STUDENT BLOG: REWRITING THE FARM BILL, REBUILDING THE ECONOMY
The United States farm bill is the primary tool of the federal government that controls agriculture and food policy. It is largely controversial and has the power to impact international trade laws, conservation efforts, and food safety (Wikipedia, 2012).
According to Marion Nestle, “The farm bill supports farmers, of course, but also specifies how the United States deals with such matters as conservation, forestry, energy policy, organic food production, international food aid, and domestic food assistance (Nestle, 2012).” It is not hard to see that the issue of food, whether through the production of or the distribution of, finds its way into almost every facet of policy and legislation. To put simply, whoever controls the food, controls the people. Perhaps this is why the United States farm bill is as extensive as it is corrupt. This is so for several reasons according to Nestle, “ the bill does not require farmers to engage in conversation or safety practices (farms are exempt from having to comply with environmental or employment standards). Because the bill subsidizes production, it gets the United States in trouble with international trading partners, and hurts farmers in developing countries by undercutting their prices (Nestle, 2012).” Nestle also mentions that the farm bill is so big it is especially vulnerable to influence by lobbyists for special interests opening the floodgates to the exploitation of nature and people.
Perhaps what is most interesting about the bill is its largest program SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program), which accounts for 85% of the 663-page piece of legislation. By the late 1970s, small farms had been consolidated into large factory farms, which reduced the political power of agricultural states. To continue farm subsidies, agricultural states needed votes from large low-income urban populations and in order to pass food assistance bills, those legislatures needed votes from agricultural states. The farms receiving the majority of the subsidies are those that grow commodity crops such as soybean, corn, and canola. I think what is most important to recognize here is the contradictive nature of this program. Federal dietary guidelines recommend that people maintain diets rich in fruits and vegetables, yet the farm bill subsidizes commodity crops used in the production of processed foods (Nestle, 2012). In my own personal experience with SNAP I soon learned that there were certain herbal teas that could not be purchased, yet any kind of soda pop or candy could be. It begs the question, what kind of message is being sent? Are low-income people being intentionally dumbed down and fattened up? When you look at who is really profiting from these types of policies you can’t help but wonder.
Further competition in a free-market continued to push for faster growth and higher profit margins. Corporate deregulation policies during the Reagan-era removed limits on television marketing of food products to children. These factors led to the consolidation of larger, more powerful food companies. Super-sized portions of food and an increase in the availability and options of different types of snack foods was the result (Nestle, 2012). These highly processed foods are inexpensive and can be purchased in large quantities. And because they are mostly devoid of any nutritional value they do not fill one’s belly for long, further increasing consumption of more empty calories.
So how do we go about fixing the farm bill? It is certainly no small task, and would have to begin with rebuilding an entirely different economic system. The economic system that is currently in place can only function when there is constant ever-expanding growth dependent on the extraction of finite resources. This is a contradiction in terms. What we need is an economic system that puts the health and well being of people and nature before corporate profits. A healthy ecosystem is vibrant and flourishes with abundance. Why couldn’t an economic system be the same?
Awesome insight! I was intrigued right away when you said that the Farm Bill includes such matters as conservation, forestry, energy policy, organic food production, international food aid, and domestic food assistance. These things are directly related to the farm but makes the farm bill very broad. Do you think that the root of the problem with the farm bill is that it concerns so much? Could we start by making the bill smaller?
Great blog! I am very interested in your statement about what message is being sent by the farm bill by our government. “Are low-income people being intentionally dumbed down and fattened up?” This is something I think about all the time. I actually think that our government is doing exactly that! There is no money to be made in health, but there is loads of money to be made by sickness. I see it as the government which is run by big money (corporations, medical industry, the meat industry, agriculture industry, pharmaceutical industry) is in fact intentionally allowing/causing our poor/uneducated peoples to become sick so that the industries running our government can profit from this by operations, sales, and drugs.