Posted May 11, 2007:
The history of the Farm Bill in America is a mini-history
of 20th-century American farming. Inaugurated as the Agricultural
Adjustment Act of 1933 and renewed and revised every five
or so years since, the Farm Bill has grown into a multi-billion
dollar legislative package affecting everything from what's
on your kid's school lunch tray to the price of cotton in
Africa.
But while the Farm Bill's true constituency—those whose
daily lives are impacted by its outcome—now includes
virtually every U.S. citizen, the number of Americans who
claim a role in how it gets written is tiny: a few dozen farm-state
legislators on a handful of committees, answerable to a few
thousand farmers and a clique of lobbyists. The non-farming
population yawns.
This book seeks to change all that. Intuitively organized
and terrifically illustrated (although marred by an unfortunate
number of copyediting lapses), Food Fight more than
fulfills its objective of providing an accessible, engaging
primer to the Farm Bill's past and present complexities. Like
all of Watershed Media's books, it is at once timely and attractive,
reconfiguring chronic eco-political dilemmas from a fresh
perspective.
Here you will find short, effective summaries of key Farm
Bill outrages—from commodity payment disparities (195
farms received more than $1 million a piece in 2005) to program
distortions (millions of conservation program dollars have
been diverted to help mega-livestock farms build manure lagoons)
to crop insurance fraud (estimated at $160 million in 2004).
Studies have repeatedly found that subsidies encourage farm
consolidation, decimate local economies and accelerate rural
population loss, but still they are with us, fiercely preserved
by the few who benefit.
Imhoff highlights the tragic disparity between farmer interest
in conservation initiatives and funding to pay for them, despite
"mandatory" spending levels written into the original
legislation. He demystifies the Farm Bill life cycle, from
initial authorization to annual appropriations via Senate
and House committees, subcommittees and the budget reconciliation
process. Perhaps most importantly, he spells out the critical
issues in play for the 2007 Farm Bill, major pieces of which
are being hashed out at this very moment.
Among these critical issues is the tug of war between status
quo commodity payments—which have been outlawed by the
World Trade Organization and were supposed to have been phased
out under the 1996 Farm Bill—and a more forward-looking
farm policy centered on "agri-environmental" programs
that recognize and reward farmers' roles as responsible stewards
of the land (and water and air, for that matter).
The 2002 Farm Bill negotiations fostered a landmark coalition
over this very issue, with traditional rural advocacy groups
and environmentalists coming together to support the Conservation
Security Program, woefully underfunded in practice but in
principle a revolution in U.S. farm policy. Part of what's
at stake in 2007 is whether this new coalition, strengthened
by experience and maturity, can achieve even more this time
around—or at least protect and reinforce what's been
gained so far.
Another key issue is energy, which the 2002 Farm Bill addressed
in the form of Section 9006 grants to promote investment in
on-farm renewable energy and other projects. How the ethanol
boom and mounting interest in biofuels as a means of reducing
U.S. dependence on foreign oil may make themselves felt in
the 2007 Farm Bill remains to be seen.
But what really could set this Farm Bill apart from earlier
legislation is the now-widespread recognition of the public
health crisis associated with obesity, diabetes and other
consequences of the abysmally poor average American diet.
The statistics are familiar but still astounding. Two-thirds
of Americans aged 20 to 74 weigh more than they should, with
half of those qualifying as clinically obese. Fifteen percent
of children are overweight; a mere 2 percent eat a healthy
diet as defined by federal guidelines.
Obesity falls disproportionately on the poor because bad
food is generally less expensive than good food. Between 1985
and 2000, Food Fight notes, the price of fruits and
vegetables increased 38 percent, while the price of soft drinks
fell 23 percent. Why? Because federal subsidies make soft-drink
ingredients like corn syrup cheaper than dirt.
Public health has played a role in Farm Bill discussions
since the 1930s, when surplus crops were first purchased and
redistributed to those suffering from Depression-era hunger
and unemployment. Three decades later, as Imhoff explains
it, negotiations between the "hunger lobby" and
the "farm bloc" led to the 1964 Food Stamp Act,
expanding food relief programs to something like their present
form. To this day, food stamp and other nutrition programs
account for about half of all Farm Bill spending.
Demand for food stamps has been rising steadily since 2001,
despite the fact that just 60-70 percent of those eligible
make use of the program. In 2005, 35 million people in the
U.S.—12 percent of the population—were considered
to be food insecure.
The question, then, is whether roughly half of all Farm Bill
funding is essentially exacerbating the need for the other
half, and whether a saner farm and food policy could address
the whole suite of problems—farm viability, environmental
protection, public health, hunger—from a more humane
direction. There are some promising proposals on the legislative
table at this moment. What’s needed is for all Americans
to read this book, and then stand up and make their opinions
heard.
In Imhoff's words, with "more than $600 billion spent
on Farm Bill programs since 2000 alone, it seems reasonable
to ask: Have these taxpayer dollars accomplished goals of
a greater public good?" (70). 
|
