Sep 19, 2014
Home| Tools| Events| Blogs| Discussions| Sign UpLogin


Out to Pasture

RSS By: Steve Cornett, Beef Today

Read the latest blog from Steve Cornett.

What if Michelle and Pollan Get Their Way?

Feb 11, 2010

By Steve Cornett

Just a reminder that what has always been may not always be. A quote from a Wall Street Journal editorial this morning:

The Administration wants $10 billion to fund more nutritious school breakfasts and lunches, and here's a modest proposal: Take the money out of U.S. farm subsidies that make unhealthy foods artificially cheap. Most of the excess calories in the American diet come in the form of highly processed starches, and Tufts University's Timothy Wise estimates that since the 1996 farm bill corn and soybeans have been priced 23% and 15% below average production costs.

I’m not here to argue for or against that sentiment. I am here to remind the reader that the WSJ is the rightward tick to the New York Times’ leftward tock. And the NYT has long since bought into Michael Pollan’s arguments along those very lines.

That argument holds that farm policy is aimed at providing cheap calories. Cheap wheat makes cheap Twinkies. The Pollan Principle holds, further, that subsidized food production also creates excessive energy demand and pollution.

Anytime I bring this up, I am reminded that the farm lobby is too strong to fail. Their success with ethanol makes me think that may be so.

However, if we have both sides arguing against cheap calories, at a time when the national deficit is under attack on both sides, you’ve got to wonder just how strong the lobby really is.

I’m not going to spend a lot of time today on what it would mean to producers if the U.S. got serious about subsidizing asparagus and apples instead of corn, wheat and cotton.

But I’m sure the current administration would like to do that. You don’t have to read as many USDA press releases as I do to know that these guys have a different view of how the farm-to-plate process should work.

I’m not even sure I disagree with them. 

I’m just wondering what the impact would be on the system—and the producers who’ve been working in that system for generations—if they really manage to get the change they want.

Log In or Sign Up to comment

COMMENTS (16 Comments)

Anonymous
Eliminate all subsidies to ag. Grow trees on the 50 million acres they want. Treat your cattle better than a lot people are willing to treat the homeless, and starving in the world. The five billion in direct payments are breaking this country, and its the farmers fault. Eliminate all subsidies and start doing what you want to do with your land. I dont know what wed do with USDA jobs, fsa, food stamp, etc. But our goal would finally b reached.
11:34 AM Feb 14th
 
Anonymous
Another thing, I agree that it is pretty hard to pull the rug out from under the producers who have been figuring subsidies into their business; it should be phased out with everyone understanding the process of phase-out.

Next we need to go after these seed, chemical and fertilizer companies who have ssuch a defacto monoploy that they can force a 50% premium on us. Do you pay more for long distance phone calls now in 2010 or less than you did 20-40 years ago when there was only one long distance provider who rented you a phone every month for the price you now pay for a new phone at the local store? If the agri-business monopolies were broke up do you think you would pay more or less? Do you think you would get a bigger part of the grocery store mark-up or less?
5:08 PM Feb 13th
 

Hot Links & Cool Tools

    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  
    •  

facebook twitter youtube View More>>
 
 
 
 
The Home Page of Agriculture
© 2014 Farm Journal, Inc. All Rights Reserved|Web site design and development by AmericanEagle.com|Site Map|Privacy Policy|Terms & Conditions