05/23/2024 | Press release | Distributed by Public on 05/23/2024 08:41
May 22, 2024 - As major implementing partners of Food for Peace Title II and other U.S. international food aid programs, Catholic Relief Services, CARE, Mercy Corps, Save the Children, and World Vision oppose the House Agriculture Committee Majority's Farm Bill proposal for Food for Peace within Title III. Its provisions would effectively end our work to address the root causes of global hunger and malnutrition and seriously compromise humanitarian food aid programs. We are facing unprecedented levels of food insecurity, which disproportionately affect women and children. We cannot afford a Farm Bill that endangers the life-saving work of Food for Peace.
As implementers, we know that the new spending directives included in this bill would drastically change Food for Peace, subverting the program's mandate to build resilience and undoing 20 years of measured, bipartisan improvements. The Chairman's proposal would result in Food for Peace reaching 2.3 million fewer people. At a time of rising hunger and malnutrition, this is unacceptable. Specifically, the bill:
Quotes from participating NGOs below.
"U.S. commodities are critical to our nation's international food assistance programs; they are frequently necessary, but rarely sufficient. A sole focus on donated U.S. food distribution will not help farmers provide for their own families or participate in functioning local markets. Farm Billsupported food assistance programs must respond to market conditions and ensure communities' progress on the journey of self-reliance." - Bill O'Keefe, Executive Vice President, Catholic Relief Services
"US leadership fighting global hunger is at stake in this Farm Bill. We cannot hamstring our global anti-hunger programs by spending directives from Washington - we must listen to what local communities need, pay attention to the unique circumstances of women and girls, and use all available tools to stop hunger. These proposed earmarks will render Food for Peace virtually inoperable." - Ritu Sharma, Vice President of U.S. Programs and Policy Advocacy, CARE
"The proposed changes to Food for Peace Title II outlined in the House bill would threaten our ability to carry out life-saving and resilience-building work in tandem. As a major implementer of Food for Peace-funded non-emergency programs, which invest in developing local food systems to promote resilience and save communities and donors from costlier humanitarian interventions in the long-run, we will continue to work with Congress to ensure these programs are protected and not gutted, as the current House proposal would do." - Kate Phillips-Barrasso, Vice President for Global Policy and Advocacy, Mercy Corps
"As a Food for Peace implementer in six countries across Sub-Saharan Africa, we know what it takes to implement quality programs that are fighting hunger and building resilience. We know the Chairman and American farmers share our commitment to ensuring children around the world have access to nutritious food. Unfortunately, this bill would wreak havoc on both emergency and long-term Food for Peace programs that strengthen self-reliance." - Christy Gleason, Vice President for Policy, Advocacy, and Campaigns, Save the Children
"As part of our mission to reach the most vulnerable, World Vision is proud to implement Food for Peace Title II programs. At a time when global hunger is on the rise, we know that key food security accounts like Food for Peace are most effective when resources can be tailored to the contexts in which we work. Government mandates as included in the House Agriculture Majority's proposal, limit resources and take a one-size-fits all approach to ending hunger. As Farm Bill negotiations continue, we will work to increase the impact of Food for Peace and the food security programs authorized in this bill." - Robert Zachritz, Vice President of Advocacy, World Vision