S.384 - Global Food Security Act of 2009

A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to provide assistance to foreign countries to promote food security, to stimulate rural economies, and to improve emergency response to food crises, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and for other purposes. view all titles (3)

All Bill Titles

  • Official: A bill to authorize appropriations for fiscal years 2010 through 2014 to provide assistance to foreign countries to promote food security, to stimulate rural economies, and to improve emergency response to food crises, to amend the Foreign Assistance Act of 1961, and for other purposes. as introduced.
  • Short: Global Food Security Act of 2009 as introduced.
  • Short: Global Food Security Act of 2009 as reported to senate.

This Bill currently has no wiki content. If you would like to create a wiki entry for this bill, please Login, and then select the wiki tab to create it.

Comments Feed

  • col1968 02/07/2009 3:47pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    We cannot afford our own public health and economic viability. We have no business continuing to pretend we are the Economic Superpower which will feed all the world’s hungry. Food handouts only make people come back for more food tomorrow. Let’s try to figure out how to solve our own core problems. then we might have the wherewithal to really help others more than just make them dependant on us when we will only eventually disappoint them. Then they will hate us more for taking away their expected food supply.

  • Anonymous 02/09/2009 3:59pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    The free food is not something we give away every five years. It needs to be voted on yearly. The bailout is not for five years and neither should the foreign aid budget. The agencies are already using the programs( of five year budgets outside of the federal budget and voted on just before the presidential elections ) to justify their own five year budgets.

    This is the second five year budget for these entitlements.

  • Anonymous 02/17/2009 8:01am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    We’re not the economic superpower that can feed the world’s hungry… but we ARE just about the only nation that ultimately has the capability to help. Sure, we might not eliminate the problem altogether, but we do have the power to save lives.

    Maybe we can only help a certain percentage of people… but isn’t it worth it even to save a handful of individuals?

    The problem with our generation is that people tend to think only about themselves and their own little world. If we could all be a little less selfish, we would really accomplish something great.

    “It’s only when our selfishness dies that we find something worth living for”

  • Anonymous 02/21/2009 6:18pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    This is billions of dollars we just give away. We need to spend this on our own people. These countries can trade for food.

  • Anonymous 03/03/2009 6:44am
    Link Reply
    + -1

    Why are we paying for agriculture school? Obama just taxed our agriculture for ten years.

  • cougar_gal06 03/16/2009 10:15am

    I think that it is not only our responsiblity as a world leader, but it is necessary. By helping these people it in turn will help America. American’s are way too selfish to see that this needs to be done. There are 963 million people throughout the world that go to sleep hungry every night (that includes Americans!), there are 25,000 deaths every day due to hunger and malnutrition which are preventable given the proper aid and supplies. The U.S. along with 190 other countries created 8 goals in 2000 that would help promote the wealth and well-being of the world by 2015 if accomplished. There are just as many obese people in the world as there are hungry, so it’s really that we need to reallocate the food sources. We really aren’t the only nation capable of helping those in need and we aren’t the only nation that has been doing it. If you want to actually learn more about it google the Millennium Development Goals or go to www.borgenproject.org.

  • Yelena 03/16/2009 12:30pm
    Link Reply
    + -1

    I agree, CougarGal. Americans are too selfish, and we fail to realize how well off we are in comparison to the rest of the world. Sure, we should fix our own economy. But compared to the 963 million people that are starving, people who die because of something so simple as lack of clean water, children who get sick because they don’t have a mosquito bed… compared to those people, we have it easy.

    Yeah, the economy is tough… but believe me, it’s a lot better than it could be. We actually have the power to do something, to help our fellow man on the other side of the world. I think that we should take that opportunity.

  • Jenna1607 04/10/2009 3:30pm

    This bill is NOT about feeding the worlds hungry, its about using GMO and pesticides as the sole source to help people in africa grow food. Such a BAD idea, as there is mounting evidence about the health risks with both. Also, pesticides deplete the soil of nutrients, making farming more difficult for future generations, and lower vitamin content of the produce grown with that soil (as has happened in the US since the 70s). We SHOULD help EDUCATE people in africa and other countries about PROPER farming techniques, such as crop rotations etc, not forcing GMOs and petroleum based pesticides.

  • mpaone 04/19/2009 11:01am

    For more information on the technological / GMO leanings of this bill, see: http://www.grassrootsonline.org/publications/fact-sheets-and-reports/why-lugar-casey-global-food-security-act-will-fail-curb-hunger

    I agree, food aid must be done smartly, with the intention of enabling the food sovereignty of all nations to produce the majority of their own food supply. Also, US overproduction is often bought up and given to developing nations, to the benefit mainly of big agriculture and food processing companies for donation and tax write-offs. We overproduce enough food to feed our citizenry twice over, and then want to make money off of that fact. Any food aid policy has to happen in concert with our own Farm Bill.

  • Comm_reply
    qldaustralia 05/13/2009 3:24pm

    If what you’re saying is a possibility, perhaps we should all make sure we contact our reps to insert language that would prevent this possibility. It seems that it will more likely provide opportunity for people already farming locally to continue to make a living, or for indigineous agricultural techniques to be fostered, but I know companies like Monsanto are powerful, and could find an opportunity in here to do even more destruction. All the more reason to lobby our legislators to include language to prevent his from happening.

  • qldaustralia 05/13/2009 3:10pm

    I agree with many of the points here. Currently, the U.S. spends $.65 of every $1.00 of food aid (which is less than .2% of our GDP, which is about what we spend on international development as a whole) on transportation costs. We send food to other countries, which is sometimes a necessity (tsunami, drought), but oftentimes not. This legislation would start allowing international organizations to use the money we provide to ship food if NECESSARY, but in a majority of the cases, to purchase it from local vendors or give vouchers to purchase from local vendors when possible. It’s absolutely true that the way we deliver aid only fosters depenence, because the purpose of aid is not for development, or to help people become self-sufficient. This legislation, along with the upcoming legislation based on the Roadmap to End Global Hunger and H.R. 2139, Initiating Foreign Assistance Reform Act, provide the opportunity for us to have a strategy as we help to address extreme poverty.

  • Spam Comment

Vote on This Bill

34% Users Support Bill

20 in favor / 38 opposed

Send Your Senator a Letter

about this bill Support Oppose Tracking
Track with MyOC

Top-Rated Comments