Agriculture | Election 2008

Agriculture

NETWORK supports an end to unjust U.S. farm subsidies which force small U.S. farmers out of business and millions of Mexican campesinos off their farms. Currently, our agricultural policies promote unsustainable, energy intensive and environmentally destructive farm practices which favor the interests of agricultural corporations over the wellbeing of those who are most vulnerable, the environment, and future generations.

NETWORK’s Vision and Values
NETWORK envisions food and farm policies that ensure:

  • Healthy food for all families
  • Conservation of our land, water and air
  • Vibrant rural communities

Fairness for U.S. and global farmers.

  • Our vision comes from principles of Catholic social teaching, which call us to:
  • Care for people who are poor and vulnerable
  • Be good stewards of God’s creation
  • Promote the common good
  • Be in solidarity with our neighbors around the world.

NETWORK’s Position on Farm Subsidies
There are many different types of subsidies that fall into three general categories: trade-distorting (based on market price), non-trade distorting (e.g. direct payments, based on historical production), and conservation payments. Most of the subsidies are structured to favor large farms, because the more farmland you have, the more money you can get. Most of the subsidies go to producers of certain crops: corn, wheat, soy, rice, and cotton. There is relatively little support for fruit and vegetable growers and organic farms.

NETWORK does not advocate elimination of farm supports, we advocate fair supports for all farmers. The groups we work with who are concerned about global trade and development want to phase out trade-distorting subsidies and replace them with some other kind of safety net. Most people would also like to phase out direct payments, which are paid whether you grow anything or not. We advocated for caps on the amount an individual farmer can get and limiting payments to farmers who make under a certain amount of income. These would be steps to target payments to those who really need them.

Background Information
Congress first enacted the system of price supports, subsidy payments and supply controls that we recognize as the farm bill with one of the earliest pieces of New Deal legislation in 1933.

Farm income and commodity price support policies are at the heart of every farm bill, but recent iterations have typically included titles on agricultural trade and foreign food aid, conservation and environment, domestic food assistance (primarily food stamps), and rural development.

What’s in the Farm Bill?

Nutritional Assistance
The farm bill usually includes funding the for the food stamp program, nutrition assistance block grants to states and some territories, the Food Distribution Program on Indian Reservations (FDPIR), the Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), the Commodity Supplemental Food Program (CSFP), Community Food Projects, and some rules governing the provision of federally acquired food commodities to domestic feeding programs such as school meal programs. The 2002 bill created a Seniors Farmers’ Market Nutrition program, a fruit and vegetable pilot program for schools, a program to increase domestic consumption of fresh fruit and vegetables, and provisions to encourage schools to purchase locally produced foods.

Price supports
These are concentrated on “food grains” such as wheat and rice, “feed grains” such as corn, barley and oats, “oilseeds” such as soybeans and canola, and “upland cotton.” Other crops, including peanuts, wool, mohair, honey, chickpeas and dry beans, are eligible for some assistance, but not direct price support.

Supply controls and import quotas
These apply to milk and sugar in the current bill, and they act to maintain prices for these commodities above what the market might otherwise dictate. Given the cost to maintain the programs and the World Trade Organization (WTO) rules for fair trade, these are at risk in the new bill. However, past efforts to significantly alter or phase out these programs have not been successful.

Green Payments
The 2002 farm bill included a Conservation Security Program aimed at encouraging integrated whole-farm planning and rewarding producers who conserve resources across their entire operation. Tight requirements and relatively low financial incentives have combined to limit participation in this program.

Trade and Export Promotion
Export credit guarantees for commercial agricultural sales, export subsidies for grains and dairy products, and funding for promotion of U.S. farm products in overseas markets.

The World Trade Organization (WTO) has ruled that certain aspects of U.S. support to cotton farmers are illegal subsidies and must be removed. This development may cause legislators to question the effect of every new U.S. farm policy proposal on trade commitments to the WTO.

Payment limits
In 2005, 6.2% of the farms receiving payments got 36% of the payments. Over $5.7 billion went to farms with annual sales over $500,000. Congress will be under some pressure to reduce the outflow of money to these larger farms and to address concerns that these subsidies are contributing to the absorption of smaller family farms by larger corporate operations.

Green Payments
Replacing some existing subsidies with environmentally focused incentives may be a more attractive option in this farm bill than in previous bills because farm supports that are focused on conservation and environmental improvement are viewed more favorably under WTO rules.

Energy
Current interest in renewable energy is likely to spark debate on incentives for producing biofuels such as ethanol.

Export Promotion
These face a real bang-for-the-buck challenge in this round of farm bill debate. They are increasingly limited, due to international trade agreements, and legislators may be less likely to commit funds to a program that may cause more harm in terms of international trade protests than good in terms of benefits to American agriculture.


Rural Development
The bulk of rural development funding in past farm bills has focused on crop subsidies that improve the lot of farmers living in rural areas as the key to improving rural economies–a sort of rural trickle-down concept. But there is growing support for the concept that farmers actually depend on a healthier and more diverse rural economy as a predecessor to the success of the farm. Several development issues may be in play for 2007, such as developing new sources of economic growth for rural areas, stemming rural population out-migration, and conservation and environmental restoration as rural employment opportunities.

Sources[i]

Learn More:

NETWORK
NETWORK on the Farm Bill
NETWORK’s Messages for U.S. Food and Farm Policy
NETWORK’s “Farm Subsidies 101″

International Food Aid
Catholic Relief Services

Advocates for Better Farm Policies
Oxfam America’s Farm Bill Campaign
Bread for the World
National Catholic Rural Life Coalition
Farm & Food Policy Project
Sustainable Agriculture Coalition
National Family Farm Coalition
National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture
Religious Working Group on the Farm Bill

Anti-Hunger Advocates
Food Research and Action Center
America’s Second Harvest
The Alliance to End Hunger

[i] Congressional Research Service, “Food Stamps and Nutrition Programs in the 2002 Farm Bill,” Order Code RL33690, available online from the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas School of Law Website, http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL33690.pdf.

Congressional Research Service, “Previewing a 2007 Farm Bill,” Order Code RL33037, available online from the National Agricultural Law Center at the University of Arkansas School of Law Website, http://www.nationalaglawcenter.org/assets/crs/RL33037.pdf.

Senator Tom Harkin’s Summary of the 2002 Farm Bill http://harkin.senate.gov/agriculture/farm-bill-summary.cfm

Take the Food Stamp Challenge on Catholic Charities USA’s Web site: http://povertyinamerica.typepad.com/campaign/hunger/index.html

Comments are closed.