biggest oil producing nation was by far the largest response to the U.N. food agency's emergency appeal for $755 million to cover increased costs that threatened critical aid to millions of needy people.
Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon "warmly welcomes the offer of the landmark contribution," U.N. deputy spokeswoman Marie Okabe said.
"The secretary-general notes that this contribution of an unprecedented size and generosity comes not a moment too soon, given the needs of millions of people dependent on food rations," she said.
The Saudi contribution means the agency, which operates the world's largest humanitarian program, will now have the money it needs to carry on its activities without cutting the amount of food given to the needy, Okabe said.
Josette Sheeran, the agency's executive director, said donations actually topped the appeal target -- reaching $960 million from 32 countries -- which means WFP will have $205 million to use for other urgent needs.
"We turned to the world to help the hungry and the world has been generous," Sheeran said in a statement issued at the agency's Rome headquarters.
According to the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries, Saudi Arabia produces about 9 million barrels of oil a day. Oil prices have now topped $130 a barrel.
The WFP describes higher food prices as its biggest challenge ever and estimates the rising prices are pushing 130 million people into hunger.
Ban warned last month that the rapidly escalating global food crisis has reached emergency proportions and threatens to wipe out seven years of progress in the fight against global poverty. Ban has established a top-level task force to tackle the world food crisis.
Tuesday, May 20, 2008
Farm Bill passes Congress w/ votes to Override a Veto
So a couple of farm bill updates came out and they strike me as a little odd. America's Second Harvest is urging supporters to contact Congress to ensure Congress overrides the imminent Presidential Veto. Bread for the World states that it's pretty much a done deal and calls for no action. In fact, the presidential veto is based on Bush's viewpoint that US subsidies in the Farm Bill need to be capped...something that Bread has been advocating for all year. So, what is an anti-poverty advocate to think?
I think two things:
1) This is one of those times where the desire to eradicate domestic and international poverty diverge. Domestic hunger interest groups would want the bill passed quickly, while International hunger groups would want the veto to prevail. Groups like Bread for the World that advocate for everybody are just trying to cut the best deal as fast as possible, but it seems no longer possible to get everything for everybody.
America's Second Harvest wants this done and over with so that the increases in nutrition programs can start flowing to Americans who desperately need help. The longer we operate under the 2002 Farm Bill, the harder it is for them in this time of rising food and gas prices. Bread wanted those nutrition increases as well, but they could have been achieved with the subsidy caps to pay for them. Doing that would have helped poor farmers in developing nations as well as farmers of modest means in the US who are often on Food Stamps themselves. It would have been a more comprehensive approach. In this respect, President Bush is pushing for the more intelligent, forward-thinking plan(wow!), but his attempt to help is failing as well.
2) Advocacy at this point one way or the other wouldn't be effective because they passed with enough votes to override a veto. I'm not sure why advocacy would be necessary at this point.
This is where I could use a little feedback. Does anyone out there have more insight on this? Is my understanding amiss on points #1 or #2?
Here are the press releases I'm talking about...
From America's Second Harvest:
"Last week, the House and Senate passed the Farm Bill with an overwhelming majority. In fact, both houses were able to muster enough votes to override a presidential veto. However, the work is not yet done. The President still plans to veto the Farm Bill, sending it back to Congress before it can become law. Therefore, if your Member of Congress voted in favor of the Farm Bill, it is critically important to contact them, thank them for their vote, and urge them to override the President's veto. If they opposed the Farm Bill, you can explain why the Farm Bill and federal nutrition programs are important to you and your community. We encourage you to contact each of your legislators through the Hunger Action Center to ensure that the Farm Bill will be passed once and for all! "
From Bread for the World:
"The Farm Bill passed the House and Senate this week, in numbers large enough to withstand a presidential veto. In the House, the final vote was 318-106 in support of the bill. The Senate passed it on a vote of 81-15. It takes two-thirds of each chamber to override a presidential veto. The bill clearly has enough support in Congress if President Bush follows through on his stated intention to veto the legislation."
I think two things:
1) This is one of those times where the desire to eradicate domestic and international poverty diverge. Domestic hunger interest groups would want the bill passed quickly, while International hunger groups would want the veto to prevail. Groups like Bread for the World that advocate for everybody are just trying to cut the best deal as fast as possible, but it seems no longer possible to get everything for everybody.
America's Second Harvest wants this done and over with so that the increases in nutrition programs can start flowing to Americans who desperately need help. The longer we operate under the 2002 Farm Bill, the harder it is for them in this time of rising food and gas prices. Bread wanted those nutrition increases as well, but they could have been achieved with the subsidy caps to pay for them. Doing that would have helped poor farmers in developing nations as well as farmers of modest means in the US who are often on Food Stamps themselves. It would have been a more comprehensive approach. In this respect, President Bush is pushing for the more intelligent, forward-thinking plan(wow!), but his attempt to help is failing as well.
2) Advocacy at this point one way or the other wouldn't be effective because they passed with enough votes to override a veto. I'm not sure why advocacy would be necessary at this point.
This is where I could use a little feedback. Does anyone out there have more insight on this? Is my understanding amiss on points #1 or #2?
Here are the press releases I'm talking about...
From America's Second Harvest:
"Last week, the House and Senate passed the Farm Bill with an overwhelming majority. In fact, both houses were able to muster enough votes to override a presidential veto. However, the work is not yet done. The President still plans to veto the Farm Bill, sending it back to Congress before it can become law. Therefore, if your Member of Congress voted in favor of the Farm Bill, it is critically important to contact them, thank them for their vote, and urge them to override the President's veto. If they opposed the Farm Bill, you can explain why the Farm Bill and federal nutrition programs are important to you and your community. We encourage you to contact each of your legislators through the Hunger Action Center to ensure that the Farm Bill will be passed once and for all! "
From Bread for the World:
"The Farm Bill passed the House and Senate this week, in numbers large enough to withstand a presidential veto. In the House, the final vote was 318-106 in support of the bill. The Senate passed it on a vote of 81-15. It takes two-thirds of each chamber to override a presidential veto. The bill clearly has enough support in Congress if President Bush follows through on his stated intention to veto the legislation."
Monday, May 5, 2008
Farm Bill Update: Over $10B increase for nutrition prgms
Bread for the World Celebrates Nutrition Gains in Farm Bill
Washington, DC, May 2, 2008 -– Bread for the World today welcomed the agreement reached this morning by congressional negotiators over the $10.361 billion increase for national nutrition programs included in the farm bill over a ten year period. Negotiators, however, still have to reach an agreement over the commodity payments portion of the farm bill.
The food stamp program accounts for $7.8 billion of the increase for national nutrition programs. Currently, 26 million Americans receive food stamp benefits; with an expected increase to 29 million because of high food prices. "They can claim a sizeable victory with this agreement in the nutrition title," said Rev. David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World. "Food stamps remain our first line of defense against hunger for the working poor across the country, and today is a great day for those who are most in need."
He hopes that the congressional negotiators will be as successful in reforming the commodity titles in the farm bill just as they have been in increasing the national nutrition programs.
"Even before the recent spike in food costs, 90 percent of low-income families who participate in the food stamp program ran out of benefits by the third week of the month. With food costs rising, they run out even earlier," said Rev. Beckmann.
The timing for an increase in funds for nutrition programs could not be better, since the number of people going to food banks has increased by 20 percent in the wake of soaring food prices. The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) also received a significant increase and indexing for inflation.
Under the agreement hammered out early this morning, the minimum monthly benefit for food stamps increased from $10 to $14 and the standard monthly deduction for a family of three or fewer has been increased to $144 monthly. These two benefits will be implemented in step with the U.S. consumer price index which will prevent their losing ground to inflation in the future.
"Speaker Pelosi, and Representatives Rangel, DeLauro, and Peterson did the lion's share of heavy lifting on championing this proposal, and we are deeply grateful for their valiant efforts. I'm certain many hungry folks across the country will be grateful as well when they see their food stamp benefits go just a little further," said Rev. Beckmann.
One disappointing aspect of this morning's agreement was the decision to cut the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education program by $800 million.
"We hope a sizeable portion of the previously-proposed $860 million set aside for the McGovern-Dole initiative finds its way back into the legislation before it becomes law," said Rev. Beckmann. "This program not only helps feed hungry kids; it encourages them to be in school and provides the nutrition they need to grow and learn. What could be more important?"
Washington, DC, May 2, 2008 -– Bread for the World today welcomed the agreement reached this morning by congressional negotiators over the $10.361 billion increase for national nutrition programs included in the farm bill over a ten year period. Negotiators, however, still have to reach an agreement over the commodity payments portion of the farm bill.
The food stamp program accounts for $7.8 billion of the increase for national nutrition programs. Currently, 26 million Americans receive food stamp benefits; with an expected increase to 29 million because of high food prices. "They can claim a sizeable victory with this agreement in the nutrition title," said Rev. David Beckmann, president of Bread for the World. "Food stamps remain our first line of defense against hunger for the working poor across the country, and today is a great day for those who are most in need."
He hopes that the congressional negotiators will be as successful in reforming the commodity titles in the farm bill just as they have been in increasing the national nutrition programs.
"Even before the recent spike in food costs, 90 percent of low-income families who participate in the food stamp program ran out of benefits by the third week of the month. With food costs rising, they run out even earlier," said Rev. Beckmann.
The timing for an increase in funds for nutrition programs could not be better, since the number of people going to food banks has increased by 20 percent in the wake of soaring food prices. The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) also received a significant increase and indexing for inflation.
Under the agreement hammered out early this morning, the minimum monthly benefit for food stamps increased from $10 to $14 and the standard monthly deduction for a family of three or fewer has been increased to $144 monthly. These two benefits will be implemented in step with the U.S. consumer price index which will prevent their losing ground to inflation in the future.
"Speaker Pelosi, and Representatives Rangel, DeLauro, and Peterson did the lion's share of heavy lifting on championing this proposal, and we are deeply grateful for their valiant efforts. I'm certain many hungry folks across the country will be grateful as well when they see their food stamp benefits go just a little further," said Rev. Beckmann.
One disappointing aspect of this morning's agreement was the decision to cut the McGovern-Dole International Food for Education program by $800 million.
"We hope a sizeable portion of the previously-proposed $860 million set aside for the McGovern-Dole initiative finds its way back into the legislation before it becomes law," said Rev. Beckmann. "This program not only helps feed hungry kids; it encourages them to be in school and provides the nutrition they need to grow and learn. What could be more important?"
Thursday, May 1, 2008
Farm Bill Update
From Bread for the World...a Farm Bill update as of April 25. Sorry I'm a bit late in posting it here!
----------------------------------------
Bread for the World Celebrates Half a Victory as Farm Bill Deal Seems Imminent
The following is a statement from the Rev. David Beckmann, president, Bread for the World, regarding the tentative deal reached this afternoon by Congressional negotiators on the multibillion-dollar Farm Bill:
“Congress is very close to finishing its marathon negotiations on the Farm Bill. We do not yet have the details, and there will probably be some last-minute wrangling over the weekend and next week.
“But Bread for the World is celebrating because Congress has, by all accounts, substantially increased funding for food assistance to hungry people. This is the right thing to do, especially now that hunger and poverty are on the increase. Poor families in this country are facing higher food and fuel prices, higher unemployment, and more restricted access to credit. The increase in world hunger is even more dramatic.
“It would have been wrong to continue past policies at a time when the need for food assistance is acute.
“Reportedly, the new Farm Bill also increases farm subsidies, despite record commodity prices and farm income. Congress has added a whole new subsidy program, a permanent disaster fund, even while they are modestly trimming some ongoing subsidy programs. Bread for the World wanted money shifted from subsidies to affluent landowners into investments that would benefit farm and rural families who really need help. That same shift would reduce the extent to which U.S. farm policies interfere with agriculture in Africa and other poor parts of the world.
“So if Congress and the President finalize the deal that was negotiated today, it will be a half victory for Bread for the World and the other reform groups – more help for hungry people, but no significant reform yet in the subsidy programs.
“The organizations that lobby for big farm subsidies spent $80 million lobbying Congress last year, according to the Wall Street Journal. For the church, environmental, and taxpayer groups who are seeking reform, half a victory is indeed cause for celebration.”
----------------------------------------
Bread for the World Celebrates Half a Victory as Farm Bill Deal Seems Imminent
The following is a statement from the Rev. David Beckmann, president, Bread for the World, regarding the tentative deal reached this afternoon by Congressional negotiators on the multibillion-dollar Farm Bill:
“Congress is very close to finishing its marathon negotiations on the Farm Bill. We do not yet have the details, and there will probably be some last-minute wrangling over the weekend and next week.
“But Bread for the World is celebrating because Congress has, by all accounts, substantially increased funding for food assistance to hungry people. This is the right thing to do, especially now that hunger and poverty are on the increase. Poor families in this country are facing higher food and fuel prices, higher unemployment, and more restricted access to credit. The increase in world hunger is even more dramatic.
“It would have been wrong to continue past policies at a time when the need for food assistance is acute.
“Reportedly, the new Farm Bill also increases farm subsidies, despite record commodity prices and farm income. Congress has added a whole new subsidy program, a permanent disaster fund, even while they are modestly trimming some ongoing subsidy programs. Bread for the World wanted money shifted from subsidies to affluent landowners into investments that would benefit farm and rural families who really need help. That same shift would reduce the extent to which U.S. farm policies interfere with agriculture in Africa and other poor parts of the world.
“So if Congress and the President finalize the deal that was negotiated today, it will be a half victory for Bread for the World and the other reform groups – more help for hungry people, but no significant reform yet in the subsidy programs.
“The organizations that lobby for big farm subsidies spent $80 million lobbying Congress last year, according to the Wall Street Journal. For the church, environmental, and taxpayer groups who are seeking reform, half a victory is indeed cause for celebration.”
Tuesday, March 18, 2008
Budget Call-in results: $4.1 Billion shortfall RESTORED!
From breadblog.org yesterday...
(FYI Obama and Clinton voted for this. McCain did not vote.)
------------------------
Early Friday morning of last week, the Senate decided overwhelmingly to restore the $4.1 Billion shortfall in the International Affairs Budget - which recommends funding levels for federal programs including effective anti-poverty efforts. The "Biden-Lugar Amendment" (S. Amdt 4245) passed 73-23 with overwhelming bipartisan support! (See how your senators voted here)
So here's what happened... Earlier last week, we asked you to called to support the Feinstein (D-CA) - Smith (R-OR) amendment to restore $2.6 billion to the International Affairs function of the FY09 budget resolution. Shortly after calls started to flood in (there were nearly a thousand calls from Bread supporters alone), we learned that Senators Biden (D-DE) and Lugar (R-IN) had decided to do even better and sponsor an amendment that brought the International Affairs back to the level of the president's request of $39.8 billion - a $4.1 Billion increase. So we turned our attention to the Biden-Lugar amendment which contained this bigger increase--and that amendment passed.
Bottom line: we couldn't have done this without you. This victory signals the power of grassroots demands for building a more just world. Moreover, this is an important first step in Bread for the World's campaign to increase poverty-focused development assistance by $5 billion next year.
Yet our work is not done. The budget resolution is just a spending blueprint and does not dictate the details of how this money should be spent. However the budget does send an important signal to appropriators who will be making these final decisions, and last Friday's vote shows the broad support these programs have.
Let's build on this momentum. Can you write a letter to the editor? Over the next few days, your local papers may run stories about the federal budget. We need to make sure the story focuses on what the budget resolution could mean for reducing poverty and giving hope to millions of our brothers and sisters around the world.
We also want to thank the senators that voted in favor of the amendment, and call those into account who did not. We have sample talking points if you need help getting started (see the 'comment' under this post), but your letter is always more likely to get published if it is original and comes from the heart. Please consider writing one, and if you have any questions, you can e-mail or call Shawnda Hines, Grassroots Media Associate at Bread, at shines@bread.org or at 888-752-7323 x2.
Thank you again for your passion for working to end hunger in our time.
(FYI Obama and Clinton voted for this. McCain did not vote.)
------------------------
Early Friday morning of last week, the Senate decided overwhelmingly to restore the $4.1 Billion shortfall in the International Affairs Budget - which recommends funding levels for federal programs including effective anti-poverty efforts. The "Biden-Lugar Amendment" (S. Amdt 4245) passed 73-23 with overwhelming bipartisan support! (See how your senators voted here)
So here's what happened... Earlier last week, we asked you to called to support the Feinstein (D-CA) - Smith (R-OR) amendment to restore $2.6 billion to the International Affairs function of the FY09 budget resolution. Shortly after calls started to flood in (there were nearly a thousand calls from Bread supporters alone), we learned that Senators Biden (D-DE) and Lugar (R-IN) had decided to do even better and sponsor an amendment that brought the International Affairs back to the level of the president's request of $39.8 billion - a $4.1 Billion increase. So we turned our attention to the Biden-Lugar amendment which contained this bigger increase--and that amendment passed.
Bottom line: we couldn't have done this without you. This victory signals the power of grassroots demands for building a more just world. Moreover, this is an important first step in Bread for the World's campaign to increase poverty-focused development assistance by $5 billion next year.
Yet our work is not done. The budget resolution is just a spending blueprint and does not dictate the details of how this money should be spent. However the budget does send an important signal to appropriators who will be making these final decisions, and last Friday's vote shows the broad support these programs have.
Let's build on this momentum. Can you write a letter to the editor? Over the next few days, your local papers may run stories about the federal budget. We need to make sure the story focuses on what the budget resolution could mean for reducing poverty and giving hope to millions of our brothers and sisters around the world.
We also want to thank the senators that voted in favor of the amendment, and call those into account who did not. We have sample talking points if you need help getting started (see the 'comment' under this post), but your letter is always more likely to get published if it is original and comes from the heart. Please consider writing one, and if you have any questions, you can e-mail or call Shawnda Hines, Grassroots Media Associate at Bread, at shines@bread.org or at 888-752-7323 x2.
Thank you again for your passion for working to end hunger in our time.
Wednesday, February 20, 2008
Global Poverty Act: Is your senator a co-sponsor?
The Global Poverty Act has passed through the Senate Foreign Relations committee and will move to the Senate floor soon.
This is the legislation that would make the eradication of extreme poverty an objective of US foreign policy. It would be the first time the Millennium Development Goals appeared in US law. It would require a coordinated effort of government agencies (including Treasury, Commerce, Ag Dept, etc) to make sure the efforts to alleviate poverty are not undercutting each others programs. In the push for "more and better" poverty-focused development aid, this act is the "better" part of that equation.
Here is a list of the 10 senators who are co-sponsoring the GPA. Obama is listed as "sponsor" and introduced it into the Senate with a couple of others...
Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL]
Sen. Joseph Biden [D-DE]
Sen. Maria Cantwell [D-WA]
Sen. Christopher Dodd [D-CT]
Sen. Richard Durbin [D-IL]
Sen. Russell Feingold [D-WI]
Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]
Sen. Charles Hagel [R-NE]
Sen. Richard Lugar [R-IN]
Sen. Robert Menéndez [D-NJ]
If your senators are among them, a thank you note would be appropriate if you are so inclined. If they are not...now would be a good time to write them a hand-written personal letter making sure they are aware of this legislation soon to be voted upon and that you care about it.
This is the legislation that would make the eradication of extreme poverty an objective of US foreign policy. It would be the first time the Millennium Development Goals appeared in US law. It would require a coordinated effort of government agencies (including Treasury, Commerce, Ag Dept, etc) to make sure the efforts to alleviate poverty are not undercutting each others programs. In the push for "more and better" poverty-focused development aid, this act is the "better" part of that equation.
Here is a list of the 10 senators who are co-sponsoring the GPA. Obama is listed as "sponsor" and introduced it into the Senate with a couple of others...
Sen. Barack Obama [D-IL]
Sen. Joseph Biden [D-DE]
Sen. Maria Cantwell [D-WA]
Sen. Christopher Dodd [D-CT]
Sen. Richard Durbin [D-IL]
Sen. Russell Feingold [D-WI]
Sen. Dianne Feinstein [D-CA]
Sen. Charles Hagel [R-NE]
Sen. Richard Lugar [R-IN]
Sen. Robert Menéndez [D-NJ]
If your senators are among them, a thank you note would be appropriate if you are so inclined. If they are not...now would be a good time to write them a hand-written personal letter making sure they are aware of this legislation soon to be voted upon and that you care about it.
Tuesday, January 1, 2008
2007 Farm Bill good from a Food Pantry perspective
If you read this blog, you are getting my perspective on the Farm Bill that is heavily swayed toward wanting those subsidies to be reined in for the benefit of global poverty and domestic. As I've pointed out already, the amendments related to reform did not get passed. Which is disappointing except for the magnificent fact that so many more people are aware and talking about it! Yet there was another side to what many of us were pushing for, which was increased support for domestic hunger programs. This type of support is the money that helps out local food pantries. From that end, it seems to have been a success...at least for now. There was increased support with the concern being that funding for it is not completely secure for the future. Nevertheless, here are optimistic statements from two main organizations that help out our local food pantries around here....
------------------------------
From the Greater Chicago Food Depository's website:
On Friday, Dec. 14, the Farm Bill passed out of the U.S. Senate. As you know, this is an important step toward securing additional resources for both the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) and the Food Stamp Program which provides food for hungry families throughout the country. Your advocacy helped to make this victory possible so give yourself a round of applause!
There are still obstacles ahead as the bill must go through conference committee and be signed into law by the President. Keep an eye out for future action alerts on this issue. Now that the bill has passed out of the Senate, please take a moment to call your U.S. Senators to thank them for their support of a strong nutrition title in the Farm Bill.
----------------------
From America's Second Harvest:
On Friday, December 14th, the Senate passed the 2007 Farm Bill by a vote of 79-14. The bill now will go before a House-Senate conference committee that will work to iron out the differences between the House and Senate-passed proposals.
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) have both voiced their strong support for wrapping up negotiation quickly on a final Farm Bill. Chairman Peterson has indicated that he plans to spend part of the winter congressional recess in Washington working with his staff on the Farm Bill. Chairman Harkin will chair the conference committee on the Farm Bill, but conferees apparently will not be named until January.
The Senate approval of the Farm Bill was a critical step in the process towards enactment of a final Farm Bill conference report. However, it is essential that the process continue to move forward to help ensure that the Congress passes a final Farm Bill that strengthens and enhances critical nutrition programs, like the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), the Food Stamp Program, and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), that help hungry Americans. The number of individuals and families seeking assistance from food banks across the country remains strong; however, federal commodities to food banks have declined drastically over the past several years due to high food prices. Quick passage of a final Farm Bill is essential for charitable feeding providers and the low-income Americans they serve every day.
Please send a letter to your Senators today and urge them to support the swift passage of a final Farm Bill conference report with a strong nutrition title as quickly as possible. Thank you for your help!
------------------------------
From the Greater Chicago Food Depository's website:
On Friday, Dec. 14, the Farm Bill passed out of the U.S. Senate. As you know, this is an important step toward securing additional resources for both the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) and the Food Stamp Program which provides food for hungry families throughout the country. Your advocacy helped to make this victory possible so give yourself a round of applause!
There are still obstacles ahead as the bill must go through conference committee and be signed into law by the President. Keep an eye out for future action alerts on this issue. Now that the bill has passed out of the Senate, please take a moment to call your U.S. Senators to thank them for their support of a strong nutrition title in the Farm Bill.
----------------------
From America's Second Harvest:
On Friday, December 14th, the Senate passed the 2007 Farm Bill by a vote of 79-14. The bill now will go before a House-Senate conference committee that will work to iron out the differences between the House and Senate-passed proposals.
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) and Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-IA) have both voiced their strong support for wrapping up negotiation quickly on a final Farm Bill. Chairman Peterson has indicated that he plans to spend part of the winter congressional recess in Washington working with his staff on the Farm Bill. Chairman Harkin will chair the conference committee on the Farm Bill, but conferees apparently will not be named until January.
The Senate approval of the Farm Bill was a critical step in the process towards enactment of a final Farm Bill conference report. However, it is essential that the process continue to move forward to help ensure that the Congress passes a final Farm Bill that strengthens and enhances critical nutrition programs, like the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), the Food Stamp Program, and the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), that help hungry Americans. The number of individuals and families seeking assistance from food banks across the country remains strong; however, federal commodities to food banks have declined drastically over the past several years due to high food prices. Quick passage of a final Farm Bill is essential for charitable feeding providers and the low-income Americans they serve every day.
Please send a letter to your Senators today and urge them to support the swift passage of a final Farm Bill conference report with a strong nutrition title as quickly as possible. Thank you for your help!
Tuesday, December 11, 2007
FRESH Amendment failed 37-58 in Senate
The first amendment to be voted on was the FRESH amendment (aka Luger-Lautenberg). It failed 37-58. This is the one that would have completely overhauled farm subsidies. Similar to the Ron Kind amendment in the House, which was a famous non-success. This one was not actually expected to pass as it might have been the most radical one. Bread for the World folks say they are happy that they got as high as 37 votes. So, that would be the good news in this. I am irritated to report that Biden, Clinton, Obama, Dodd and McCain were not voting. Could it be they were all stuck on the same plane back from Iowa? Sadly, I doubt it.
To see how everyone voted: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00417
There is still more action packed Farm Bill excitement to come, so don't get totally discouraged yet.
To see how everyone voted: http://www.senate.gov/legislative/LIS/roll_call_lists/roll_call_vote_cfm.cfm?congress=110&session=1&vote=00417
There is still more action packed Farm Bill excitement to come, so don't get totally discouraged yet.
Monday, December 10, 2007
BREAKING NEWS: Farm Bill vote TOMORROW!!!! Call in!
BREAKING NEWS: the Senate will be debating and voting on the Farm Bill TOMORROW DEC 11th!!!!
I've seen 2 very optimistic updates on the farm bill in the last 24 hrs. I'm not going to be disappointed in the length of the process if it turns out that we get some real reform in the end! The worst thing that could've happened is for the bill to be rushed through with a completely status quo result and no real debate. So, that does not appear to be happening!
The stalling was happening in the part of the process where the Senate decides on what amendments are even going to be considered. A deal has been achieved where both Reps and Dems will offer 20 amendments to the farm bill. Which should, as I understand it, be able to encompass the biggies that Bread for the World has been pushing for (Grassely-Dorgan, Lugar-Lautenberg, etc).
So call those senators if you haven't already:
1-800-826-3688 ask them to support:
• The FRESH Amendment;
• The Dorgan-Grassley Amendment
• The Brown-Sununu Amendment; and
• Any other amendments that help make our commodity payments fairer for all farmers and provide additional funding for the Food Stamp Program.
If you want to see a video on how to talk to your senators, here is a demonstation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgmKEAsfgok&eurl=http://www.breadblog.org/
It's actually a beautiful little piece that I can't believe we haven't seen before! good luck!
I've seen 2 very optimistic updates on the farm bill in the last 24 hrs. I'm not going to be disappointed in the length of the process if it turns out that we get some real reform in the end! The worst thing that could've happened is for the bill to be rushed through with a completely status quo result and no real debate. So, that does not appear to be happening!
The stalling was happening in the part of the process where the Senate decides on what amendments are even going to be considered. A deal has been achieved where both Reps and Dems will offer 20 amendments to the farm bill. Which should, as I understand it, be able to encompass the biggies that Bread for the World has been pushing for (Grassely-Dorgan, Lugar-Lautenberg, etc).
So call those senators if you haven't already:
1-800-826-3688 ask them to support:
• The FRESH Amendment;
• The Dorgan-Grassley Amendment
• The Brown-Sununu Amendment; and
• Any other amendments that help make our commodity payments fairer for all farmers and provide additional funding for the Food Stamp Program.
If you want to see a video on how to talk to your senators, here is a demonstation:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lgmKEAsfgok&eurl=http://www.breadblog.org/
It's actually a beautiful little piece that I can't believe we haven't seen before! good luck!
Thursday, August 2, 2007
Norman Borlaug: Saved a billion people from hunger
Here's an article about Norman Borlaug who recently won the Congressional Gold Medal (after winning the Nobel Peace Prise and the Presidential Medal of Freedom) for his work developing high yield wheat hybrids, planting & soil conservation techniques that have saved many from hunger and given us the science and the technology to eradicate extreme poverty if we choose to. Congratulations, Mr. Borlaug!
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19886675/site/newsweek/
Here's an excerpt:
"Borlaug's success in feeding the world testifies to the difference a single person can make. But the obscurity of a man of such surpassing accomplishment is a reminder of our culture's surpassing superficiality. Reading Walter Isaacson's terrific biography of Albert Einstein, I was struck by how famous Einstein was, long before his role in the atom bomb. Great scientists and humanitarians were once heroes and cover boys. No more. For Borlaug, still vital at 93, to win more notice, he would have to make his next trip to Africa in the company of Angelina Jolie.
The consequences of obscuring complex issues like agriculture are serious. Take the huge farm bill now nearing passage, a subject Borlaug knows a thing or two about. Because it seems boring and technical and unrelated to our busy urban lives, we aren't focused on how it relates directly to the environment, immigration, global poverty and the budget deficit, not to mention the highly subsidized high-fructose corn syrup we ingest every day. We can blame the mindless media for failing to keep us better informed about how $95 billion a year is hijacked by a few powerful corporate interests. But we can also blame ourselves. It's all there on the Internet (or in books like Daniel Imhoff's breezy "Food Fight"), if we decide to get interested. But will we? Sometimes it seems the more we've got at our fingertips, the less that sticks in our minds."
http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/19886675/site/newsweek/
Here's an excerpt:
"Borlaug's success in feeding the world testifies to the difference a single person can make. But the obscurity of a man of such surpassing accomplishment is a reminder of our culture's surpassing superficiality. Reading Walter Isaacson's terrific biography of Albert Einstein, I was struck by how famous Einstein was, long before his role in the atom bomb. Great scientists and humanitarians were once heroes and cover boys. No more. For Borlaug, still vital at 93, to win more notice, he would have to make his next trip to Africa in the company of Angelina Jolie.
The consequences of obscuring complex issues like agriculture are serious. Take the huge farm bill now nearing passage, a subject Borlaug knows a thing or two about. Because it seems boring and technical and unrelated to our busy urban lives, we aren't focused on how it relates directly to the environment, immigration, global poverty and the budget deficit, not to mention the highly subsidized high-fructose corn syrup we ingest every day. We can blame the mindless media for failing to keep us better informed about how $95 billion a year is hijacked by a few powerful corporate interests. But we can also blame ourselves. It's all there on the Internet (or in books like Daniel Imhoff's breezy "Food Fight"), if we decide to get interested. But will we? Sometimes it seems the more we've got at our fingertips, the less that sticks in our minds."
Saturday, July 28, 2007
Farm Bill News FAQ: "what happened?" "what's with the Dems?" "Is it over?"
In the interest of timeliness, I previously copied a few detailed articles I found that summed up farm bill news. But I've had a few very good questions that I'll try to answer concisely.
"So...what happened exactly? Did our call-ins work?"
Yes and no. The bad news is that the farm subsidy program is largely unchanged. Under this Farm Bill version, large farms will continue to get most of the subsidies while farmers of modest means will continue to struggle. Developing countries will be locked out of selling their products. The WTO may sue us over cotton subsidies. So, that didn't work. But the good news is that to get that passed, the Status Quo reps had to sweeten the pot for the on-the-fencer's by giving more food stamp assistance, nutrition stuff, rural development and conservation programs. So, that part did work. The bummer is that those nice things might not actually get funded. If the subsidy part had been cut more, the money could have come from there.
"I don't understand why so many Democrats voted against the reform amendment and for the Farm Bill. What do you think?"
Dems are having a really hard time keeping together on this one. They're trying to hold their majority and show they can run Congress effectively. A powerful "farm bloc" feels strongly about keeping subsidies high although it flies in the face of what democrats stand for. These reps are backed by large farms that eat up most of the subsidy payments and they don't want to lose support. Rep Zack Space from Ohio is an example. He's a freshman Dem rep, outspoken in saying things like "my constituents are pretty comfortable with things the way they are." Meaning: those with clout to get him replaced with a Republlican are happy with fat subsidies. Poor constituents with no influence are probably not happy at all. I've also heard some Dem reps personally receive those subsidies. A legal conflict of interest?
"Why are Republicans against the Farm Bill?"
In order to pay for the last minute adds, a tax on foreign countries- that can be used as tax havens for US subsidiaries- was put in that has the GOP against the bill. Republicans cite this as a partisan move to add taxes to what was a bipartisan bill.
"Is it over?"
Oh no. Things aren't looking great, but this thing is far from over. The White House threatened to veto if significant subsidy caps aren't in place. Bush can still do this. And the Senate debate is just beginning. The House and Senate must pass their own versions of the bill, then Congress has to reconcile the two for the final bill. Now it's more important than ever to write/call your senators about this. And if your senator is running for president, try extra hard to catch their attention. Like writing a letter to the editor with their name in it. Their printed name gets them looking more than anything!
"So...what happened exactly? Did our call-ins work?"
Yes and no. The bad news is that the farm subsidy program is largely unchanged. Under this Farm Bill version, large farms will continue to get most of the subsidies while farmers of modest means will continue to struggle. Developing countries will be locked out of selling their products. The WTO may sue us over cotton subsidies. So, that didn't work. But the good news is that to get that passed, the Status Quo reps had to sweeten the pot for the on-the-fencer's by giving more food stamp assistance, nutrition stuff, rural development and conservation programs. So, that part did work. The bummer is that those nice things might not actually get funded. If the subsidy part had been cut more, the money could have come from there.
"I don't understand why so many Democrats voted against the reform amendment and for the Farm Bill. What do you think?"
Dems are having a really hard time keeping together on this one. They're trying to hold their majority and show they can run Congress effectively. A powerful "farm bloc" feels strongly about keeping subsidies high although it flies in the face of what democrats stand for. These reps are backed by large farms that eat up most of the subsidy payments and they don't want to lose support. Rep Zack Space from Ohio is an example. He's a freshman Dem rep, outspoken in saying things like "my constituents are pretty comfortable with things the way they are." Meaning: those with clout to get him replaced with a Republlican are happy with fat subsidies. Poor constituents with no influence are probably not happy at all. I've also heard some Dem reps personally receive those subsidies. A legal conflict of interest?
"Why are Republicans against the Farm Bill?"
In order to pay for the last minute adds, a tax on foreign countries- that can be used as tax havens for US subsidiaries- was put in that has the GOP against the bill. Republicans cite this as a partisan move to add taxes to what was a bipartisan bill.
"Is it over?"
Oh no. Things aren't looking great, but this thing is far from over. The White House threatened to veto if significant subsidy caps aren't in place. Bush can still do this. And the Senate debate is just beginning. The House and Senate must pass their own versions of the bill, then Congress has to reconcile the two for the final bill. Now it's more important than ever to write/call your senators about this. And if your senator is running for president, try extra hard to catch their attention. Like writing a letter to the editor with their name in it. Their printed name gets them looking more than anything!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)