Tuesday, May 21, 2013

Speak Your Piece: Failure to Legislate

09/26/2012

John Henke/Cronkite News Farmers gathered in Washington, D.C., asking for Congress to pass a Farm Bill. It didn't happen. What we have here is a failure to legislate.

Politico recently described the inability of the House to pass a Farm Bill as a “massive legislative failure.” Not even a self-described “grassroots” Capitol Hill rally of some of the nation’s largest farm groups could  generate sufficient attention to break political gridlock.

So what else is new? 

For decades, most Farm Bills, proposed as well as approved, have been massive legislative failures.

One-Dollar, One-Vote

Farm Bills have been written and directed increasingly by and for special interest agricultural organizations and corporate agribusiness. Reported direct political contributions and Congressional lobbying by agribusiness totals about $200 million annually. 

We can only speculate on the millions, or hundreds of millions of unreported contributions allowed under the Supreme Court’s “one-dollar, one-vote” decision known in legal terms as Citizens United.

Opensecrets.org has detailed information contributions. Here’s the rundown:

Agribusiness

Lobbying 

Revolving Doors 

The House Ag Committee 

The Senate Ag Committee 

Why do giant agribusiness corporations and ag organizations contribute hundreds of millions annually? Are these contributions made out of the goodness of their corporate hearts and concern for the common good? 

No. 

Heck no. 

Powerful special interests lobby, send their people through the revolving door, and make political contributions because they expect a good return on their investment. Typically they get an outstanding return; otherwise the corporations and organizations would not continue to “invest” in politics.

Who pays? 

You do. In one-way or another.

Rural America is not well represented. Even the average urbanite is not well represented in farm bills. Indeed, the “public interest” is not well represented in farm bill legislation.

Agribusiness contributions lean Republican; nevertheless, the fundamental problem applies to all political parties. In a sense, it is a DIRT problem--Democrats, Independents, Republicans, and Teas (with or without dregs). There is too much special interest DIRT, too little representation of the public interest.

Welcome to the Plantation

To a great extent, special interest farm bills have promoted and propped up what is now called “industrial farming.”  This industrial model of vertical integrated and horizontal concentrated firms controlled by a few corporate executives is not sustainable. 

Industrial farming is not sustainable because it relies heavily on fossil fuels and mined phosphorous and potash fertilizer. Our world is finite. Resources are limited. Population, use of fossil fuel, mining of fertilizer, and drawdown of aquifers cannot continue to grow exponentially.

The industrial system is also increasingly based on a very narrow plant and animal genetic base.  If Mother Nature does not get angry and retaliate against this narrow genetic base, bioterrorists will have a most vulnerable target made to order.  

The industrial system is also environmentally undesirable, as it has highly concentrated livestock and poultry production, leading to pollution and waste of plant nutrients. Yes, food is cheap at the grocery store, but society will eventually pay the full social price for that food — like it or not, 2012 Farm Bill or not,

The system is socially undesirable — at least to 99% of us — because it is basically a 21st century plantation. Yes, it is a return to indentured servants in a feudalist agricultural system.

Corporate agribusiness money goes not just to influence Congress but also, as Richard Oswald (in Letter From Langdon) points out, they should be arrested for identity theft, having stolen or attempted to steal the good name of U.S. farmers and ranchers.

It is also curious that many giant agribusinesses owe their early economic success to offering products that consumers demanded. Now they are spending huge sums to “tell” consumers what they should want. Advertising that moves beyond informing the public to strong-armed persuasion or deception are arguably not in the public interest.

Farm Bills will continue to be “massive legislative failures” until the public interest, not special interests, becomes the focus and intent of farm legislation.  People need a democratic food and agricultural system.

C. Robert Taylor is the Alfa Eminent Scholar and Professor of Agriculture and Resource Policy, Agribusiness and Concentration at Auburn University.

Comments

Failure to Legislate

The Senate Farm Bill should NOT be passed with this section still added:  SEC. 12211. DEFINITION OF RURAL AREA FOR PURPOSES OF THE HOUSING ACT OF 1949 would increase the pool of recipients and also increased rural community population requirement to 35,000.  This population level would be a small City not a true rural community.  Also, changing the Census date to 2020 insures those who have already received fair share of benefits over past years and now self-sufficient to continue receiving such benefits.  That is the purpose of rural programs to help very small struggling communities grow and become self-sufficient, not to become a Welfare System for self-sufficient communities who have already received past benefits wanting more.

 

Unfortunately my view is not to add or “grandfather” more communities under the USDA because there have been Property Right violations regarding a USDA program.  Mr. Vilsack has not responded to me on how he plans to FIX this issue to better protect citizens.  Therefore, potentially as the saying goes if you want something done right, apparently I will have to try and do it myself.  Because of that I am proposing the following:       

 

Our country needs the following or something similar to better protect citizens and their property rights:

 

“Whoever, with intent to obtain property knowingly participates in changing, without lawful authority, a contract attached to Real Property of another person with the intent to commit, or to aid or abet, or in connection with, any unlawful activity that constitutes a violation of Federal law, or that constitutes a felony or fraud under any applicable State or Local Law, shall face fines or imprisonment for … “

 

Similar to Identity Theft property owners should be afforded the same legal avenues to pursue when a contract is taken behind their back, without knowledge, without consent, depriving them of the use and benefit affecting the marketability of millions of dollars in property.  Sorry We the People are supposed to have guaranteed the Constitutional Right to Protect Property and our government or any of its program grantees have zero right implementing any program to violate the People. 

 

Currently citizens such as possibly legally disabled ones if the perpetrator does not just do the legally, morally or ethically right thing then must choose between paying lawsuit legal fees vs. medical needs.  Having a potential law would then give them the same rights in protecting property whereby they can file theft charges.  Sorry it does not seem right that you can steal a cheap car and face charges, but if you deprive an owner and negatively affect property by potentially $100,000+ there are not similar consequences.     

 

If you would like to see better Property Right protection then please write your Senator and Congressman.