Navigation
about wwb
about the debate
archive
rolling cyber debate archives
best of the best archive
featured nonprofit archive
the campaign trail archive
state directory
wwb in the news
 take our survey
Navigation
Navigation Audio Tour

WWB Evaluation (PDF)

editorial policy

privacy policy

Home

Participate in WWB Participate in WWB star take our survye Star Contact WWB star About WWB for the press Navigation

In March 2001, Web White & Blue received the SXSW Interactive Festival "Online Community" Award. We are very pleased to be recognized by this prestigious festival.

Don't forget to visit our Rolling Cyber Debate Archives


question of the day red bar
mini Today's Rolling Cyber Debate Question for John Hagelin
hagelin
candidate resources

www.hagelin.org



bottom
Question: It seems every year we hear about American grain surpluses and the intentional destruction of good grain. With so many developing nations facing food crises and many people starving, couldn't that surplus be shipped where it is needed?
Submitted from Lynn of St. Croix Falls, Wisconsin through PBS Online (10/19/00)

 

Answer from John Hagelin:

A Terrible Scourge
Global hunger remains a terrible scourge, and we, as compassionate Americans...

...must do everything within our power to address it.

It is, however, a myth that our excess grains are being destroyed. Yet it is true that we can, and must, do more to ensure that the world's food, including our own surpluses, is more effectively distributed to those who need it most.

Most countries are, in fact, capable of producing enough food to feed their citizens. Often, however, either for political reasons or poverty, this food fails to reach their citizens in need. For such countries, our foreign policy must focus on strengthening these countries politically and economically.

There is a clear role for humanitarian distribution of U.S. grain surpluses. But we must be careful about dumping excessive, highly subsidized U.S. grain into a developing market, for this can destroy the agricultural infrastructure of that nation. It can also make developing nations overly dependent on U.S. growers for food, rather than promoting their own food self-sufficiency. Our humanitarian food aid should focus primarily on helping developing nations become food self-sufficient by offering crucial technical assistance in sustainable agricultural methods and technologies.

There is more than enough food produced today to feed all of Earth's nearly 6 billion citizens. Hunger results from poverty, poor infrastructure, and in too many cases, a lack of political will to ensure that all people are fed.

Given these true reasons for global hunger, propaganda by biotech corporations that the genetic engineering of crops is necessary to feed the world is absolutely unfounded. Gene pollution caused by such genetically engineered crops poses a serious threat to biodiversity and to a sustainable food supply.

Vice President Gore emphasized these very threats in his book "Earth In The Balance." Unfortunately, once he joined the Clinton/Gore administration and became a major recipient of biotech money, he suddenly became a strong promoter of biotech food. Thus, even in our own country, politics poses the most serious threat to our food supply.

I would require mandatory labeling and safety testing on genetically engineered foods, and a moratorium on the release of these experimental foods into the environment until proven safe.

question of the day rebuttals

    No other campaigns have provided rebuttals to this yet.
blank bar


Markle Foundation logocopyright © 1998 - 2002 Markle Foundation  | Online presence by mindshare Internet Campaigns LLC.

The views expressed during the Rolling Cyber Debate are those of the participating campaigns, and not those of Web, White & Blue and the sponsorship of the Rolling Cyber Debate is not intended as an endorsement of any candidate.