SCOTT: GOOD MORNING AND WELCOME TO ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE NEWS.  I’M SCOTT SAMUELSON A PROFESSOR OF PHILOSOPHY AT KIRKWOOD COMMUNITY COLLEGE IN IOWA CITY.  TODAY OUR TOPIC IS THE PRICE OF FOOD.  BEYOND SWEARING AT THE HIGH COSTS WE’RE PAYING AT THE SUPERMARKET WHAT KIND OF ETHICAL ISSUES DOES THE COST OF FOOD RAISE.  WELL FOR ONE THOUGH WE MAY GROAN AT THE HIGH PRICE OF BREAD THERE ARE SOME IN THE WORLD WHO STARVE.  FOOD PRICES HAVE REPLACED THE DEATH OF BENIZAR BHUTTO AS THE NUMBER ONE STORY IN PAKISTAN AND PARA MILITARY GROUPS ARE HAVING TO PROTECT WHEAT THERE.  THERE HAVE BEEN RIOTS OVER FOOD IN SENEGAL.  DOES OUR ABUNDANCE GIVE US AN ETHICAL OBLIGATION TO HELP THOSE WHO ARE HUNGRY AROUND THE WORLD?            PERHAPS IT’S EVEN IN OUR BEST INTERESTS TO HELP FEED NATIONS ON THE VERGE OF FAILURE.  WHEAT PRICES HAVE DOUBLED IN THE PAST 5 YEARS WORLDWIDE.  BREAD CHEESE EGGS, ALL ARE UP ANYWHERE FROM 10 TO 20% THIS YEAR ALONE IN THE U.S. AND EVEN MORE IN OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD AND SOME ECONOMISTS BELIEVE THESE PRICES AREN’T COMING DOWN.  AS I UNDERSTAND IT FOOD PRICES HAVE INCREASED IN LARGE PART BECAUSE OF THE GROWING WEALTH OF INDIA AND CHINA.  THE CHINESE MIDDLE CLASS FOR INSTANCE IS EATING MORE MEAT THAN EVER BUT OF COURSE MEAT TAKES A LOT OF GRAIN TO PRODUCE.  THUS AS COWS AND PIGS EAT DOWN THE SUPPLY OF GRAIN AND DEMAND FOR FOOD GOES US WITH POPULATION AND WEALTH THE COST OF FOOD SKYROCKETS.  HERE IN IOWA WE SEE VIVIDLY THE SUPPLY OF CORN FOR FOOD GOING DOWN AS OUR BIG CROP IS BEING CONVERTED INCREASINGLY INTO ETHANOL.  WHAT ONCE FED CATTLE IS NOW FEEDING SUV’S.  OF COURSE THE HIGH PRICE OF GAS FOR THE TRANSPORTATION OF GRAPES FROM CHILE AND BEEF TO CHINA DOESN’T HELP EITHER.  WHAT KIND OF ETHICAL DEMANDS IF ANY ARE ON FARMERS?  WHAT ARE THE ENVIRONMENTAL AND SOCIAL COSTS OF THE FOOD WE EAT?  WHAT SHOULD WE BE PUTTING IN OUR MOUTHS AND HOW MUCH?  HOW SHOULD WE THINK OF FOOD IN OUR GLOBAL ENVIRONMENT?  WHAT IS THE COST OF FOOD?  TO DEAL WITH THESE AND OTHER QUESTIONS WE HAVE 3 FINE PANELISTS ON TODAY.  WILLIAM PUGLIESE, RECTOR OF CHRIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, THANKS FOR BEING ON.  ELLEN FISHER WHO WORKS WITH BREAD FOR THE WORLD, THANK YOU FOR BEING ON.  AND PAUL BAGLYOS, DIRECTOR OF THE CENTER FOR THEOLOGY AND LAND AND PROFESSOR AT WARTBERG SEMINARY, THANKS FOR BEING ON.  PAUL MAYBE LET’S START WITH YOU SO WHAT IS THE PRICE OF FOOD SO TO SPEAK, IT HAS BEEN GOING UP IN OUR GROCERY STORES AND AROUND THE WORLD BUT DO WE PAY FOR IT OTHER THAN AT THE REGISTER, HOW SHOULD WE BE THINKING ABOUT THE FOOD WE EAT IN AN ETHICAL SENSE?

 

PAUL: WELL WE COULD PERHAPS MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THE PRICE OF FOOD THAT WE PAY AT THE POINT OF PURCHASE AND THE COST OF FOOD REFERRING TO THE LARGER DIMENSIONS OF COST INVOLVED IN GETTING THE FOOD TO THE POINT OF PURCHASE.  OFTEN THERE ARE COSTS ASSOCIATED THAT ARE NOT REFLECTED IN THE PRICE WE PAY AT THE POINT OF PURCHASE. 

 

SCOTT: LIKE WHAT?

 

PAUL: WELL, HUMAN COSTS, ECOLOGICAL COSTS, FOR THE TYPICAL CONSUMER IF THERE IS SUCH A THING IN THE UNITED STATES AT LEAST THERE IS OFTEN A LARGE DISCONNECT AT THE POINT OF PURCHASE.  ONE OF THE STUDENTS AT OUR SEMINARY HAD SAID TO ME WHEN SHE HEARD THAT I WOULD BE ON THIS PROGRAM THAT PERHAPS I WOULD STATE THE FACT AND SO NOW I’M DOING IT THAT WE ARE OFTEN UNAWARE OF WHERE OUR FOOD COMES FROM AND WHAT IT HAS TAKEN TO GET THE FOOD IN THE FORM IN WHICH WE PURCHASE IT AT THE POINT OF PURCHASE.   BUT THE COST WOULD INCLUDE FOR EXAMPLE WHETHER ALL WHO WERE INVOLVED IN THE GROWING OF THE FOOD, THE PRODUCTION OF THE FOOD AND THOSE WHO ARE INVOLVED IN VARIOUS STEPS ALONG THE WAY IN PACKAGING AND SHIPPING THE FOOD.  ARE THEY BEING FAIRLY COMPENSATED FOR THEIR WORK OR IS THE LOW PRICE OF OUR FOOD AND IN MOST CASES IN THE UNITED STATES IT IS STILL RELATIVELY LOW COMPARED TO OTHER PARTS OF THE WORLD.  IS THAT LOW PRICE REPRESENTING THE COST IN HUMAN FAIRNESS AT OTHER POINTS ALONG THE LINE.

 

SCOTT: SO SHOULD WE BE PAYING MORE YET FOR OUR FOOD?

 

PAUL: IT DEPENDS.  THESE ARE COMPLICATED QUESTIONS SIMPLY RAISING THE PRICE OF THE FOOD DOES NOT NECESSARILY MEAN THE MONEY

 

SCOTT: YOU MEAN GOING TO THE RIGHT PLACE?  WELL, ELLEN LET ME TURN TO YOU.  SO HOW SHOULD WE THINK ETHICALLY ABOUT THE FOOD WE EAT?  WHAT CHANGES SHOULD WE BE MAKING IF ANY?

 

ELLEN: I WOULD SAY THAT WE OUGHT TO BE STRIVING FOR JUST WAGES AT ALL STEPS BETWEEN THE FARMER GROWING THE FOOD AND IT’S ARRIVAL ON OUR GROCERY SHELVES.  I THINK THAT WHILE I RECOGNIZE THAT STAGNANT WAGES IN THE UNITED STATES ARE MAKING IT HARDER FOR PEOPLE TO AFFORD FOOD AS ENERGY COSTS GO UP, AS HOUSING COSTS GO UP, NONETHELESS I THINK WE ARE ETHICALLY OBLIGATED TO PAY A LIVING WAGE TO EACH OF THE GROUPS OF PEOPLE WHO ARE GETTING FOOD TO OUR GROCERY SHELVES AND IF THAT INVOLVES MORE HELP FROM THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT THROUGH FOR INSTANCE THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM, OR THROUGH THE OTHER FEDERAL NUTRITION PROGRAMS SO THAT PEOPLE WHO’S WAGES ARE STAGNANT AND HURTING CAN STILL AFFORD WHILE STILL PAYING A LIVING WAGE TO THOSE GETTING IT TO THE SHELVES THEN I THINK THAT THAT’S THE ROUTE WE SHOULD GO.  YOU’RE MENTIONING THE ISSUES OF JUSTICE AND WHETHER A FAIR WAGE HAD BEEN PAID, IT DOES BRING TO MIND THE INEQUITIES FACED BY MANY OF OUR SEASONAL HARVESTING, PEOPLE WHO DO SEASONAL HARVESTING OF OUR CROPS AND THERE HAS BEEN FOR INSTANCE A MAJOR EFFORT IN FLORIDA TO GET A 1 CENT PER POUND INCREASE FOR TOMATO PICKERS AND THAT HAS BEEN A MULTI YEAR PROCESS AND RIGHT AT THE MOMENT THE GAINS THAT HAVE BEEN ACHIEVED ARE AT RISK OF BEING LOST SO I, AND THESE PICKERS ARE PEOPLE WHO HAD NOT RECEIVED A WAGE INCREASE IN MORE THAN 20 YEARS.  SURELY FOR MOST OF US WE HAVE NOT BEEN IN POSITIONS WHERE WE HAVE SEEN NO GROWTH IN OUR WAGES OVER 20 YEARS.  I DO THINK THAT ETHICALLY WE ARE OBLIGATED TO PAY A FAIR PRICE.   I THINK THAT THE EFFORTS FOR FAIR TRADE ON FOOD ITEMS ARE VERY IMPORTANT BECAUSE FAIR TRADE CERTIFIED COMMODITIES OF TELL THE CONSUMER UNEQUIVOCALLY THAT EACH STEP RECEIVED A LIVING WAGE.

 

SCOTT: WHAT KIND OF COMMODITIES CAN WE GET THAT ARE FAIR TRADE CERTIFIED?  WHAT ARE SOME EXAMPLES, I KNOW COFFEE FOR EXAMPLE.

 

ELLEN: COFFEE.  TEA IS AVAILABLE FOR TRADE CERTIFIED, CHOCOLATE IS AVAILABLE FOR TRADE CERTIFIED.  THERE IS A MOVEMENT AMONG FARMERS AND ORGANIC PRODUCERS IN THIS COUNTRY TO DEVELOP A FAIR TRADE LABEL FOR FOOD THAT IS GROWN AND PROCESSED IN THE UNITED STATES WITH EXACTLY THAT ISSUE IN MIND OF THEM CERTIFYING THAT PEOPLE HAVE RECEIVED JUST WAGES AND JUST TREATMENT IN THE PRODUCTION OF THE FOOD.  I HAVE SEEN PHOTOS OF IT BEING USED, LABELS BEING DEVELOPED TO MARK FOOD AS FAIR TRADE CERTIFIED WITHIN FARMERS MARKETS IN THE UNITED STATES.  THAT’S A MOVEMENT I WOULD LIKE TO SEE SUPPORTED. 

 

SCOTT: WELL BILL LET’S BRING YOU INTO THE CONVERSATION.   HOW SHOULD WE THINK ABOUT FOOD AND JUSTICE?

 

BILL: WELL I THINK THE ISSUE IS IT’S SORT OF COMPLEX AND IT’S DIFFICULT TO COME TO ANY KIND OF SOLUTION.  I CAN AFFORD FAIR TRADE BUT THOSE WHO CAN’T AFFORD FOOD AS IT IS CANNOT AFFORD FAIR TRADE.  IF EVERYONE GETS A LIVING WAGE THAT RAISES ALL THE COSTS OF EVERYTHING SO THERE’S NO SIMPLE SOLUTION TO IT.  I THINK THE UNDERLYING ISSUE AT HAND IS POVERTY.  POVERTY THE WORLD OVER, POVERTY CAUSE IN AT LEAST MY OPINION IT’S THE GREATEST SIN AND IT CAUSES THE PROBLEMS THAT ** ALL OVER THE WORLD AND PEOPLE DON’T HAVE ENOUGH TO EAT, THEY DON’T HAVE ENOUGH INCOME TO BUY FOOD, THE MORE THE RICH GET RICHER THE POOR GET POORER AND HOW DO WE BALANCE THAT IN A WAY WHERE WE TALK ABOUT THE YOU BROUGHT IT UP ABOUT THE GRAIN, WE’RE USING GRAIN THAT FEEDS PEOPLE TO PUT GAS IN OUR CARS THAT RAISES THE PRICE OF THE FOOD THAT IT’S A VICIOUS CIRCLE.

 

SCOTT: YEAH AND IT SEEMS LIKE SO YOU KNOW YOU TALK ABOUT THE COMPLEXITY OF IT AND IT SEEMS LIKE I HEAR SORT OF 2 DIFFERENT KIND SOF SOLUTIONS.  ON THE ONE HAND WELL, WE NEED TO FEED MORE PEOPLE SO THAT WOULD INVOLVE HAVING FARMERS KIND OF OR TRY TO HAVE PEOPLE MAKE TECHNOLOGICAL ADVANCES THAT FARMERS COULD USE SO WE COULD GET MORE FOOD PER GIVEN ACRE, THAT WE CAN PRODUCE FOOD MORE CHEAPLY, MORE EFFICIENTLY, MORE EFFECTIVELY AND SO IT’S KIND OF A TECHNOLOGICAL SOLUTION.  ON THE OTHER HAND I HEAR THE OTHER SIDE AS WHAT ELLEN WAS MENTIONING ABOUT MORE ORGANIC FOOD, STUFF THAT’S MORE CONNECTED TO THE LAND, STUFF THAT DOESN’T HAVE THE SAME KINDS OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS.  BUT THESE SEEM LIKE VERY DIFFERENT KIND SOF THINGS RIGHT SO WHAT IS THERE A BETTER SOLUTION, ARE BOTH GOING TO BE AVAILABLE?  YOU MENTIONED THE IDEA THAT FOR SOME PEOPLE ORGANIC FOOD IS TOO EXPENSIVE, EVEN IF THEY BELIEVE IN THE HELPING THE ENVIRONMENT. 

 

BILL:  OR IF YOU GO TO A FARMERS MARKET, YOU KNOW AND TO GO TO A FARMERS MARKET YOU HAVE TO PUT GAS IN YOUR CAR SO IT COSTS YOU MORE TO GET TO THE FARMERS MARKET AND WE HAVE THE FARMERS MARKET OUT ON COLLINS ROAD 3 TIMES A WEEK DURING THE SEASON.  PEOPLE BUY THERE, IT’S MORE EXPENSIVE, IT’S BETTER FOOD BUT WHO CAN AFFORD IT?  THE POOR CERTAINLY CAN’T AFFORD IT, THEY CAN’T EVEN GET THERE BECAUSE THE BUSES DON’T GET THERE AND THAT’S SO, IT’S YES, THAT’S ONE WAY OF ADDRESSING SOME OF THE ISSUES BUT HOW DO YOU FEED THOSE WHO NEED FED?  I CAN AFFORD TO PAY MORE FOR FOOD, I’M NOT GOING TO STARVE, I CAN LEARN HOW TO EAT BETTER FOOD ORGANIC FOOD, LESS FRUIT, LESS MEAT, WE DO THAT BUT THE ISSUE IS THAT PEOPLE ARE STILL STARVING TO DEATH            AROUND THE WORLD AND HOW DO WE FEED THEM?  WHAT’S THE ISSUE AND I DON’T SEE THAT ISSUE BEING ADDRESSED.  WE TALK ABOUT THE ETHANOL ISSUE WHERE WE’RE BUYING ETHANOL BECAUSE IT COSTS 10 CENTS LESS A GALLON.  WELL IF I PUT 20 GALLONS IN MY CAR THAT’S I SAVED 2 DOLLARS AND HOW FAR CAN I GO ON 2 DOLLARS?  THAT’S NOT EVEN A GALLON OF GAS BUT THAT ISSUE HAS BEEN WITH US SINCE 1974 WITH THE OIL EMBARGO AND YET NO ONE HAS ADDRESSED THAT ISSUE THAT INFLUENCES THE WHOLE I THINK THE WHOLE ISSUE OF POVERTY AND FOOD CAN AFFORD THE FOOD.

 

SCOTT: I WANT TO STAY ON THE ORGANIC ISSUE FOR A SECOND, ELLEN MAYBE YOU CAN SPEAK TO THIS.  HOW CAN WE BALANCE OUT THE IDEA OF TRYING TO FEED THE WORLD AND ALSO AT THE SAME, AND EVEN JUST FEED THE POOR AMONG US AND AT THE SAME TIME HAVE PRACTICES THAT DON’T HAVE THE KIND OF COST THAT YOU WERE TALKING ABOUT TO OUR SOCIETY AND TO OUR ENVIRONMENT?

 

ELLEN: I DON’T KNOW IF WE COULD FEED THE WHOLE COUNTRY ON ORGANIC FOOD.  I HAVEN’T SEEN AN ANALYSIS OF THAT.  CERTAINLY THERE IS A STRONG MOVEMENT TO EAT LOCAL AND EAT ORGANIC AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT’S OFTEN CITED FOR EATING LOCAL BESIDES HELPING PEOPLE CLOSE TO YOU IN TERMS OF THE FARMS, IS THAT YOU’RE SPENDING, YOU’RE USING LESS OIL FOR TRANSPORTATION, FOOD DOESN’T HAVE TO BE SHIPPED AS FAR SO IT HAS THAT BENEFICIAL EFFECT ON OUR OIL CONSUMPTION OF I THINK THAT IN TERMS, ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WE NEED TO BE DOING IS MUCH GREATER EMPHASIS ON CONSERVATION.  SORT OF ACROSS THE BOARD SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD SAVE OIL FOR CONSUMPTION IS IF WE DIDN’T SHIP OUR FOOD QUITE SO FAR.  AND THEN OTHER WAYS OF REDUCING PETROLEUM INPUTS INTO FARMING OF UN FARMED STUDIES OF HOW MUCH NITROGEN IS WASHING INTO STREAMS ARE NOW PROVIDING DATA THAT WILL ALLOW FARMERS TO REDUCE THE AMOUNT OF NITROGEN THEY APPLY TO CROPS BECAUSE THEY DON’T NEED TO APPLY SO MUCH THAT IT WASHES OFF.  SO FARMERS CAN DETERMINE HOW MUCH FOR THEIR PLOT OF LAND HOW MUCH IS ENOUGH, THEN THAT’S A WAY OF REDUCING AMOUNT OF INPUTS AND CAN BOTH REDUCE THE HARMFUL EFFECTS OF THE CHEMICALS WE USE AND ALSO REDUCE THE COSTS FROM THAT.  SO I THINK THAT THERE ARE THINGS WE CAN DO THAT IMPROVE THE QUALITY OF OUR FOOD AND IMPROVE LIFE FOR THE PEOPLE WHO ARE PRODUCING IT. 

 

SCOTT: AND MAYBE EVEN SAVE US MONEY IN OTHER AREAS.  WE MIGHT BE PAYING A LITTLE BIT MORE FOR FOOD BUT A LITTLE BIT LESS IN OTHER AREAS OF OUR LIFE.

 

ELLEN: AND I DON’T KNOW WHAT THE TRADEOFFS ARE AND WHETHER YOU CAN BUY FOOD CHEAPER IF YOU’RE BUYING IT LOCAL IF IT ISN’T SHIPPED AS FAR, IF IT’S BEING BROUGHT IN FROM KALONA INSTEAD OF THE STATE OF WASHINGTON. 

 

SCOTT: RIGHT.  PAUL WHAT DO YOU THINK ABOUT THE ORGANIC FOOD VERSUS US TRYING TO DEAL WITH THESE ISSUES OF POVERTY?

 

PAUL: MY THOUGHTS WERE GOING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION AS I WAS LISTENING TO ELLEN TALK.  I THINK IT’S IMPORTANT THAT WE MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN FOOD THAT IS PRODUCED THROUGH ORGANIC AGRICULTURAL METHODS AND FOOD THAT IS LABELED AS CERTIFIED ORGANIC.  

 

SCOTT: RIGHT THAT’S A BIG ISSUE UNTO ITSELF. 

 

PAUL: IT IS IN FACT THERE IS A LOT MORE ORGANIC FOOD THAT IS AVAILABLE FOR EXAMPLE THROUGH LOCAL GROWERS AND FARMERS MARKETS THAT MAY NOT BE LABELED AS SUCH BECAUSE THE REQUIREMENTS FOR WHAT ALLOWS ANYONE TO PUT A LABEL CERTIFIED ORGANIC ON A FOOD ITEM ARE OFTEN IN THEMSELVES COST PROHIBITIVE TO THE FOOD PRODUCERS WHO MAY BE PRODUCING ORGANIC FOOD ANYWAY BUT TO GO THROUGH THE CERTIFICATION PROCESS THAT ALLOWS THEM TO USE THE LABEL ORGANIC IS PROHIBITIVE. 

 

THAT’S ALL WELL AND GOOD, THIS ORGANIC DISCUSSION IS ALL WELL AND GOOD BUT IT DOESN’T SOLVE THE PROBLEM OF PEOPLE STARVING TO DEATH.  I THINK OF PEOPLE WHO COME INTO OUR FOOD PANTRY AND SAY THAT’S AN ELITIST ISSUE.  YOU CAN GET ORGANIC FOOD.  I WANT, I NEED TO PUT SOME FOOD ON MY TABLE AND I DON’T CARE WHERE IT COMES FROM, BEANS CORN, WHATEVER IT IS, I NEED FOOD.  ORGANIC OR NOT I NEED FOOD.  WE CAN HAVE THESE WONDERFUL DISCUSSIONS BUT IT DOESN’T SOLVE THE BASIC ISSUE OF FEEDING THE POOR.  IT MAY SOLVE THE ISSUE OF HOW I CAN EAT BETTER AND FEEL BETTER AND LIVE LONGER BUT IT’S NOT GOING TO HELP SOMEONE WHO DOESN’T HAVE ANY FOOD AT ALL.  THAT’S NOT TO SAY IT’S NOT AN IMPORTANT ISSUE AND IT IS, CAUSE WE POOR NITRATES AND ALL THAT STUFF INTO THE GROUND THAT GOES INTO THE WATERS AND SO FORTH AND THAT’S VERY MUCH AN ISSUE BUT THE LARGER ISSUE IS THAT PEOPLE DON’T HAVE ANYTHING TO EAT WHILE WE CAN WORRY ABOUT WHAT KIND OF FOOD WE’RE EATING. 

 

ELLEN:  I THINK THAT GETS US TO A DISCUSSION OF THE FARM BILL WHICH IS CURRENTLY STILL UNDER CONSIDERATION IN CONGRESS AND THEY’VE JUST EXTENDED THE DEADLINE FOR ANOTHER MONTH TO APRIL 18^TH BUT OUR FARM BILL INCLUDES BOTH ALL OF THE LEGISLATION FOR THE MAJOR NUTRITION PROGRAMS IN THE UNITED STATES LIKE THE FOOD STAMP PROGRAM AND THE TFEF, THE EMERGENCY COMMODITY PROGRAM SO WE NEED FUNDING FOR THE NUTRITION TITLE IN THE FARM BILLS SO WE CAN HELP THE POOR IN THIS COUNTRY SO THEY CAN HAVE AN ADEQUATE NUTRITION AND THE OTHER THING THAT’S IN THE FARM BILL IS THE FUNDING FOR FOOD FOR PEACE THE INTERNATIONAL FOOD AID AND THAT’S ANOTHER PIECE THAT NEEDS ALTERATION IN THE FARM BILL.  THE PRESIDENT HAS BEEN REQUESTING FOR 3 YEARS THAT CONGRESS AUTHORIZE THE PURCHASE OF AT LEAST THE USE OF AT LEAST 25% OF THE MONEY IN OUR FOOD AID BUDGET FOR PURCHASING FOOD ABROAD, SAVING SHIPPING COSTS AND DELIVERING IT FASTER AND CONGRESS HAS NOT YET BEEN WILLING TO GRANT THAT.

 

SCOTT: BUT I TAKE THAT BECAUSE THERE’S SOME MONIED INTERESTS THERE RIGHT?  BUYING FOOD HERE AND SHIPPING IT OVER, THEN THEY’RE GETTING THE GOVERNMENT MONEY HERE AND SO WE MIGHT BE SAVING ON SHIPPING COSTS BUT WE’RE NOT HELPING OUR OWN.

 

THERE’S EVEN BEEN I WAS TOLD RECENTLY SOME CONSIDERATION BEHIND THE SCENES THAT FOOD AID MIGHT BE GIVEN AS CASH AID ALLOWING THE FOOD TO BE PURCHASED LOCALLY IN THE PLACES WHERE IN THE SITES WHERE THE AID IS INTENDED TO GO RATHER THAN SHIPPING THE FOOD THERE.  I WAS GOING TO GET TO THE POINT SOONER OR LATER TALKING ABOUT THE ORGANIC ISSUE BUT I THINK PERHAPS A MORE IMPORTANT CONSIDERATION AND IT GETS TO THE QUESTION OF FEEDING THE POOR, IS SUPPORT FOR LOCAL AGRICULTURE  WHEREVER IN THE WORLD ONE IS.

SCOTT: AND THAT WOULD SPEAK TO THIS AID PACKAGE.

 

IT DOES SPEAK TO THE AID PACKAGE.

 

SCOTT: IF WE REALLY WANT TO HELP PEOPLE WE DON’T JUST SEND THEM FOOD BUT WE ALSO HELP TO IMPROVE THEIR ECONOMY, HELP THEM GET FOOD IN THEIR MOUTHS BUT ALSO BE HELPING THE FARMERS.

 

AND THE WORLD I BELIEVE IS BETTER OFF THE MORE FARMERS THERE ARE AND IN THE UNITED STATES AT LEAST THERE ARE FEWER AND FEWER FARMERS BECAUSE THERE ARE LARGER AND LARGER FARMS AND IT’S NOT NECESSARILY THE SIZE OF THE FARMS THAT’S THE PROBLEM AS THE LOSS OF DIVERSITY AND FOOD PRODUCTION. 

 

SO WE NEED A MARSHAL PLAN FOR NOT INDUSTRY NOW BUT FARMING AND AGRICULTURE

 

WELL LOCAL AGRICULTURE GLOBALLY WOULD GO A LONG WAY TO REDRESSING ALL SORTS OF

 

SCOTT: LET ME JUST BACK UP HERE REAL QUICK AND I LIKE THIS IDEA BUT TO WHAT EXTENT DO WE HAVE A DUTY TO BE FEEDING THE WORLD POOR?  I THINK THAT’S A QUESTION SOME PEOPLE WOULD HAVE ON THEIR MINDS, I TAKE IT YOU COULD HAVE ONE POSITION WHERE YOU THINK WELL, IT’S CERTAINLY ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY TO FEED THE WORLD POOR BUT IT’S REALLY NOT OUR JOB, WE DON’T HAVE TO DO IT TO BE ETHICAL PEOPLE THAT WE CAN JUST TAKE CARE OF OURSELVES AND LET THEM BE.  IS THERE A REASON WHY WE HAVE TO FEED THE WORLD? 

 

I THINK FROM A MORAL PERSPECTIVE, MORAL RELIGIOUS PERSPECTIVE.  IF I TAKE MATTHEW 25 JUDGEMENTS WE’RE GOING TO BE JUDGED AND WE SHOULD JUDGE OURSELVES ON HOW WE FEED THE POOR AND CLOTHE THE NAKED AND TAKE CARE OF THE SICK.  THOSE ARE OUR PRIMARY SOCIAL RESPONSIBILITIES IT GOES OUT FROM OURSELVES TO OTHERS BECAUSE WHEN WE TAKE CARE OF OTHERS WE TAKE CARE OF OURSELVES.  POVERTY IS THE ROOT CAUSE OF SO MUCH EVIL IN THIS WORLD.  IT IS EVIL BUT PEOPLE WILL RISE UP AND REBEL BECAUSE THEY HAVE NOTHING TO EAT.  THEY’LL BURN DOWN BUILDINGS.

 

SCOTT: SO THERE’S EVEN A POLITICAL INTEREST IN DOING THAT.

 

ELLEN: I WAS GOING TO SAY THE SAME THING.  IT REALLY IS A MATTER OF NATIONAL SECURITY.  CONGRESS HAD DRAWN UP A COMMISSION CALLED THE HEALTH COMMISSION.  THIS WAS ESTABLISHED BY LAW IN 2004 AND IT WAS TO REPORT IT WAS TO STUDY ALL OF OUR INTERNATIONAL AID PROGRAMS AND THEN TO REPORT TO CONGRESS IN 2007 WITH ITS RECOMMENDATION FOR IMPROVING FOREIGN AID.  THE REPORT CAME LAST DECEMBER AND ONE OF THE THINGS THAT THEY SAID WAS THAT WE NEED TO HAVE AS MUCH FOCUS ON DEVELOPMENT AS ON DIPLOMACY AND DEFENSE, THAT IT’S PART OF BOTH OUR MORAL UNDERPINNINGS BUT ALSO OUR NATIONAL SECURITY.  FAILED STATES ARE, WE HAVE CERTAINLY SEEN THE IMPACT OF FAILED STATES AND THEY’RE RISKS FOR PRODUCING TERROR.  I THINK IT’S ALL OF THOSE.  I THINK WE DO HAVE A MORAL OBLIGATION AND I THINK THAT WE HAVE A STRONG NATIONAL SECURITY INTEREST IN ADDRESSING BOTH POVERTY AND HUNGER IN THE WORLD. 

 

SCOTT: I THINK TO ME THE MORAL ARGUMENT BECOMES STRONG IN THAT OUR FATES ARE LINKED, THAT IT’S NOT JUST THAT I LIVE IN A KIND OF CLOSED WORLD OF IOWA OR EVEN OF THE UNITED STATES AND THAT OPERATES ON ITSELF.  THERE REALLY IS A SENSE IN WHICH WHAT’S GOING ON IN IOWA WITH ETHANOL HAS AN EFFECT ON PEOPLE IN CHINA.  WHAT’S GOING ON IN CHINA HAS AN EFFECT ON WHAT’S GOING ON IN OUR BACK YARDS AND SO THERE IS A SENSE IN WHICH WE SHARE A KIND OF COMMON DESTINY AND SO WHEN WE DO IT SEEMS LIKE MORAL OBLIGATIONS COME ON BOARD SO I TAKE THAT ARGUMENT.

 

AND WE CAN’T IGNORE THE PROBLEM.  WE’RE SO IN TUNED WITH ONE ANOTHER WITH THE INTERNET.  IF SOMETHING HAPPENS NOW IT HAPPENS INSTANTLY ALL AROUND THE WORLD.  WE CAN’T RUN FROM THE PROBLEMS, PRETEND THEY DON’T EXIST, PRETEND THEY’RE SOMEONE ELSE’S PROBLEM.  WE ARE THAT GLOBAL VILLAGE THAT WE HAVE TO TAKE CARE OF ONE ANOTHER ENVIRONMENTALLY, WITH FOODS, SUBSTAINABLITY.  IT’S ALL.

 

SCOTT: RIGHT SO IF WE ESTABLISH THAT THEN THE QUESTION TO WHERE WE WERE GETTING JUST A SECOND AGO IS SO WHAT’S THE BEST WAY THEN FOR US TO DELIVER THAT AID TO THE WORLD.  TO WHAT EXTENT CAN WE DO IT AS INDIVIDUALS OR AS PEOPLE IN GROUPS OR TO WHAT EXTENT DOES OUR GOVERNMENT NEED TO BE DOING IT AND IF SO, HOW CAN THAT HAPPEN MOST EFFECTIVELY?  ONE OF THE IDEAS YOU SAID WAS THE MARSHAL PLAN BUT THE QUESTION IS HOW ARE WE GOING TO DO IT.

 

I THINK A COUPLE OF THE CANDIDATES, MAYBE ALL 3 OF THEM HAVE SAID THAT THE GOALS ARE PART OF THAT.  THIS IS AN INTERNATIONAL DESIRE INTENT TO ELIMINATE POVERTY AND HELP MATERNAL HEALTH CARE AND ALL POVERTY ISSUES, EDUCATION AND SO FORTH.  THE GOVERNMENT HAS TO TAKE, AS INDIVIDUALS WE COULD DO A SMALL PART BUT AS A GOVERNMENT WE HAVE TO BE INTENT ON DEALING WITH THIS ISSUE.

 

SCOTT: RIGHT, AS PART OF OUR FOREIGN POLICY IF NOTHING ELSE.

 

OUR WHOLE POLICY.

ELLEN: I WAS DELIGHTED TO HEAR YOU MENTION THE MARSHAL PLAN AND ONE OF THE REASONS THAT WOULD BE A WONDERFUL GOAL TO SHOOT FOR TO AIM AT IS THAT WE WERE FAR MORE GENEROUS WITH OUR MARSHAL PLAN THAN WE HAD BEEN AT ANY TIME SINCE.  AT THAT POINT WE WERE GIVING PROBABLY 2 TO 3% OF OUR GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT TO SUPPORT THE MARSHAL PLAN.  WE HAVE PROMISED TO GIVE SEVEN TENTHS OF ONE PERCENT OF OUR GROSS NATIONAL PRODUCT, GROSS NATIONAL INCOME FOR DEVELOPMENT AID BUT WE ARE NOWHERE CLOSE TO THAT.  WE ARE GIVING ABOUT A FOURTH OF THAT.  WE’RE ONLY GIVING 50 CENTS OUT OF EACH HUNDRED DOLLARS IN OUR FEDERAL BUDGET FOR OUR ENTIRE POVERTY FOCUSED AID PROGRAM SO ONE OF THE THINGS THAT WOULD BE WONDERFUL ABOUT STARTING A MARSHAL PLAN THAT WOULD ADDRESS THE ISSUES OF POVERTY AND HUNGER AS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE AS THE MARSHAL PLAN WAS A NATIONAL SECURITY ISSUE WHEN WE PUT THAT INTO PLACE.  WE COULD BE A LOT MORE GENEROUS.  AMERICANS THINK THAT WE ARE VERY GENEROUS.  IN COMPARISON TO THE REST OF THE WORLD AND IN COMPARISON AS TO THE PORTION OF OUR RESOURCES WE ARE NOT AT ALL GENEROUS.  AMONG THE 22 DONAR NATIONS WE RANK SECOND TO LAST IN THE PROPORTION OF OUR INCOME THAT WE GIVE FOR POVERTY FOCUSED AID.  IN FACT FOR OUR ENTIRE OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE AND ONLY HALF OF OUR OFFICIAL DEVELOPMENT ASSISTANCE IS POVERTY FOCUSED AID.  I’D LOVE TO SEE A MARSHAL PLAN FOR ADDRESSING HUNGER ISSUES. 

 

SCOTT: AND WHAT ABOUT THE POOR IN OUR MIDST TOO.  HOW CAN WE BEST HELP THOSE WHO ARE STRUGGLING JUST TO PUT FOOD ON THE TABLE RIGHT HERE IN OUR AREAS?

 

SEE I THINK THAT’S WHERE LOCALLY WE CAN DO IT AND THAT’S WHY IT’S IMPORTANT.  WE CAN’T SOLVE THE WORLD POPULATION, THE WORLD PROBLEM OF POVERTY BUT WE DO IN OUR LOCAL COMMUNITIES, OUR CHURCHES, OUR CIVIC ORGANIZATIONS TO ELIMINATE POVERTY IN CEDAR RAPIDS.  THAT IS A GOAL AND IT CAN BE DONE BUT IT’S NOT JUST IT’S FEEDING IT’S EDUCATION, IT’S PROVIDING JOB OPPORTUNITIES.  ALL THAT’S POSSIBLE ON A LOCAL LEVEL.  ** OF INDIVIDUALS TO HELP LOCALLY THAN WE ** LOCALLY AND WE, WE’RE WORKING ON THAT.

 

SCOTT: PAUL WHAT DO YOU SAY?

 

PAUL: WELL THERE’S LOCAL CHOICES.

 

SCOTT: WE ONLY HAVE A COUPLE MINUTES.

 

PAUL: GLOBAL IMPLICATIONS.  WE CAN ACT LOCALLY IN SUCH A WAY THAT MAYBE FROM OUR POINT OF VIEW AT LEAST, INADVERTENTLY OR UNINTENTIONALLY CONTRIBUTING TO GLOBAL POVERTY BECAUSE WE’RE NOT AWARE OF THE WAY IN WHICH THAT’S OCCURRING WITH OUR CHOICE OF WHETHER AND WHAT AND WHERE TO BUY THE THINGS THAT WE PURCHASE AND FOOD IS HUGE HERE.  THESE ISSUES ARE TREMENDOUSLY COMPLEX BUT THERE’S ALSO A SENSE IN WHICH I BELIEVE WITH A CONTRASTING SIMPLICITY SOME OF THE PROBLEMS DEVOLVE TO THE SAME POINT AND I BELIEVE ONE OF THOSE POINTS IS OUR GLOBAL ADDICTION TO OIL WHICH IS CREATING HAVOC FOR US IN MANY WAYS INCLUDING THE COST OF FOOD AND THE PRICE OF FOOD TO MAKE A DISTINCTION BETWEEN THOSE TWO WORDS.  ON A LARGE SCALE AT LEAST OUR AGRICULTURE HAS BEEN PETROLEUM DEPENDENT FOR DECADES AND AS THE COST OF OIL IS GOING UP AND UP AND UP WE’RE SEEING THAT IN THE PRICES OF FOOD.

 

SCOTT: RIGHT.  YEAH, I REMEMBER A GREAT PHILOSOPHER SMALDAE ONCE SAID PEOPLE ARE MORE LIKELY TO FIGHT OVER OIL THAN FOOD AND ONE WONDERS IF THERE ISN’T A CERTAIN TRUTH IN THAT BUT OBVIOUSLY THEY’RE BOTH THINGS THAT WE CARE IMMENSELY ABOUT.  WELL I’M AFRAID WE’RE RUNNING OUT OF TIME HERE.  THERE ARE STILL MANY ISSUES THAT WE COULD ADDRESS INCLUDING ETHANOL AND MORE DETAIL BUT I’D LIKE TO THANK THE PANELISTS HERE FOR A REALLY NICE DISCUSSION AND SOMETHING ON HOPING AS, I WON’T USE THE PUN I GUESS, BUT I HOPE WE GIVE YOU SOMETHING TO THINK ABOUT WHEN IT COMES TO FOOD. 

 

YOU WERE GOING TO SAY FOOD FOR THOUGHT.

 

SCOTT: I WAS BUT I RESISTED THAT.  BUT ANYWAY WE DO HOPE THAT YOU CONTINUE THIS CONVERSATION IN YOUR OWN HOMES AND COMMUNITIES AND THANK YOU AND WE’LL SEE YOU NEXT TIME ON ETHICAL PERSPECTIVES ON THE NEWS.