Chicago Tribune Editorial Endorses Oxfam Biofuels Position

The Chicago Tribune recently published an editorial, Gotta Eat, that agreed with Oxfam's negative stance on biofuels:

Even if Obama gets through this dangerous summer without a crisis, he can't keep running the same risks. The Oxfam International development agency recently predicted that global food prices will more than double within 20 years, citing everything from climate change to flat-lining yields. Breathless reports designed to sound an alarm naturally invite skepticism, but the biofuel part of Oxfam's analysis rings true.

The U.S. needs a comprehensive energy policy that ends our reliance on food for fuel. We need it now, and we will need it all the more in the future.

New York Times Blog Mentions Oxfam Report On Food Prices

At the New York Times' Green blog, Justin Gillis posted an article, World Food Supply: What's To Be Done?, that mentions Oxfam's recent report on food prices:

Oxfam, the global relief group, recently published an analysis of the food situation and the risks in coming decades. The themes echo many of my own findings and those of the Beddington report, but the Oxfam report has a sharper tone on certain issues, particularly relating to the behavior of corporations, investors and governments in rich countries. Raymond C. Offenheiser, head of Oxfam’s American branch, was recently on the radio talking about these issues. One of the major conclusions of the Oxfam report is that food prices could easily double from today’s high levels by 2030, with climate change likely to be responsible for a major part of that increase. 

As I reported in my article, the governments of the developed world have acknowledged a need to invest anew in global agricultural development, but have been slow to fulfill the $22 billion of pledges they made on this issue in 2009 in L’Aquila, Italy. Numerous advocacy groups are attempting to track the status of the pledges. The latest accounting on this issue by the Group of 8 governments themselves was made public a few weeks ago in a document called the Deauville Accountability Report. 

However, the watchdog groups have attacked that document, saying that it obfuscates the slow pace of spending by the governments. A group called ActionAid has published a detailed analysis, coming to the conclusion that, two years into a three-year set of pledges, the governments have actually spent only 22 percent of the pledged amount. Oxfam also discusses the status of the pledges in one section of a broader report. 

A Table for 9 Billion

Today our planet is facing its second large-scale food crisis in 3 years.  Research shows that 1 in 7 people worldwide are chronically hungry and it's time to make this emergency a global priority. 

Hunger is about power. Its roots lie in inequalities in access to resources and opportunity. And women face the greatest inequalities of all.

In response, Oxfam International is launching a global food justice campaign on June 1st to alleviate hunger and build a food system: one that produces enough for a growing population and empowers poor people to earn a living, feed their families, and thrive. In 2050, estimates show that our global population will reach 9 billion people and we want everyone to have a seat at the table.  


To mark the start of this campaign locally, the Chicago Oxfam Action Corps will be setting "A Table for 9 Billion"  at the Chicago Green City Market on Wednesday, June 1st from 7 am to 1 pm.  We will have educational material about the current food crisis and opportunities for you to become a partner in our food justice campaign in Chicago.  


Read more on Oxfam's Fact Sheet - Food For All: http://www.oxfamamerica.org/files/food-for-all-fact-sheet.pdf

All of us, no matter who we are, can do something to help. Join us on June 1st to find out what you can do to educate others and help get the word out.

If you are interested in volunteering or learning more, please email us at chicago@oxfamactioncorps.org

 

Budget cuts are nothing to laugh about

By Gawain Kripke - 04/01/11 09:30 AM ET

Good news! Congress finally does what U.S. voters say they want and dedicates 13 percent of the federal budget to life-saving international poverty-fighting assistance.

April Fools!

As the current budget drama gripping Washington continues, foreign aid remains on the chopping block. 

While all kinds of theatrics go on, some of us are waiting to see what will happen to the tiny fraction of the federal budget that is dedicated to the life-saving international health programs, emergency aid, poverty reduction, climate change adaptation and economic development assistance. Oxfam America’s doesn’t take funding from the US government, so our budget doesn’t depend on the answer. But we care because these programs make a big difference for poor people and developing countries. 

Year after year, cutting international assistance is a talking point for politicians: “We have to take care of America before we send American money all over the world,” say some members of Congress. But it’s an easy thing to say, given the misperceptions Americans have about international assistance. 

According to recent polling, Americans think 27 percent of the budget goes to foreign aid. Asked if they support cuts, most say yes. The funding level Americans settle on for foreign aid is somewhere between 10 and 13 percent of the federal budget. 

The only problem, of course, is that the ENTIRE international affairs budget, which includes diplomacy and development, is just about 1 percent of the budget. And less than half of that is spent on poverty-focused development aid. So armed with the facts, voters could actually support INCREASING spending on foreign assistance by 1,000 percent? Given that Americans spend around the same amount on caring for their lawns as they do for programs that improve livelihoods and create lasting solutions to world poverty, I would hope they do.

Cutting half of foreign aid – or even cutting all of it – wouldn’t do much for the federal budget deficit. But it doesn’t stop politicians from supporting the foolish decision to cut it. 

Pretending to close the yawning federal budget gap with cuts to foreign assistance is a terrible prank to play on:

• 5 million children and family members who could be denied treatment for preventative interventions for malaria,

• 3,500 mothers, more than 40,000 children under 5 in danger of dying due to reduced child survival interventions,

• 400,000 people who would be turned away from life-saving treatment for HIV/AIDS.

Even the threat of the government shutting down is disruptive and does damage.  Important development and anti-poverty programs have already been put on hold due to the uncertainty; an innovative food security program focused on rice production in Cambodia has indefinitely postponed its March 28 launch, for example.   

April fools is for laughs and kicks. But the pranks should stop when it comes to cutting life saving assistance. 

Gawain Kripke is the policy director for Oxfam America in Washington.

Reposted from The Hill's Congress blog