6 FOOD DAY PRINCIPLES
Support sustainable farms & limit subsidies to big agribusiness
Uncle Sam has long been generous to farmers, or at least some of them. All sorts of subsidies have been developed, such as payments to farmers when crop prices are low; payments regardless of whether a farmer grows anything at all; and a subsidy for crop insurance. Between 1995 and 2009, direct subsidies totaled some $246 billion, or about $16 billion per year. Included in that total are some wiser subsidies, such as ones that pay farmers not to farm on erosion-prone land.
Taxpayers provided $247 billion in direct farm subsidies between 1995 and 2009. Just 10 percent of large farms rake in 74 percent of direct subsidies – with the top recipient getting $4.8 million in 2009. Meanwhile, the average payment to 80 percent of the farms receiving the smallest subsidies was only $572. Most of that aid goes to growers of just five crops: corn, wheat, soybeans, cotton, and rice. Direct and counter-cyclical payments (subsidies given when prices are low) and the federal crop-insurance program are based on acreage and mostly benefit large-scale farmers.
Photo Credit: USDA, Natural Resources Conservation Service
Other subsidies are indirect, such as when America limits imports of cheap foreign sugar, which keeps domestic sugar prices high and costs consumers several billion dollars a year. Enriching the huge, American sugar growers at the expense of struggling farmers in developing nations makes no sense. Also, the federal requirement that 15 billion gallons of corn ethanol be produced annually has led to record-high corn prices, which is a boon to both corn farmers and ethanol producers, but has also resulted in higher food prices. The Washington Post charged that "the costs to taxpayers of replacing a gallon of gasoline with one of corn ethanol add up to $1.78. The tax incentives alone cost the Treasury $6 billion in 2009."
Farm subsidy programs are begging for reform. Possible changes might include: Limits on how much federal money goes to a given farm; dramatically relaxing sugar-import restrictions; and eliminating the corn-ethanol requirement, which does little or nothing to save energy. President-elect Obama's promise to seek a limit on subsidies to farms could be realized in the 2012 Farm Bill – but the farm lobby is extremely powerful and might be able (again) to kill significant reforms.
Some of the money saved could be directed to small and mid-size farms, especially environmentally friendly ones. Farmers who want to convert to organic methods need help during the several costly years it takes to do so. Local farms could be helped to deliver fresh produce to schools. And the farmers-market movement could be assisted, especially in helping farmers markets bring tasty, nutritious foods to low-income communities.
Among the farms that deserve the most help are those that practice "sustainable agriculture." Sustainability is defined as meeting the needs of the present without compromising the ability of future generations to meet their own needs. Typical sustainable practices are the use of crop rotation, minimal use of synthetic pesticides, use of composted manure instead of chemical fertilizer, and organic methods. Yet the current (2008) Farm Bill provides only tiny amounts of funding to support organic and sustainable agriculture and local food production.
Some possible improvements to farm policy that could help small and mid-size family farms include:
- Sharply limit federal support to large farms. Use the money saved to provide technical and financial support to small family farms, especially ones that make special efforts to protect the environment.
- Protect small ranchers and poultry growers from the giant meatpackers and poultry processors. The processors set prices and, in some cases, business practices in ways that make it tough for small farmers to earn a living.
- Build local food systems. Most foods travel hundreds or thousands of miles to get to grocery stores. Increasing the marketing of locally grown food helps local farmers, keeps rural communities alive, and protects the environment – and may provide tastier, healthier food at no extra cost. Establishing local Food Policy Councils would help promote local production and consumption.
- Promote Farm to School programs. In 2009, only about 9,000 of the 100,000 schools in the United States got any of their cafeteria foods from local farms. The USDA already assists schools to access local markets and gives grants for equipment through its "Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food" initiative, but a lot more needs to be accomplished. Congress should provide greater funding for Farm to School programs.
- Support the infrastructure for making locally grown foods more available. Promoting farmers markets, CSAs (community-supported agriculture), local food processing, and bringing more locally grown fruit and vegetables into schools, hospitals and colleges are tasty ways to support local farmers!
- Improve the SNAP program. In 2009, only 900 out of about 5,200 farmers markets accepted SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, formerly Food Stamps) benefits. More markets need EBT machines (for the debit card-like SNAP benefit cards), which can be provided through USDA's Farmers Market Promotion Program. Also, to promote health and subsidize the produce growers, SNAP should provide bonuses to encourage people to buy more fruits and vegetables.
- Tax chemical fertilizer and pesticides to fund sustainable agriculture programs. Revenues from federal (or state) taxes could help farmers reduce unnecessary uses of chemicals or assist farmers who are converting to organic methods. Iowa, for instance, imposes small taxes and fees on pesticides and fertilizer, and uses some of the revenues to fund the Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture.
Of course, beyond any of those federal programs, we consumers can buy more locally produced fruits, vegetables, and other foods at farmers markets, farm stands, and grocery stores.
Resources:
Eat Well Guide
