Tankou Nasyonzini an, USAID tou se rate Ayiti
USAID pa fè yon bagay revitalize ayisyen sektè agrikòl. Kòm yon kesyon de reyalite, yo ap fè tout bagay nan pouvwa yo gen kiltivatè ayisyen koupe jarèt. Yo te devlope pa gen okenn pwogram fòmasyon pou ede fèmye yo amelyore jesyon rekòt yo ak kapasite pwodiksyon fèm.
Instead of financing projects that can empower Haitian to produce more rice, poultry, pork, and sugar at peak capacities, they rather bring American products to Haiti in order to compete against the locally produced Madam Gougous; thus, reducing and slowly killing the national production so the motto "Prodwi Lakay or Made In Ayiti" can now only be a dream slipping away from Haitian farmers' reach.
USAID is performing in Haiti under the 1986 Blumper's Amendment through which countries that grow crops such as soy, sugar or rice and possibly corn, coconut or palm that compete in world markets with American crops cannot receive funding from USAID.
Here is the Blumper’s Amendment in even simpler terms.
Americans sell rice, soybeans and sugar into the Haitian markets. Although these three food staples (among others) are able to be grown on Haitian soil and are the key to Haitian food security, if a farmer plants either of them, they will more than likely be cut off from USAID aid.
USAID $100 million flagship initiative encourages Haitian farmers to produce mangoes, lettuce, cabbage, and peppers, instead of rice; a crop that has been tied to Haiti's self sufficiency for histories. As a result, Haitian farmers produce less and less, which paves the way for American products to be found "a dime a dozen" on the Haitian market.
The deployment of American products on Haiti soil mainly benefit foreign church organizations and the Nasyonzini (UN), which buy lands from farmers who cannot survive the competition. Lands are bought to erect churches and MINUSTAH bases, dragging the Haitian economy downhill or until Haitian farmers hit rock bottom.
“When a country has no longer the power and the motivation to locally produce and when this country has to buy “for cheaper” imported products, the economy of such a country is bound to decline. In a country where the “power of buying” of the majority is less than weak, price in relation of product availability becomes the factor that drives the economy.”
In recent years, organizations such as Oxfam and the Chicago Council on Global Affairs have called for repeal of the Bumpers Amendment, and in 2010, the Senate Foreign Relations Committee tried to include legislation in the Foreign Relations Authorization Act that would soften the law and make exceptions for the world’s most food-insecure countries. The move met with opposition from rice-lobby groups, as well as from Sens. Blanche Lincoln, D-Ark., and Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., members of the Senate Agriculture Committee. The changes were not included in the final bill.