A proposed plan by the Obama administration to change the food aid program has sparked a series of intense lobbying, reports The New York Times. Shipping companies, agribusiness and charitable groups say the change will harm the nation's economy and weaken efforts to fight global hunger.
However, people in favor of the new plan, say the change will enable the U.S. to feed an additional 17 million starving people a year. At the same time, it will also help struggling farmers in foreign countries sell their crops.
Currently, the United States distributes its' international food aid by reselling and shipping crops grown in the United States. This has been the food aid business model in the U.S. for the last 60 years.
The administration is proposing to change that by reselling food in developing countries instead of shipping it from the U.S., a process that usually takes months, according to the New York Times.
The new plan is expected to save millions of dollars in shipping costs and the food will be able to reach people in need faster.
According to the Times, Obama's administration is also seeking to end the practice of aid "monetization," a very controversial process, in which Washington gives American-grown grains to international charities.
The groups can then resell their crops and help finance their antipoverty programs. Critics point to the fact that local farmers are hurt by the charities' competitive prices.
The U.S. currently spends around $1.4 billion a year on food aid and is the only major donor to ship foods to struggling countries, rather than buying the local food and helping to resell it.
However, more than 60 groups are opposed to the change, according to theTimes. Corporations such as the USA Rice Federation and the American Maritime Congress have come to the defense of the age-old bill.
"Growing, manufacturing, bagging, shipping and transportation of nutritious U.S. food creates jobs and economic activity here at home, provides support for our U.S. Merchant Marine, essential to our national defense sealift capability, and sustains a robust domestic constituency for these programs not easily replicated in foreign aid programs," the groups wrote in a letter.
Twenty-one senators from "farm states" also wrote to Obama and lobbied against the reform.
