The 2007 Farm Bill now being drafted has
a variety of different forces that traditionally haven't been players in the
development of past farm bills.
The fruit and vegetable growers are
getting into the mix, renewable fuels are coming to the forefront, and our
urban neighbors are getting involved.
With these factors there are new
challenges for the limited amount of federal dollars budgeted for the next farm
bill. With these new players there also can be new opportunities!
The
Agricultural Adjustment Act, created during the Great Depression of the 1930's,
formed the roots of today's farm policies. It was put in place to protect
American agricultural producers and provide the opportunity to make a
respectable living off the land while providing a safe, affordable and abundant
food supply.
This was done by production controls and a responsible
trading policy to ensure the price of commodities would naturally rise in the
marketplace. Along with the original farm policy came something no one likes to
talk about any more called "parity" which ties, by law, the price of
farm products to the inflationary effects of the rest of America's production.
As we look back on the decades of farm programs, how do we grade them?
If
their purpose has been to structure an economy that allows producers to stay on
the farm, then I would have to say that it has been a drastic failure.
Less
than 2 percent of our population now farms, and the mass exodus of farmers and
ranchers continues. To me this does not reflect a healthy, grass-roots
agricultural economy.
Parity has gone by the way-side and farm prices have
lagged horribly below the rest of the economy.
Recent
farm programs have strayed from their original intent by doing away with
market-affecting policy and instead relying on subsidies to sustain the farmer
during low prices.
By doing this, exports are supposed to bring prosperity
to American producers. What a failure this has been. I would argue today's
policies have lowered the standard of living for producers around the world.
Farmers Union is advocating on the commodity title of the Farm Bill a
program that utilizes:
* A counter-cyclical safety net, tied to the cost of
production to support family farmers during periods of low commodity
prices.
* Non-recourse loans to help move the producers' income back into
the marketplace where it should come from.
* A permanent disaster program
as part of the farm bill.
* Directing farm program benefits to the production
levels of family farm operators. In other words, tighter payment limits.
This
might be the best opportunity with the limited dollars in the farm program to
maintain a safety net under our nation's producers.
However,
can we do better? Farmers Union also supports fully funded conservation
programs, including the innovative Conservation Security Program.
We
as a social entity in the United States are, rightfully so I believe, starting
to take responsibility for our environment. The stewardship of our rural areas
can, and should, play a key role in this.
But with limited funding how can
we start to channel some of the farm bill dollars into environmental programs
while at the same time providing a safety net for America's producers?
That's
the catch 22.
Recent
farm bills have been a failure in keeping producers on the land. Would a fully
funded Conservation Security Program be a better route? It might, but how
intact will this program remain once special interests dig their claws into it
as the farm bill is being worked this summer?
We have an opportunity for
some real change now. However, I suspect that this next farm bill will end up
as a slightly modified same-old, same-old.
It
hasn't worked so far. We need fresh ideas while protecting a safety net for the
producers who are left out there.
---
Donn Teske, Wheaton, is president
of the Kansas Farmers Union.
