Agriculture
Chair: Blanche Lincoln (D-AR)
- Max Baucus (D-MT)
- Michael Bennet (D-CO)
- Sherrod Brown (D-OH)
- Bob Casey (D-PA)
- Kent Conrad (D-ND)
- Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY)
- Tom Harkin (D-IA)
- Amy Klobuchar (D-MN)
- Pat Leahy (D-VT)
- Ben Nelson (D-NE)
- Debbie Stabenow (D-MI)
- Saxby Chambliss (R-GA)
- Thad Cochran (R-MS)
- John Cornyn (R-TX)
- Chuck Grassley (R-IA)
- Mike Johanns (R-NE)
- Dick Lugar (R-IN)
- Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
- Pat Roberts (R-KS)
- John R. Thune (R-SD)
Appropriations
Chair: Daniel Inouye (D-HI) Ag Sub-Committee
Chair: Herb Kohl (D-WI)
- Byron Dorgan (D-ND)
- Dick Durbin (D-IL)
- Dianne Feinstein (D-CA)
- Tom Harkin (D-IA)
- Tim Johnson (D-SD)
- Ben Nelson (D-NE)
- Jack Reed (D-RI)
- Robert Bennett (R-UT)
- Christopher Bond (R-MO)
- Sam Brownback (R-KS)
- Thad Cochran (R-MS)
- Mitch McConnell (R-KY)
- Arlen Specter (R-PA)
Health, Education, Labor, & Pensions
- Chris Dodd (D-CT)
Agriculture
Chair: B Collin Peterson (D-MN)
V. Chair: B Tim Holden (D-PA)
B Joe Baca (D-CA)
- John Boccieri (D-OH)
B* Leonard Boswell (D-IA)
- Bobby Bright (D-AL)
B* Dennis Cardoza (D-CA)
- Travis Childers (D-MS)
B Jim Costa (D-CA)
- Henry Cuellar (D-TX)
- Kathy Dahlkemper (D-PA)
B Brad Ellsworth (D-IN)
- Debbie Halvorson (D-IL)
B Stephanie Herseth Sandlin (D-SD)
- Steve Kagen (D-WI)
- Larry Kissell (D-NC)
B Frank Kratovil (D-MD)
- Betsy Markey (D-CO)
B Jim Marshall (D-GA)
P Eric Massa (D-NY)
B Mike McIntyre (D-NC)
- Walt Minnick (D-ID)
B Earl Pomeroy (D-ND)
- Mark Schauer (D-MI)
- Kurt Schrader (D-OR)
B David Scott (D-GA)
B Zachary Space (D-OH)
- Timothy Walz (D-MN)
- Frank Lucas (R-OK)
- Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
- K. Michael Conaway (R-TX)
- Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE)
- Virginia Foxx (R-NC)
- Bob Goodlatte (R-VA)
- Sam Graves (R-MO)
- Timothy Johnson (R-IL)
- Steve King (R-IA)
- Robert Latta (R-OH)
- Blaine Luetkemeyer (R-MO)
- Cynthia Lummis (R-WY)
- Jerry Moran (R-KS)
- Randy Neugebauer (R-TX)
- Phil Roe (R-TN)
- Mike Rogers (R-AL)
- Jean Schmidt (R-OH)
- Adrian Smith (R-NE)
- Glenn Thompson (R-PA) *=House Organic Caucus member B=Blue Dog Democrat
Appropriations
Chair: Dave Obey (D-WI) Ag Sub-Committee
Chair: P Rosa DeLauro (D-CT)
- Sanford Bishop (D-GA)
* Allen Boyd (D-FL)
- Lincoln Davis (D-TN)
*P Sam Farr (D-CA)
*P Maurice D. Hinchey (D-NY)
P Jesse L. Jackson, Jr. (D-IL)
P Marcy Kaptur (D-OH)
- Jack Kingston (R-GA)
- Rodney Alexander (R-LA)
- Jo Ann Emerson (R-MO)
* Tom Latham (R-IA) *=House Organic Caucus member
P=Congressional Progressive Caucus
Education and Labor
P Chair: George Miller (D-CA)
- Jason Altmire (D-PA)
- Robert Andrews (D-NJ)
- Timothy Bishop (D-NY)
P Yvette Clarke (D-NY)
- Joe Courtney (D-CT)
- Susan Davis (D-CA)
P Marcia Fudge (D-OH)
P Raul Grijalva (D-AZ)
P Phil Hare (D-IL)
- Ruben Hinojosa (D-TX)
P Mazie Hirono (D-HI)
- Rush Holt (D-NJ)
- Dale Kildee (D-MI)
P Dennis Kucinich (D-OH)
P Dave Loebsack (D-IA)
- Carolyn McCarthy (D-NY)
P Donald Payne (D-NJ)
- Jared Polis (D-CO)
- Robert Scott (D-VA)
- Joe Sestak (D-PA)
- Carol Shea-Porter (D-NH)
P John Tierney (D-MA)
- Dina Titus (D-NV)
- Paul Tonko (D-NY)
P Lynn Woolsey (D-CA)
- David Wu (D-OR)
- Buck McKeon (R-CA)
- Judy Biggert (R-IL)
- Rob Bishop (R-UT)
- Bill Cassidy (R-LA)
- Michael Castle (R-DE)
- Vernon Ehlers (R-MI)
- Luis F Fortuno (R-PR)
- Brett Guthrie (R-KY)
- Peter Hoekstra (R-MI)
- Duncan D. Hunter (R-CA)
- John Kline (R-MN)
- Kenny Marchant (R-TX)
- Tom McClintock (R-CA)
- Cathy McMorris Rodgers (R-WA)
- Thomas Petri (R-WI)
- Phil Roe (R-TN)
- Todd Russell Platts (R-PA)
- Tom Price (R-GA)
- Mark Souder (R-IN)
- GT Thompson (R-PA)
- Joe Wilson (R-SC) P=Congressional Progressive Caucus
In this regular series, crossposted from the Worldwatch Institute's Nourishing the Planet, we profile African indigenous crops that can improve food security and protect the environment.
The basic needs for human survival include food, water and shelter. Baobab, a tree indigenous to the semi arid regions of sub-Saharan Africa can provide all three, and more. Baobabs can be found in areas from the Senegal coast to northern South Africa, and Madagascar, where seven out of the eight species occur.
The baobab's leaves, fruit and seeds are all edible. In West African countries, including Ghana and Burkina Faso, leaves are commonly ground up and used in soups, and for condiments and sauces served with yam, cassava, maize, millet and sorghum. The leaves are high in protein and contain a wide spectrum of essential amino acids. They are high in lysine, which is often missing in the daily diets of poor populations who consume mostly cereals and tubers, and little meat. As these leaves are also high in vitamin A, frequent consumption should be encouraged in pregnant women and children as it can help prevent blindness and birth defects resulting from vitamin A deficiency.
Millions of cassava farmers in eastern and central Africa are in distress from viral cassava diseases that are sweeping across the region and ravaging their crops. But their counterparts on the popular tourist island of Zanzibar are undergoing a quiet revolution using new disease-resistant and high-yielding varieties that were introduced three years ago.
This is the first post in a regular series about African indigenous crops that can improve food security and protect the environment.
Ever heard of the Bambara Bean? How about Nyimo or Vignea Subterranea or the African Groundnut? No matter what you call it, this little bean, which is indigenous to tropical Africa, is highly overlooked by scientists, development agencies, and humanitarian programs, even though it packs a lot of nutrition. The bean may have originated in Mali, but it's also popular in Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Burkina Faso, and Cameroon. It is now widely distributed and grown in Asia, parts of Northern Australia, and South and Central America and is often found for sale on street corners in Johannesburg.
Let me summarize the article for you: Bla bla bla... drought-tolerant corn... global warming... Africa really fucked... feed 9 billion people... bla bla bla... Gates Foundation.
There. Now you don't have to read it. It says nothing new and contains zero critical thinking or alternate viewpoints. There was one section of the piece that was right on:
Charles Godfray, a professor at the Department of Zoology at Oxford University who recently co-authored a paper in the journal Science about the challenges of feeding 9 billion people, said that the impact of climate change on agriculture will be negative. Although warming will open up lands in cooler regions for cultivation, it will not compensate for the loss of water and land in areas near the tropics, he said.
"The current system of agriculture is not sustainable," he said. "Water is arterial. We will run out of water in parts of the world."
Yep. The Africa-is-fucked-if-things-don't-change meme is correct. And the African-corn-production-is-in-trouble idea is also correct:
But the continent is drought-prone, with millions of farmers relying on rainfall for their crops grown in small land holdings. Corn is most widely grown, with almost 300 million people in sub-Saharan Africa using it as the main source of food. And it is grown in rain-fed regions prone to crop failures.
Riiight. So how about we grow something other than corn? I'm very disappointed at the New York Times failure to only present one side - a side that is opposed by scientists world wide - on this matter.
Many companies are now buying up land in African countries such as Ethiopia to engage in large-scale agriculture, the bulk of whose output is then shipped out of these countries to the Middle East and Europe. The purchased land is often communal in nature, used for grazing or to help preserve the agricultural productivity of surrounding lands. But the local governments consider it to be unowned, and if it is still arable it can be sold off. Not surprisingly, this also impacts water availability to the local communities.
The issues are discussed in this article from the Guardian:
IITA calls themselves "Africa's leading research partner in finding solutions for hunger and poverty" and is involved in many activities, including improving agricultural biodiversity, building or supplying seed banks, and investigating biological controls for pests. They receive funding from a wide variety of NGOs and governments, including the Gates Foundation, various national governments, U.S. AID, Rockefeller Foundation, and W.K. Kellogg Foundation.
The annual report from Michigan Technological University's (MTU) Mechanical Engineering-Engineering Mechanics (ME-EM) department ended up on my desk the other day. Since I know a few alums from that department, I took a look inside. No news about my acquaintances, but I found an interesting story about a collaboration between MTU and the Peace Corps and one of the projects undertaken as part of the program.
MTU has the first and only collaboration like this, where a student takes classes on campus (including classes on field engineering and rural development), works a standard Peace Corps tour of duty (training + two years), and then returns to MTU to write a report and give a oral presentation. Upon completion of the requirements, he or she receives a master's degree from the ME-EM department. Although MTU is unique in its offer of a degree, the school is not alone in its interest in the developing world: dozens of engineering schools have students who are using their education to help solve problems in the developing world. Engineers Without Borders, for example, has chapters at almost 200 colleges and universities; they also have chapters for working engineers.
I've spent the past few days hanging out with two men from Africa - one from Kenya and one from Uganda. Yesterday, we ate lunch together. The meal was a salad that probably came out of a bag with your choice of dressing, grilled soggy veggies, roasted herb potatoes, turkey, and a corn pudding (very similar to corn bread but very moist).
I piled my plate high in a rather ambitious fashion. I should eat grilled veggies but I really don't like them. I don't hate all grilled veggies, but I generally dislike the ones served in catered meals at conferences like these grilled veggies. I skipped the onions, zucchini, and red peppers and opted for asparagus (probably from South America) and yellow squash. Then I got what I knew I'd like: potatoes and corn pudding.
Back at the table, my African friends politely ate as I choked down my asparagus and squash. I eagerly ate up all of my potatoes, and my favorite was the corn pudding. I offered the remaining mountain of asparagus on my plate to my African friends (I had finished the squash, with much effort) and went back for seconds on the corn pudding. It was so good, I gulped it down immediately!
At our table, we began talking about the food. I don't know if either of the Africans really liked the food or if they were just being polite. They told me the food from their countries was great because they had lots of diversity. Then, the man from Kenya pointed to his corn pudding and asked: "Is this GMO?"
This was very possibly his first time having to wonder whether the food on his plate was genetically modified. Back home, many African countries do not allow GMOs at all. Whereas we Americans were fed GMOs without our permission or (in many cases) knowledge long ago, the Africans are very conscious of the issue and many have strong opinions about it.
"Yes," I replied. Then I looked at the kernels of sweet corn in the bread and said, "No."
"No?" he asked. "Not GMO?"
I thought again. There were kernels of non-GMO sweet corn but the corn meal as probably GMO. "Both," I corrected myself.
"Yes, GMO?" he asked.
"Yes," I replied.
He pushed it over to the side of my plate, no longer interested in eating any more of it. Jokingly, I told him that if he had any more children they would be born with three heads. He knew I was kidding and we both laughed. I'd obviously already pigged out on the corn pudding, GMO or not. At one point, a few years ago, I tried to be a purist with my food, but I've given up. It's just too difficult, living here and avoiding food grown via objectionable practices.
It's wonderful seeing our food system through such different eyes as I hang out with my new friends. I don't mean to imply that our system is wrong and theirs is right (or vice versa), but having somebody who comes from such a different background with you makes you question things that you might not otherwise question.
I always find it fascinating to read what the people of Sub-Saharan Africa think about the food aid they receive from the U.S. In my view, help is not actually help unless the receiver of the help wants it. That's why a Ghanaian article called "Obama Pushes GM Foods on Ghana, Africa" caught my eye.
Much of the piece follows the money and connections behind Obama's current policy to "help" Africa by helping Monsanto. It's not just a money and influence problem, it's also an ideology problem. And it's really tragic because real lives are at stake here.
Hillary Clinton and Tom Vilsack are visiting Kenya, and not for an entirely good reason:
Also during the high-level tour, the top US diplomat will on Wednesday afternoon visit the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute (KARI) laboratories along Waiyaki Way.
She will be accompanied by US Secretary of Agriculture, Thomas J. Vilsack, together with U.S. Representatives Donald M. Payne and Nita M. Lowey.
"The visit will focus on KARI's contributions to Kenya's food security and agricultural development. It will include a laboratory tour, discussion with KARI staff and collaborating partners, observation of a maize research plot, and ceremonial tree-planting," according to a brief from the US embassy in Nairobi.
As part of the Obama Administration's efforts to enhance global food security, Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack will attend the 8th U.S.-Sub-Saharan African Trade and Economic Cooperation Forum in Nairobi, Kenya from Aug. 4-6, 2009. At the forum, Vilsack will highlight the USDA's ongoing food security efforts in Africa and other places throughout the world which is focused on building the agricultural industry in developing countries.
Here's what the press release says about his visit to KARI with Secretary Clinton:
Finally, he plans to visit the Kenya Agricultural Research Institute and meet with women scientists receiving African Women in Agricultural Research and Development fellowships.
Tomorrow Obama is expected to make a big speech in Ghana, announcing a new American policy for food security in the Global South. There's a tiny bit of good in what he will announce - and a whole lot of bad. On the occasion of its Italy meeting, the G8 released a statement on food security that recognizes the need and the urgency for action. They say:
Effective food security actions must be coupled with adaptation and mitigation measures in relation to climate change, sustainable management of water, land, soil and other natural resources, including the protection of biodiversity.
That much is good, but sadly, they also call for more free trade, even after the ample amount of proof we already have that free trade policies (particularly coupled with the government subsidies in developed countries) harm food security rather than helping it. Their failure - and Obama's failure - to recognize the problems caused by free trade is nothing short of tragic.
So where's the good part I spoke of? Well, the U.S. is shifting from a "give a man a fish" strategy to a "teach a man to fish" strategy. Instead of shipping American-grown food to the developed world, we will focus on helping needy countries produce enough to feed themselves. And that much is fantastic - almost.
The problem is - and this is a big problem - the U.S. has no interest in taking the scientific, peer-reviewed, global consensus approach to global agriculture. We'd prefer to go a different route, one which has been dismissed by experts but embraced by multinational corporations.
Today's episode of Democracy Now! featured 2 Ghanaians commenting on Obama's trip to their country. When asked about the G8's recent promise of food aid, the two Ghanaians were far from joyous. Their reaction was actually quite skeptical. One said that "the devil is in the details" because often the U.S. & other developed countries' end up screwing over Africa by dumping cheap sudsidized commodities on them in the form of food aid and undercutting their own farmers. He added that we need to look closely at what is being promised because often these big announcements involve repackaging old money and calling it new money in order to promise a large dollar value in aid. All in all, he said, the promised aid may "do more harm than good."
On that note, Food and Water Watch just put out a press release that was critical of the Obama Administration's efforts to combat global hunger and poverty. They say Obama's policy "merely dusts off the tired, failed approaches of the Bush years," referencing free trade and reliance on biotechnology as policies that do not work. I've pasted it below in its entirety so you can take a look.
The Gates Foundation just gave a $1.3 million grant to the Worldwatch Institute for a 2 year sustainable ag project in sub-Saharan Africa. Wow! I didn't know that the Gates Foundation was willing to support sustainable ag (since, to date, I've only seen them pushing the opposite). From Worldwatch Institute's press release:
Worldwatch Institute will assess the impacts of a range of farming techniques on the environment and agricultural productivity. The project will provide stakeholders, including policymakers, farmer and community networks, and international donors, with research on practical solutions for creating sustainable food security.
In other words, they are going to try some sustainable agriculture and see what happens. Nice. Here are the specific things they say they will try:
Adding nitrogen-fixing plants into crop rotations as a low-cost solution for enriching soils and breaking weed and pest cycles;
Overcoming freshwater shortages with rain harvesting, efficient irrigation, micro dams, and cover cropping;
Strengthening local breeding capacity, including the use of farmer-run seed banks and genetic markers of important crop traits;
Tapping international carbon-credit markets to reward farmers for enriching their soils and planting carbon-sequestering tree crops;
Involving women farmers in decision-making at all levels.
Better yet? They are partnering with groups like World Neighbors, Ecoagriculture Partners, Heifer International, Rodale Institute, Slow Food International, International Fund for Agricultural Development, and the Global Water Policy Project. Very exciting! The end result of the project will be the Institute's 2011 annual report "World 2011: Nourishing the Planet," which will share the project's findings.
Two sources I've been reading criticize the notion that biotech and GMOs are THE solution to "feed the world." The first is a paper called "Undying Promise: Agricultural Biotechnology's Pro-Poor Narrative, Ten Years on" by Dominic Glover. The second is Hope not Hype: The Future of Agriculture Guided by the International Assessment of Agricultural Knowledge, Science, and Technology for Development by Jack Heinemann (a book I HIGHLY recommend!).