By John Q. Hosedrinker 
The Honolulu Charter Commission is considering a proposal to enshrine the right to food in the city’s charter, which would make Honolulu the first U.S. city to do so. This proposed amendment aims to address food insecurity issues on Oʻahu by ensuring access to nutritious and affordable food for all residents, potentially influencing city policies. While the concept is globally recognized, and Maine has already adopted similar measures, the specific implementation in Honolulu, a city within a state and federal system, could be complex and require a long-term commitment. The amendment is one of 276 submitted proposals, with a public review period beginning in December, and will appear on the November 2026 general election ballot if approved by the commission.
Read the original article here
Honolulu Could Become The First US City Where Food Is A Human Right, and it’s a monumental step, even if it’s just the beginning. The idea of enshrining the right to eat within the city’s charter is a powerful statement, a recognition that basic sustenance shouldn’t be a privilege, but a fundamental right for everyone. This is a concept that much of the world already embraces, so the US is playing catch-up.
The proposed amendment is significant, given the nation’s history. It is also interesting that the location is Hawaii, a state with its unique background. This contrast highlights a broader conversation about values and priorities. The discussion on food as a human right touches on the failings of the current system, where millions of people, especially children, struggle with food insecurity.
Considering that the US had around 20,500 malnutrition-related deaths in 2022, is a sobering reminder of the consequences of not addressing this need. However, the data reveals that most of these deaths, particularly the increase from 2018, are caused by aging related issues. The need for the right to food is clear when the lack of access can cause stunted physical and mental growth, weakened immune systems, and increased risks of chronic diseases, ultimately decreasing the quality of life. Making sure people get enough to eat will improve well-being.
The argument that this is merely “virtue signaling” does not hold water, at least if the action works. This move could signal that this could potentially make a positive impact on the health and welfare of those in need, even in a place like Hawaii, where the weather is more favorable than many locations. Furthermore, if this starts off a positive trend of reform, then it could create change elsewhere.
The discussion also inevitably brings up the practicalities. The fact that the homeless are often pushed out or have their documents stolen, emphasizes the complex nature of the issue. The need for comprehensive support, including housing and mental health services, is a critical component of any solution, and these issues must be addressed.
The influx of homeless people to the islands, and the potential negative impact on the community, is another element of the broader issues. It touches on topics like rising real estate costs and the “rich fallout” bunker effect, where wealthy people take over living and create new standards. This situation makes this move for the right to food an even more important issue.
While some debate the efficacy of the measure, the fundamental principle remains. The US faces a crisis, with millions of children living in food-insecure households in 2023. This measure could become an important step toward providing food security.
The challenges are considerable, including the logistical complexities of providing food and the need for a comprehensive approach that addresses the root causes of food insecurity. The success of this initiative will be determined by its implementation and its ability to deliver on its promise.
The importance of the proposed amendment cannot be overstated. It represents a bold step towards recognizing the essential needs of all citizens. If successful, Honolulu could become a model for other cities and states.