Some quick notes about the Global Food Security Act introduced last week. The news has an IL aspect as Sen Durbin is now an original sponsor!
-Sens. Richard Lugar (R-IN) and Bob Casey (D-PA) introduced their Global Food Security Act (S. 384) last week, joined by Senator Richard Durbin (D-IL) as an original sponsor.
-The bill seeks to improve coordination of programs that support global food security; increase the resources available for agriculture, rural development, and nutrition programs; and create a fund for immediate food emergency response.
- A similar bill is expected to be introduced in the House.
Showing posts with label News. Show all posts
Showing posts with label News. Show all posts
Thursday, February 12, 2009
Friday, February 6, 2009
Obama signs Children's Health Care Bill (SCHIP)
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.
------------------
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.
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
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!!!!
Wednesday, June 11, 2008
Uganda 'happy' about food crisis
I came across this on the Poverty News Blog (http://povertynewsblog.blogspot.com/) who cites the BBC as the source. If trade barriers can be removed, then it is possible that a great deal of long term good could come from (relatively) short term hardship.
----------------------------------------
Uganda 'happy' about food crisis
from the BBC
The president of Uganda says he is "very happy" about the food crisis.
"Why? Because we produce a lot of food... We are stuck with food," President Yoweri Museveni told Commonwealth heads of government.
The president hopes the food crisis will prompt the removal of trade barriers, allowing countries like Uganda to profit from food surpluses.
A BBC correspondent says most benefits are going to large, commercial farms, while poor Ugandans are suffering.
The BBC's Sarah Grainger in Uganda says most of the population are subsistence farmers, who do not export their crops but are affected by the rising cost of fuel and other inputs.
But overall food production has risen in recent years.
Uganda's growth rate is expected to reach 8.9% later on this year, up from 6.5% last year, partly due to debt relief.
"Our problem has been marketing... We produce 10 million metric tonnes of bananas and 40% of it rots because we have nowhere to sell it," President Museveni told delegates.
President Museveni said milk production had risen so rapidly, it had been poured away.
That was until Uganda set up a recent agreement with an Indian processor plant: excess milk is now being shipped to India.
----------------------------------------
Uganda 'happy' about food crisis
from the BBC
The president of Uganda says he is "very happy" about the food crisis.
"Why? Because we produce a lot of food... We are stuck with food," President Yoweri Museveni told Commonwealth heads of government.
The president hopes the food crisis will prompt the removal of trade barriers, allowing countries like Uganda to profit from food surpluses.
A BBC correspondent says most benefits are going to large, commercial farms, while poor Ugandans are suffering.
The BBC's Sarah Grainger in Uganda says most of the population are subsistence farmers, who do not export their crops but are affected by the rising cost of fuel and other inputs.
But overall food production has risen in recent years.
Uganda's growth rate is expected to reach 8.9% later on this year, up from 6.5% last year, partly due to debt relief.
"Our problem has been marketing... We produce 10 million metric tonnes of bananas and 40% of it rots because we have nowhere to sell it," President Museveni told delegates.
President Museveni said milk production had risen so rapidly, it had been poured away.
That was until Uganda set up a recent agreement with an Indian processor plant: excess milk is now being shipped to India.
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.
Wednesday, May 14, 2008
Bread for the World Calls 2008 Farm Bill "Half a Loaf"
Washington, DC, May 14, 2008--Bread for the World president Rev. David Beckmann issued the following statement today concerning the 2008 Farm Bill that is expected to pass both houses of Congress this week and is also expected to be vetoed by President Bush:
"The 2008 Farm Bill represents half a loaf. Congress has increased funding for vital domestic nutrition programs but has failed to substantially reform the U.S. agricultural system.
"We rejoice that additional funding has been given to nutrition programs especially in light of the growing global hunger crisis that is hindering the efforts of struggling parents to feed their children. We celebrate the increases to the Food Stamp Program and funding for food banks. We are happy that the bill authorizes the Hunger Free Communities grant program, which will enable community-based organizations to work together to plan and implement local strategies to end hunger. We are also encouraged that it contains a pilot program that allows for the local purchase of food aid from sources closer to the countries in need.
"But we are missing the other half of the loaf--substantial reform of the commodity programs. Congress has failed to make our commodity programs fairer and more equitable. The bill does little to target subsidies to where they are most needed, but continues to concentrate payments to the largest and wealthiest landowners.
"This missing half has long-term and pernicious effects on global agriculture and trade. Current policies have helped stymie agricultural development in poor countries, leaving millions of people mired in poverty and helping to create the current hunger crisis worldwide. Rather than respond to the new reality of global agriculture, the 2008 Farm Bill locks the United States into another five-year protectionist system that hampers the desperate efforts of small farmers to feed their families.
"We celebrate the important and urgent increases in nutrition funding. But we deeply lament the lack of serious reform of agricultural subsidies in this bill. Many will praise the 2008 Farm Bill as 'the best we can do.' We think the United States can and should do better. Therefore, with a heavy heart, we have chosen a middle of the road stance as the bill moves toward final passage.
"Our stand on the 2008 Farm Bill comes from a Biblical imperative that calls for a 'harvest of righteousness' (James 3:18). We will keep on working to reform the farm bill until it truly serves the needs of poor farm and rural families and all people around the world who struggle to feed themselves and their children."
"The 2008 Farm Bill represents half a loaf. Congress has increased funding for vital domestic nutrition programs but has failed to substantially reform the U.S. agricultural system.
"We rejoice that additional funding has been given to nutrition programs especially in light of the growing global hunger crisis that is hindering the efforts of struggling parents to feed their children. We celebrate the increases to the Food Stamp Program and funding for food banks. We are happy that the bill authorizes the Hunger Free Communities grant program, which will enable community-based organizations to work together to plan and implement local strategies to end hunger. We are also encouraged that it contains a pilot program that allows for the local purchase of food aid from sources closer to the countries in need.
"But we are missing the other half of the loaf--substantial reform of the commodity programs. Congress has failed to make our commodity programs fairer and more equitable. The bill does little to target subsidies to where they are most needed, but continues to concentrate payments to the largest and wealthiest landowners.
"This missing half has long-term and pernicious effects on global agriculture and trade. Current policies have helped stymie agricultural development in poor countries, leaving millions of people mired in poverty and helping to create the current hunger crisis worldwide. Rather than respond to the new reality of global agriculture, the 2008 Farm Bill locks the United States into another five-year protectionist system that hampers the desperate efforts of small farmers to feed their families.
"We celebrate the important and urgent increases in nutrition funding. But we deeply lament the lack of serious reform of agricultural subsidies in this bill. Many will praise the 2008 Farm Bill as 'the best we can do.' We think the United States can and should do better. Therefore, with a heavy heart, we have chosen a middle of the road stance as the bill moves toward final passage.
"Our stand on the 2008 Farm Bill comes from a Biblical imperative that calls for a 'harvest of righteousness' (James 3:18). We will keep on working to reform the farm bill until it truly serves the needs of poor farm and rural families and all people around the world who struggle to feed themselves and their children."
Sunday, April 13, 2008
Dramatic Increase in World Hunger Coverage
Some of you might have noticed that this blog has been a little (ok...a lot) light on the content for a while. Sorry! The reason was that I was traveling around the eastern US in a minivan, discovering how irritating dependence on someone else's i-phone for internet access can be. But I've been back now for a while and catching up on all the poverty coverage I missed and didn't comment on. As I scan the papers and reflect on the only decent news source I had recently (NPR), I'm struck by the rising amount of coverage that global hunger is getting lately. I remember, last summer, sometimes I would go weeks without hearing anything poverty-related. Now, I hear something daily. On one hand, I'm happy the issue is finally making front page news (literally front page on the Sunday Chicago Trib this AM) and entering the global and national debate. On the other hand, I think it's because things are really getting bad and they are likely to get much, much worse.
Last December, I posted an Economist article from the economist called "The End of Cheap Food" predicting that food prices would be skyrocketing within the year. And now it's happening. I'll write further posts about the reasons for it, but let's just leave today's observation at the fact that people are talking about it now. Riots in Haiti, unrest in India, American food stamp program in trouble... Not a day goes by that I don't hear something about it.
What point can I leave you with today? It's a great time to become an anti-poverty activist. The need is great, the coverage is plentiful. If you've been wondering whether to exercise your voice and speak out for people in need, the answer is "yes!" and the time to do it is now. To get started, please visit www.bread.org or www.results.org to learn more about how to make some real change.
Last December, I posted an Economist article from the economist called "The End of Cheap Food" predicting that food prices would be skyrocketing within the year. And now it's happening. I'll write further posts about the reasons for it, but let's just leave today's observation at the fact that people are talking about it now. Riots in Haiti, unrest in India, American food stamp program in trouble... Not a day goes by that I don't hear something about it.
What point can I leave you with today? It's a great time to become an anti-poverty activist. The need is great, the coverage is plentiful. If you've been wondering whether to exercise your voice and speak out for people in need, the answer is "yes!" and the time to do it is now. To get started, please visit www.bread.org or www.results.org to learn more about how to make some real change.
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.
Tuesday, March 11, 2008
Christian Science Monitor series: "An End to Poverty"
This week, the Christian Science Monitor is running a five-part series called "An End to Poverty: New Hope for the Last Billion Poor." Today’s segment is about addressing some of common myths about global poverty. It also highlights how uncoordinated our aid is and how it isn’t targeted toward the poorest of the poor.
"A First Step for the Global Poor- Shattering Six Myths"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0310/p09s01-coop.html?page=3
Here are some excerpts:
" 'There are too many impoverished people to help.'
A bogus excuse. Historically, the world's poorest covered the globe. That's no longer the case. The mid-tier developing world in much of South and Central Asia is steadily and remarkably rising in prosperity. The last billion who suffer extreme poverty are concentrated in fewer than 60 very small sub-Saharan, Asian, and Latin American countries, which means we've never been in a better position to eradicate it."
" 'If aid is good, more aid is better.'
Not really. Since 2001, the Bush administration has tripled foreign assistance worldwide, and quadrupled it in Africa. And NGOs build their identities around raising and giving money. But more funding isn't the most critical issue.
While humanitarian assistance has saved millions, consider this startling conclusion from a recent study by the Center for Global Development: When aid rises to 8 percent of a recipient nation's gross domestic product, it has zero effect on economic growth. Above that, it has a negative effect.
The serious challenge is one of coordination. Chronic shortages of skilled citizens in the very worst-off nations mean that more resources simply can't be deployed effectively. Instead, donors, NGOs, and private philanthropies trip over one another, competing to give money away, rather than coordinating at ground level to get results. More isn't always better; smarter is better."
"A First Step for the Global Poor- Shattering Six Myths"
http://www.csmonitor.com/2008/0310/p09s01-coop.html?page=3
Here are some excerpts:
" 'There are too many impoverished people to help.'
A bogus excuse. Historically, the world's poorest covered the globe. That's no longer the case. The mid-tier developing world in much of South and Central Asia is steadily and remarkably rising in prosperity. The last billion who suffer extreme poverty are concentrated in fewer than 60 very small sub-Saharan, Asian, and Latin American countries, which means we've never been in a better position to eradicate it."
" 'If aid is good, more aid is better.'
Not really. Since 2001, the Bush administration has tripled foreign assistance worldwide, and quadrupled it in Africa. And NGOs build their identities around raising and giving money. But more funding isn't the most critical issue.
While humanitarian assistance has saved millions, consider this startling conclusion from a recent study by the Center for Global Development: When aid rises to 8 percent of a recipient nation's gross domestic product, it has zero effect on economic growth. Above that, it has a negative effect.
The serious challenge is one of coordination. Chronic shortages of skilled citizens in the very worst-off nations mean that more resources simply can't be deployed effectively. Instead, donors, NGOs, and private philanthropies trip over one another, competing to give money away, rather than coordinating at ground level to get results. More isn't always better; smarter is better."
Friday, February 22, 2008
Global Poverty Act Misrepresented by Right Wing Media
I feel the need to give space to some ridiculous rumors about the Global Poverty Act that are circulating in blog-land. Someone even brought this subject up as a comment here, but since "anonymous" referred to the legislation by the wrong name and gave no specifics, I didn't know what they were talking about at the time.
So there's this blogger-dude Cliff Kincaid that took it upon himself to write a post on Valentine's Day for a site called "Accuracy in Media." His post was, shall we say...inaccurate at best. I'm not even gonna get into the main accusations he made about Obama being a socialist (which he's not). This is the Anti-Poverty Blog, so let's focus on the anti-poverty parts. He said:
" an Obama bill, "The Global Poverty Act," has just been rushed through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, with the assistance of Democratic Senator Joe Biden, the chairman, and Republican Senator Richard Lugar. The legislation (S.2433) commits the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars more in foreign aid on the rest of the world, in order to comply with the "Millennium Goals" established by the United Nations. Conservative members of the committee were largely caught off-guard by the move to pass the Obama bill but are putting a "hold" on it, in order to try to prevent the legislation, which also quickly passed the House, from being quickly brought up for a full Senate vote. But observers think that Senate Democrats may try to pass it quickly anyway, in order to give Obama a precious legislative "victory" that he could run on. "
WHAT?!?! Has Kincaid ever heard of govtrack.us? This is not what S.2433 is about.
The Global Poverty Act has no funding provisions in it. It neither authorizes nor obligates the federal government to spending new money. It is a vehicle for us to make it US law to promote (not pay for) 3 things: reduction of poverty, elimination of extreme poverty and the achievement of the MDG's. Through it's requirements for the President to develop strategies for this and report back to congress, it commits our government to efficiency, consistency, and coherence in our efforts to reduce global poverty. Please see my post for Thurs, Jan 31st, 2008 for more detail or better yet, do what Kincaid failed to do and look it up "S.2433" on govtrack.us.
Now, "Obama bill"? Hardly. I am proud as an IL resident that he introduced it and is an original co-sponsor, but nine other senators are co-sponsoring it. It has support from both Republicans and Democrats; the legislation was shepherded through the House last year by Republican Congressman Spencer Bachus from Alabama.
It's one thing to take a swipe at a presidential candidate with "swiftboating" type lies and emails. It's quite another to misrepresent a piece of easily checked, poverty fighting legislation that has 10 bi-partisan co-sponsors just because one of them happens to look like he's winning an election. If Kincaid's assertions about the Global Poverty Act are this wildly off and off-putting, how accurate do we think his assertions about Obama are?
So there's this blogger-dude Cliff Kincaid that took it upon himself to write a post on Valentine's Day for a site called "Accuracy in Media." His post was, shall we say...inaccurate at best. I'm not even gonna get into the main accusations he made about Obama being a socialist (which he's not). This is the Anti-Poverty Blog, so let's focus on the anti-poverty parts. He said:
" an Obama bill, "The Global Poverty Act," has just been rushed through the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, with the assistance of Democratic Senator Joe Biden, the chairman, and Republican Senator Richard Lugar. The legislation (S.2433) commits the U.S. to spending hundreds of billions of dollars more in foreign aid on the rest of the world, in order to comply with the "Millennium Goals" established by the United Nations. Conservative members of the committee were largely caught off-guard by the move to pass the Obama bill but are putting a "hold" on it, in order to try to prevent the legislation, which also quickly passed the House, from being quickly brought up for a full Senate vote. But observers think that Senate Democrats may try to pass it quickly anyway, in order to give Obama a precious legislative "victory" that he could run on. "
WHAT?!?! Has Kincaid ever heard of govtrack.us? This is not what S.2433 is about.
The Global Poverty Act has no funding provisions in it. It neither authorizes nor obligates the federal government to spending new money. It is a vehicle for us to make it US law to promote (not pay for) 3 things: reduction of poverty, elimination of extreme poverty and the achievement of the MDG's. Through it's requirements for the President to develop strategies for this and report back to congress, it commits our government to efficiency, consistency, and coherence in our efforts to reduce global poverty. Please see my post for Thurs, Jan 31st, 2008 for more detail or better yet, do what Kincaid failed to do and look it up "S.2433" on govtrack.us.
Now, "Obama bill"? Hardly. I am proud as an IL resident that he introduced it and is an original co-sponsor, but nine other senators are co-sponsoring it. It has support from both Republicans and Democrats; the legislation was shepherded through the House last year by Republican Congressman Spencer Bachus from Alabama.
It's one thing to take a swipe at a presidential candidate with "swiftboating" type lies and emails. It's quite another to misrepresent a piece of easily checked, poverty fighting legislation that has 10 bi-partisan co-sponsors just because one of them happens to look like he's winning an election. If Kincaid's assertions about the Global Poverty Act are this wildly off and off-putting, how accurate do we think his assertions about Obama are?
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.
Thursday, February 14, 2008
Economist: Brazil's "Family Fund" anti-poverty program
The Economist ran an article in on Feb 7 about an anti-poverty program in Latin America that is being tried in other countries, including the US. In Brazil (who got it the idea from Mexico), it's called "Bolsa Familia." It's a conditional cash transfer program. In essence, families living in poverty are able to get receive federal money on a cash card on the condition that their children keep attending school and keep current with medical vaccinations.
The hope is that it will lessen the likelihood of poverty in the next generation through better education and improved health. It is also meant to stimulate economic growth in the poorest sections of the country. Some of the criticisms concern the possibility of fraud related to compliance of families, the possibility of it becoming a long-term program instead of a temporary boost, and the perception of the program being a way for politicians to "buy votes." Nonetheless, these programs are attracting attention around the globe. More kids are being vaccinated and educated while impovershed families are able to improve their own situations.
Here's the full story:
http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10650663
The hope is that it will lessen the likelihood of poverty in the next generation through better education and improved health. It is also meant to stimulate economic growth in the poorest sections of the country. Some of the criticisms concern the possibility of fraud related to compliance of families, the possibility of it becoming a long-term program instead of a temporary boost, and the perception of the program being a way for politicians to "buy votes." Nonetheless, these programs are attracting attention around the globe. More kids are being vaccinated and educated while impovershed families are able to improve their own situations.
Here's the full story:
http://www.economist.com/world/la/displaystory.cfm?story_id=10650663
Tuesday, February 12, 2008
New News about Malnutrition
From Breadblog.org
-------------------------------------------
We all know that malnutrition is linked to child mortality. This is not new news. But to what extent? According to a recent article in The Economist, hunger has an even bigger impact on children's health than was previously thought. In a paper by Robert Black of Johns Hopkins University,
"underweight births and inter-uterine growth restrictions cause 2.2m child deaths a year (around one every 15 seconds). Poor or non-existent breastfeeding explains another 1.4m. Other deficiencies—lack of vitamin A or zinc for instance—account for 1m. In all, that is 3.5m deaths (once you strip out double counting)—one-third of total child mortality."
The real news shown here and confirmed by Lancet, a British medical journal, is that hunger causes disease and death and can be fatal in and of itself. In the past, malnutrition had simply been treated as something that exacerbates other diseases such as measles, diarrhea, and pneumonia. These findings, however, confirm and emphasize the point that hunger is the gravest single threat to the world's public health. This has serious implications for international aid distribution. Currently, roughly $300m of aid goes to basic nutrition each year (less than $2 for each child below two in the 20 worst affected countries) whereas $2.2 billion goes to HIV/AIDS ($67 per person with HIV in all countries, including rich ones). However, HIV/AIDS causes far fewer deaths than child malnutrition. This is not to say that money shouldn't go into life-threatening diseases like HIV/AIDS. It does, however, present a far more holistic model for addressing problems of health and nutrition. According to April Harding of the Centre for Global Development,
it forces policymakers to pay attention to health-care systems as a whole, rather than trying to save children “one disease at a time”.
If we can adequately address the issue of hunger, we will be well on our way to dealing with the other diseases it causes and contributes to.
-------------------------------------------
We all know that malnutrition is linked to child mortality. This is not new news. But to what extent? According to a recent article in The Economist, hunger has an even bigger impact on children's health than was previously thought. In a paper by Robert Black of Johns Hopkins University,
"underweight births and inter-uterine growth restrictions cause 2.2m child deaths a year (around one every 15 seconds). Poor or non-existent breastfeeding explains another 1.4m. Other deficiencies—lack of vitamin A or zinc for instance—account for 1m. In all, that is 3.5m deaths (once you strip out double counting)—one-third of total child mortality."
The real news shown here and confirmed by Lancet, a British medical journal, is that hunger causes disease and death and can be fatal in and of itself. In the past, malnutrition had simply been treated as something that exacerbates other diseases such as measles, diarrhea, and pneumonia. These findings, however, confirm and emphasize the point that hunger is the gravest single threat to the world's public health. This has serious implications for international aid distribution. Currently, roughly $300m of aid goes to basic nutrition each year (less than $2 for each child below two in the 20 worst affected countries) whereas $2.2 billion goes to HIV/AIDS ($67 per person with HIV in all countries, including rich ones). However, HIV/AIDS causes far fewer deaths than child malnutrition. This is not to say that money shouldn't go into life-threatening diseases like HIV/AIDS. It does, however, present a far more holistic model for addressing problems of health and nutrition. According to April Harding of the Centre for Global Development,
it forces policymakers to pay attention to health-care systems as a whole, rather than trying to save children “one disease at a time”.
If we can adequately address the issue of hunger, we will be well on our way to dealing with the other diseases it causes and contributes to.
Sunday, February 10, 2008
Economic Stimulus Act: How Stimulating Can We Make It?
On Feb 7, the Economic Stimulus Act finished it's rounds at the House and Senate and is on its way to the White House. The goal is "To provide economic stimulus through recovery rebates to individuals, incentives for business investment, and an increase in conforming and FHA loan limits." It's my understanding that every taxpayer is to receive a $600 rebate, meaning $1200 for married couples.
That can be a wonderful windfall for many people who need it badly. And yet, it strikes me that there are a lot more people who need it more than some recipients. More than me, for instance. Can my family use $1200? Sure. Could I improve the lifestyle of my family? Maybe...marginally... But what could this money mean to someone else? Someone not getting it because they don't pay taxes... a food insecure senior or someone who lives on the street? Could it pay for literacy classes? Could it help someone be not so hungry that they could spend their energy on something besides looking for the next meal? Some friends of mine have been thinking about these questions and decided this money can be used for a different kind of stimulus. They've decided to donate their entire rebate to the organization they feel could best stimulate the economic growth of people in need of basic necessities. It might be the Greater Chicago Food Depository, which not only feeds people but provides job training, or somewhere else. They wished me to challenge you folks through this blog and others to consider whether or not you really need it. If you do, that's great...use it in good health as the windfall it is. But if you do not, please consider putting this money in part or whole where it can help the most...where it might stimulate a part of the economy that is not discussed in this Act.
That can be a wonderful windfall for many people who need it badly. And yet, it strikes me that there are a lot more people who need it more than some recipients. More than me, for instance. Can my family use $1200? Sure. Could I improve the lifestyle of my family? Maybe...marginally... But what could this money mean to someone else? Someone not getting it because they don't pay taxes... a food insecure senior or someone who lives on the street? Could it pay for literacy classes? Could it help someone be not so hungry that they could spend their energy on something besides looking for the next meal? Some friends of mine have been thinking about these questions and decided this money can be used for a different kind of stimulus. They've decided to donate their entire rebate to the organization they feel could best stimulate the economic growth of people in need of basic necessities. It might be the Greater Chicago Food Depository, which not only feeds people but provides job training, or somewhere else. They wished me to challenge you folks through this blog and others to consider whether or not you really need it. If you do, that's great...use it in good health as the windfall it is. But if you do not, please consider putting this money in part or whole where it can help the most...where it might stimulate a part of the economy that is not discussed in this Act.
Monday, February 4, 2008
Half the Sky update on China weather crisis
From Jenny Bowen, exec director of Half the Sky:
"You are phenomenal!
I feel so honored to be a part of what has become a worldwide effort to help the children through this terrible time. We have not had a chance to put a number on your commitment to the children but it’s already far beyond what I imagined just a few days ago when I told you what we had learned about their plight. You are proving beyond doubt that the world cares about China’s orphans.
The weather gave us all a bit of respite today. Together with our friends at the Ministry of Civil Affairs, we’ve been talking to the institutions in the hardest hit areas and have posted a longer list of needs on our website at ttp://www.halfthesky.org/work/littlemouse.php The list is too long to email now. Many of you have asked, so I’ve begun also posting anticipated costs for the relief effort at each site, as we begin to get estimates."
"You are phenomenal!
I feel so honored to be a part of what has become a worldwide effort to help the children through this terrible time. We have not had a chance to put a number on your commitment to the children but it’s already far beyond what I imagined just a few days ago when I told you what we had learned about their plight. You are proving beyond doubt that the world cares about China’s orphans.
The weather gave us all a bit of respite today. Together with our friends at the Ministry of Civil Affairs, we’ve been talking to the institutions in the hardest hit areas and have posted a longer list of needs on our website at ttp://www.halfthesky.org/work/littlemouse.php The list is too long to email now. Many of you have asked, so I’ve begun also posting anticipated costs for the relief effort at each site, as we begin to get estimates."
Sunday, February 3, 2008
Altantic Monthly article about Poverty in China
Since I plugged Half the Sky, it's fitting I do an entry about poverty in China. In the current Atlantic Monthly, there's a detailed article about why much of China lives in poverty...with some disturbing correlations with rich American lifestyle. In a possibly oversimplified summary: China has a ton of money in their national savings...but the public never sees it in infrastructure or care of the population. To keep national growth from running away uncontrollably, they invest their savings largely US Treasury notes. Here is the article:
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/fallows-chinese-dollars
...and here are some interesting quotes:
"Chinese leaders have deliberately held down living standards for their own people and propped them up in the United States. This is the real meaning of the vast trade surplus—$1.4 trillion and counting, going up by about $1 billion per day—that the Chinese government has mostly parked in U.S. Treasury notes. In effect, every person in the (rich) United States has over the past 10 years or so borrowed about $4,000 from someone in the (poor) People’s Republic of China. "
"Some Chinese people are rich, but China as a whole is unbelievably short on many of the things that qualify countries as fully developed. Shanghai has about the same climate as Washington, D.C.—and its public schools have no heating. (Go to a classroom when it’s cold, and you’ll see 40 children, all in their winter jackets, their breath forming clouds in the air.) "
"Better schools, more-abundant parks, better health care, cleaner air and water, better sewers in the cities—you name it, and if it isn’t in some way connected to the factory-export economy, China hasn’t got it, or not enough. ...The average cash income for workers in a big factory is about $160 per month. On the farm, it’s a small fraction of that. Most people in China feel they are moving up, but from a very low starting point."
http://www.theatlantic.com/doc/200801/fallows-chinese-dollars
...and here are some interesting quotes:
"Chinese leaders have deliberately held down living standards for their own people and propped them up in the United States. This is the real meaning of the vast trade surplus—$1.4 trillion and counting, going up by about $1 billion per day—that the Chinese government has mostly parked in U.S. Treasury notes. In effect, every person in the (rich) United States has over the past 10 years or so borrowed about $4,000 from someone in the (poor) People’s Republic of China. "
"Some Chinese people are rich, but China as a whole is unbelievably short on many of the things that qualify countries as fully developed. Shanghai has about the same climate as Washington, D.C.—and its public schools have no heating. (Go to a classroom when it’s cold, and you’ll see 40 children, all in their winter jackets, their breath forming clouds in the air.) "
"Better schools, more-abundant parks, better health care, cleaner air and water, better sewers in the cities—you name it, and if it isn’t in some way connected to the factory-export economy, China hasn’t got it, or not enough. ...The average cash income for workers in a big factory is about $160 per month. On the farm, it’s a small fraction of that. Most people in China feel they are moving up, but from a very low starting point."
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Edwards brought Poverty to the table
I just heard that the John Edwards campaign is over today. I'm sad to see him go as he was an important voice in the debates. Before he arrived on the scene, I wondered if presidential debates would ever take poverty seriously. He did a tremendous job of bringing poverty issues to the front and not letting people forget about it. I hope the other candidates keep up the dialogue now that we're having the discussion. Good luck, John and Elizabeth! I'm sure we'll see you again!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)