2007 Farm Bill
1) The United States corn ethanol subsidy is 8 or 9 times greater for ethanol than it is for oil. Ethanol costs 2 or 3 times more money to produce per gallon than does gasoline. Take away the subsidy and ethanol costs even more. This is not the way for our federal tax dollars or consumers to be taking us. 2) Corn ethanol subsidies are already driving up livestock feed costs, which is hurting other farmers at the same time it may be helping cash grain corn producers in the short term. If we put every inch of available cropland in the United States into corn production strictly for ethanol production, we will still need to go out and find 20 percent more land from which to find corn to completely displace fossil fuels. If we do that, where will our nation's food be grown? It will be imported, which will replace one insecurity and dependence (imported non-renewable energy) with another (imported food). 3) In the present farm bill, the individual producer cap on commodity payments is more than $350,000; for conservation reserve program participation the individual producer cap is $40.000. Intensive, polluting, inhumane, inefficient, bankrupting, risky farming practices receive the most federal money. Conservation, health and safety, food security receive the least. For justice, economic stability, fair prices, market-driven (not subsidy-driven) conditions for our farmers; AND for public health, a rich bank of fertile soils, earth stewardship and conservation, we should turn this around. Lower the cap for the former, even phase it out over 3 years, and raise the cap for the latter. 4) The entire federal research and education budget for sustainable agriculture represents a fraction of the total federal allocation and authorization for agriculture. We cannot find efficient, cost effective ways to farm sustainably in the United States if we do not have a national commitment to fund alternative research and education. Larger percentages should be diverted to organic and alternative farmer training, farmland conservation and placement of young farmers on farmland, development of local food production infrastructure, marketing and transportation; and assistance to small-, mid-size and cooperative farm and food producers. I am a Wisconsin Farmers Union member, and I generally oppose this agenda. I think many of these priorities could be - will be - too easily manipulated by industrial agriculture at the expense of mid-size and small farmers, whose practices and production generally provide better public health, safety and food security, but whose voices are not being heard and whose interests are not being genuinely served. I want Congress to: (1) end most, if not all, of the present subsidies for cash grains, livestock and ethanol production (especially Loan Deficiency Payments for corn, soybeans and wheat); (2) divert these funds into transition programs, alternative training practices, production diversity, conservation programs and economic incentives to stop flooding specialized and concentrated markets with high volumes and yield obsessions, which eventually only depress commodity prices and drive small and mid-size farms out of business; (3) make it a federal crime with a mandatory jail sentence for any appointed or elected official to accept any political contribution from any food manufacturing company, employee or representative, or to go to work for a food manufacturing company as an employee or lobbyist within 2 years of leaving office; (4) shift all research funding away from the land grant universities and into farm-based, farmer-led cooperative, artisan, farmstead and entrepreneurial efforts to restore local infrastructure, local transportation and local food production. Our state's farmers' union membership has fallen from more than 10,000 to about 2000 in little more than 3 1/2 decades. It seems that even within the union, voices for alternative viewpoints, democracy, small business, local economies and genuine food security may be stifled by those who want more of the same, when what we really need is something completely different. Tony Ends |
|---|
1) The United States corn ethanol subsidy is 8 or 9 times greater for ethanol than it is for oil. Ethanol costs 2 or 3 times more money to produce per gallon than does gasoline. Take away the subsidy and ethanol costs even more. This is not the way for our federal tax dollars or consumers to be taking us.
2) Corn ethanol subsidies are already driving up livestock feed costs, which is hurting other farmers at the same time it may be helping cash grain corn producers in the short term. If we put every inch of available cropland in the United States into corn production strictly for ethanol production, we will still need to go out and find 20 percent more land from which to find corn to completely displace fossil fuels. If we do that, where will our nation's food be grown? It will be imported, which will replace one insecurity and dependence (imported non-renewable energy) with another (imported food).
3) In the present farm bill, the individual producer cap on commodity payments is more than $350,000; for conservation reserve program participation the individual producer cap is $40.000. Intensive, polluting, inhumane, inefficient, bankrupting, risky farming practices receive the most federal money. Conservation, health and safety, food security receive the least. For justice, economic stability, fair prices, market-driven (not subsidy-driven) conditions for our farmers; AND for public health, a rich bank of fertile soils, earth stewardship and conservation, we should turn this around. Lower the cap for the former, even phase it out over 3 years, and raise the cap for the latter.
4) The entire federal research and education budget for sustainable agriculture represents a fraction of the total federal allocation and authorization for agriculture. We cannot find efficient, cost effective ways to farm sustainably in the United States if we do not have a national commitment to fund alternative research and education. Larger percentages should be diverted to organic and alternative farmer training, farmland conservation and placement of young farmers on farmland, development of local food production infrastructure, marketing and transportation; and assistance to small-, mid-size and cooperative farm and food producers.
I am a Wisconsin Farmers Union member, and I generally oppose this agenda. I think many of these priorities could be - will be - too easily manipulated by industrial agriculture at the expense of mid-size and small farmers, whose practices and production generally provide better public health, safety and food security, but whose voices are not being heard and whose interests are not being genuinely served.
I want Congress to:
(1) end most, if not all, of the present subsidies for cash grains, livestock and ethanol production (especially Loan Deficiency Payments for corn, soybeans and wheat);
(2) divert these funds into transition programs, alternative training practices, production diversity, conservation programs and economic incentives to stop flooding specialized and concentrated markets with high volumes and yield obsessions, which eventually only depress commodity prices and drive small and mid-size farms out of business;
(3) make it a federal crime with a mandatory jail sentence for any appointed or elected official to accept any political contribution from any food manufacturing company, employee or representative, or to go to work for a food manufacturing company as an employee or lobbyist within 2 years of leaving office;
(4) shift all research funding away from the land grant universities and into farm-based, farmer-led cooperative, artisan, farmstead and entrepreneurial efforts to restore local infrastructure, local transportation and local food production.
Our state's farmers' union membership has fallen from more than 10,000 to about 1,400 in little more than 3 1/2 decades. It seems that even within the union, voices for alternative viewpoints, democracy, small business, local economies and genuine food security may be stifled by those who want more of the same, when what we really need is something completely different.
Tony Ends
910 Scotch Hill Road
Brodhead , Wis. 53520 www.scotchhillfarm.com 608 897-4288