Document Library

This letter signed by 15 U.S. NGOs was sent to Members of Congress that voted against the Royce-Engel Food Aid Reform Amendment #15 to the House Farm Bill.  We understand that there has been a great deal of misinformation concerning this issue, including a number of arguments cited during the floor debate. We would like to set the record straight:Reducing the proportion of U.S. commodities exported as U.S. food aid will not harm American farmers. In recent years, U.S. food aid has accounted for less than 1% of total U.S. agriculture exports. Shifting 45% of Title II assistance to cash means there will still be a substantial amount of American food products used in food aid programs and overall, the decrease in US food will have a negligible impact on U.S. farmers.Reductions in U.S. food aid shipped overseas would have a minimal impact on the U.S. shipping industry and U.S. maritime jobs. Food aid is a small proportion of overall U.S.-flag preference shipping business. Other flag-preference opportunities exist that represent more than 1 billion metric tons of cargo annually compared to just 1.5 million metric tons that USAID transported in the past year.U.S. national security will remain strong as the U.S. modernizes U.S. food aid. Per the Defense Department’s analysis, Undersecretary of Defense Frank Kendall stated in a letter to Chairman Royce on June 18, 2013 that the proposed reforms “will not impact U.S. maritime readiness and national security,” and confirmed that reforms would have no bearing on any militarily useful vessels. Multiple GAO reports have made similar findings.Purchasing food aid closer to where it is needed, known as Local and Regional Purchase (LRP), is a well-tested and highly accountable process. LRP is just as secure against corruption as other forms of food aid. Reputable organizations including the World Food Program and many large NGOs have developed robust LRP accountability mechanisms that parallel those for in-kind food aid.By creating greater flexibility in U.S. food aid programs, the Royce/Engel reforms will strengthen the Food for Peace program and maintain appreciation for American generosity. This potential for an even stronger program is why major Food for Peace partners, anti-hunger advocates, and the heads of USDA and USAID have endorsed these changes. Increasing the flexibility to use cash tools alongside commodities, and removing the need for “monetization” of food aid, will make the program stronger, more efficient, and help reach millions more people with the same level of investment. These reforms will continue to showcase American generosity abroad, as LRP commodities are, like standard food aid, distributed in U.S.-branded packaging.