Senate Bill Will Mandate GMOs for Hungry Nations

There's a bad bill in Congress, and it's not the one that's received all of the attention. S. 384, the Global Food Security Act of 2009 will mandate research on GMOs for nations we give assistance to. This bill just passed out of committee - unanimously - which means it can now be voted on by the full Senate. How bad is it? I'm not sure to be honest. Elanor at The Ethicurean says:

In the worst case scenario, this bill could force these countries to choose between accepting genetically engineered technology or forgoing food aid.

I'm not sure if it's quite THAT evil but I certainly don't think it's good. I watched the hearing for the bill, and I was very upset by it. They described a scenario in which 800 million people are hungry, a large percentage of whom are living in Sub-Saharan Africa or S. Asian, farmers, and women. They have little education and many live more than 30 minutes (walking) away from the nearest road. In such circumstances, I doubt many have access to running water or electricity. How can we possibly ask people living in such a condition to participate in a western-style system of agriculture that requires SO MUCH capital?

There's very little parallel between an American wheat, corn, or soy farmer with thousands of acres, petroleum based crop inputs, and millions of dollars in farm equipment (including tractors with GPS!), and an African living in a mud hut with AIDS and a cassava field (the scenario described by one of the panelists in the Senate hearing who had recently traveled to Mozambique). The American farmer sells to the world market with prices based on global supply and demand, expecting his or her crop to be processed into food or fed to livestock before reaching anyone's table. The African just hopes to grow enough cassava to eat that year. If prices or nature fails the American farmer, government subsidies or crop insurance programs kick in to help him or her out. If the African has a bad crop, that can mean going hungry.

Yet, in the hearing, the panelists - ALL of whom were fans of the Green Revolution and backing a system more or less supported by the Gates Foundation and American agribusiness - spoke about bringing petroleum-based fertilizer & pesticides and GMOs to Africa. How do you expect that African farmer to afford that stuff? And where do you expect them to buy it, even? The store? Remember, these are people who live 30 minutes or more from the nearest road!

There's another vision for global agriculture, and it was NOT referenced by the panel at the Senate hearing. The International Assessment of Agricultural Science and Technology for Development (IAASTD) published a report last year that received little news coverage. The organization consisted of 400 scientists and 30 governments, and their findings so ticked off biotech companies Monsanto and Syngenta (presumably by rejecting GMOs) that the two pulled out of the study halfway through. Not so surprisingly, this report called for sustainable agriculture.

If you want to take action on this, write your Senators by going to http://www.senate.gov - ask them to oppose S.384 and tell them to specifically oppose the clause that requires research for GMOs.

(Photo credit: emilio labrador on Flickr)