Blogs : Food Media
Food Media CHOW's roundup of food-related news from blogs, newspapers, magazines, cookbooks, and film.
A Last-Minute Farm Bill Update
No, the Farm Bill isn’t over yet—it only seems like it should be. Those watching this year’s bill have seen it metastasize into a terrifying, nearly incomprehensible behemoth of competing interests. In Sunday’s New York Times, Michael Pollan plainly deconstructs what’s been happening on the Hill over these many months.
He is not pleased. This year, Pollan acknowledges, “[t]he eaters have spoken” and concerned citizens brought “an unprecedented level of attention to what has long been one of the most obscure and least sexy pieces of legislation in Congress.” But it mattered little: The Farm Bill on the Senate floor this week—the House passed its version in July—“is very much a farm bill in the traditional let-them-eat-high-fructose-corn-syrup mold.” The subsidy system has been largely preserved, and opponents of it were partially bought off with new programs, like $2 billion for “specialty crops” (“farm-bill-speak for the kind of food people actually eat”). Pollan reviews the monies going to the few worthy programs and then bites down hard:
We would not need all these nutrition programs if the commodity title didn’t do such a good job making junk food and fast food so ubiquitous and cheap. Food stamps are crucial, surely, but they will be spent on processed rather than real food as long as the commodity title makes calories of fat and sugar the best deal in the supermarket. We would not need all these conservation programs if the commodity title, by paying farmers by the bushel, didn’t encourage them to maximize production with agrochemicals and plant their farms with just one crop fence row to fence row.
It isn’t over. The bill will be subject to several amendments on the Senate floor, which might alter and possibly improve it. That’s why Pollan ends with a quiet call to the phones, and the Ethicurean, in its write-up of Pollan’s op-ed, concludes with a more adamant, if semiapologetic, one: “Sorry to sound like a broken record, but yep, it’s time to call your senators again (better than emailing) and urge them to vote for one of these.”
Posted by | Monday, November 5, 2007 at 5:03pm | 2 comments
« Previous Post: This Just In: Red Bull + Vodka = Dangerous Next Post: Recipe Rescue » |
Here's more on the Dorgan-Grassley amendment that Pollan described as "sensible", and a call to action for California "eaters" to get in touch with Boxer and Feinstein.
-----Original Message-----
From: Heather Fenney [mailto:heather@foodsecurity.org]
Sent: Monday, November 05, 2007 1:41 PM
Subject: Critical Time for Farm Bill Action
If you all haven’t called our Senators already I am writing again to urge you to take just a few minutes to make two quick calls.
The Senate is starting debate on the Farm Bill today and will begin considering amendments as early as tomorrow. Senators Dorgan and Grassley have introduced a payment limits amendment that would cap commodity payments at $250,000 and close the loop holes that allow mega-operations to collect mega-payments. Most importantly it would direct the more than $1billion in savings to beginning farmer, rural development, conservation, local food and nutrition programs (see more details below). We are hearing that Boxer and Feinstein are still undecided about the Dorgan-Grassley amendment but possibly leaning toward supporting it. The roaring call from constituents for reform is having an impact – we must keep the pressure on until they cast their vote.
One other issues that they will vote on on the floor is to expand the definition of Food Stamp Nutrition Education so that communities can be pursuing more environmental change strategies to addressing obesity. Their are likely to be other amendments to strengthen the food stamp program as well – we must express our support for these.
If possible please contact our two Senators and let them know you support these measures and urge them to vote yes when the come to the Senate Floor. It would be very helpful if you could also share this request with the offices that you have been reaching out to on this issue. Calls from local elected officials will be strongly considered by the Senators.
Senator Dianne Feinstein Phone: 202-224-3841
Senator Barbara Boxer Phone: 202-224-3553
What to say
* Vote YES on Dorgan Grassley payment limits amendment. Savings from commodity reform would much better serve Californians if invested in beg beginning and minority farmer, conservation and nutrition programs.
* Vote Yes on an amendment to allow greater public health approaches in Food Stamp Nutrition Education.
The phones have been really busy so if you don’t get through wait a few min and then try again. You can also contact folks in the local offices that you have relationships with – they will forward your message on to DC staff.
Thank you in advance for you calls, you can reach me at 310-591-4017.
Best, Heather Fenney
--------
Background:
In recent years, many of the original goals and methods of commodity programs have been abandoned and replaced with production subsidies that encourage overproduction and often low prices. Negative consequences of these policies include farm consolidation and the disappearance of mid-sized family farms, land prices rising well beyond market levels, reduced farming opportunities for a new generation of farmers, and the growth of industrial animal feeding facilities. While a variety of reforms are needed to reduce or eliminate the negative impacts of current commodity programs, the very effective first step Congress could take in the 2007 Farm Bill is to cap subsidies to mega farms through the Dorgan-Grassley Farm Program Payment Limitation Reform Amendment.
The Dorgan-Grassley Farm Program Payment Limitation Reform Amendment would:
● Limit annual per farm commodity subsidy payments to $250,000. The amendment would establish effective caps of $40,000 on direct payments, $60,000 on counter cyclical payments, and $150,000 on loan deficiency payments and marketing loan gains, including gains on generic certificates and forfeited commodities. The combined limit would be $250,000.
● Close loopholes. No longer would farmers be able to use generic commodity certificates or forfeitures to the government to evade the limits. Those limitation avoidance mechanisms would now count against the limits. All payments would count toward an individual’s limit, whether received directly or through a corporation or other type of entity. All beneficial interests in an entity would be subject to payment limitations, making it more difficult to create “paper” farms for the purposes of exceeding the limits.
● Ensure that payments flow to working farmers. The amendment creates a measurable standard to determine who is eligible to receive farm payments. It requires that management be personally provided on a regular, substantial, and continuous basis through direct supervision and direction of farming activities and labor and on-site services. Landowners who share rent land to an actively-engaged producer remain exempt from the “actively engaged” rules provided their payments are commensurate to their risk in the crop produced.
The $1.15 billion in savings from the Dorgan-Grassley Payment Limitation Amendment will be shifted to:
● Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program ($60 million)
● Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account Program ($20 million)
● Pigford black farmer lawsuit settlement with USDA ($100 million)
● Rural Microenterprise Assistance Program ($40 million)
● Farmers Market Promotion Program ($15 million)
● Organic Certification Cost Share Program ($3 million)
● Community Food Grants ($50 million)
● Grasslands Reserve Program (approximately $50 million)
● Farmland Protection Program (approximately $50 million)
● Emergency Food Assistance Program (approximately $370 million)
● Food Stamp Benefit Enhancements (approximately $400 million)
for an updated action alert which also outlines how the $1.15 billion in 10-year savings from Dorgan-Grassley will increase funding for the Food Stamp Program, Emergency Food Assistance Program, Grassland Reserve Program, Farmland Protection Program, Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Accounts, Rural Microenterprise Assistance Program, Community Food Grants, Farmers Market Promotion Program, and the Pigford class action settlement involving black farmers.
Omnivore's dilemma, indeed. Actually, it's not a dilemma, since the choices available to most of us are determined far away by companies like Cargill and ADM. You'll eat what we give you, they say...starting with HFCS.
I'll call my senators, but I'm terribly afraid that the corn lobby might have a louder voice. And much deeper pockets.