Well done Jerry. Glad you finally got to describing the Farm Bill as the boondoggle it is. In addition to the information about how corporate agriculture profits are supported, it would be interesting to know how many members of Congress receive payments, who they are, how much they get, and what machinations they use to avoid legal restrictions on such payouts. Mr. Grassley's comments on this subject are more interesting every election cycle.
Thanks, Dave. I knew you'd be among those interested in this subject. During my research I did stumble across a reference to Senator Grassley's subsidy payments, and those of his son. But I don't have anything specific about any Senators.
In the House, 8 members of the Ag Committee (or their family members) receive subsidies, as well as 17 other Representatives.
Here's a link to a chart showing current House members who receive subsidies, and the total amounts they've gotten over the years:
Please go on the website of the Humane Society of the United States, and read the article from May 24th 2024 titled “Proposed Farm Bill Would Create a Nightmare for Animals.”
Thank you so much for this, Hollywood. I've been considering whether to write a follow-up piece on other parts of the Farm Bill that I couldn't include this time. The Humane Society article pretty much convinces me of the need to do so. Everyone should read this.
"But let’s keep it in mind for a complete overhaul during President Biden’s second term, when Democrats once again control both Houses of Congress." I wish I shared your optimism, Jerry Weiss. I'm very worried about the future, and your very comprehensive analysis of the Farm Bill didn't allay my concerns. Peanuts? Is the peanut crop that valuable?
My take-away from what little I ever knew about the annual Farm Bill was that farmer's got money from the government for NOT growing certain crops. And I do know that factory farming gets huge subsidies and the little guys get just that, "little." Am I showing my ignorance here? Probably! But thanks for all the effort you put into this analysis....maybe I'll read it again when I'm more alert!
What you already knew about the Farm Bill is completely correct, Catherine. There's just so much more, and much of it is really bad -- especially this version currently in the House. We'll be hearing more about it in the next few weeks. Meanwhile, check out the Humane Society article mentioned in the comment above from Hollywood Gothic.
Jerry, a good job for such a short time in that rabbit hole. You can only touch on so much in a short piece like this, but I would have liked to see a couple paragraphs summarizing how the Farm Bill originally got started and why it included provisions, which started with dispnsing excess commodities to school lunch programs and to the poor, and went from there.
In grad school I went down the same rabbit hole you just did, only deeper. Not sure I ever completely emerged. I come from farming families who were dirt farmers, sheep herders (wool and meat), small-scale egg producers (no, not a back yard flock, but a business of several hundred chickens and supplier to most stores in a rural valley. Grandma did eggs. Grandpa did the pork and rabbits).
That lifestyle ended with my grandparents. Every one of their children on both sides- my parents and all their siblings and some of their cousins- left the land. They had no desire to spend their lives in debt. When the Farm Bill came along, it was not meant for small farmers. It was meant to support trade in commodities and ensure the USA's capacity as a major producer. This meant that the focus was on the big farms. Corporate agriculture was really taking off post-WW2. Think Earl Butz, who was the worst thing that ever happened to American agriculture. As Secretary of Agriculture, he pushed for buyouts and corporate takeover of huge tracts of ag land. He advocated for chemical-based agriculture and encouraged farmers to monocrop. By the sixties, corporate ag was claiming to "feed the world". It was a bogus claim: my deep dive into records showed that nearly all of the USA's trade was in five main crops- you know which they were: for the most part, the crops that the Farm Bill subsidized. And nearly all of the trade went to wealthy nations (Canada, Japan, western Europe). Very little went to smaller, poorer nations, and when it did, it was marketed in such a way that tended to suppress their ability to become self-sustaining because their farmers couldn't make enough to compete with the artificially low prices of American commodities. Thus, malnutrition and suppressed economies in those countries.
Your analysis of the current situation is quite good, and much needed, because very few people, including farmers, really understand just what the Farm Bill is. I just wanted to add a little background to give some context that really needs to be in the picture too, if we are to understand where the Farm Bill went wrong and why.
Thanks for adding your perspective on the history, Catherine.
As I said in the post, this is all new territory for me and I feel like I've only begun to scratch the surface. I had learned that Earl Butz was largely responsible for the dramatic expansion of crop subsidies and the consequent consolidation of farm acreage. But I didn't realize the reasoning behind it. What you explained is enlightening, to say the least.
Also, I appreciate your encouraging words in general. I've been considering whether to write a follow-up on the conservation and environmental elements. And given the unexpectedly enthusiastic feed-back, I probably will be doing so.
Right now, I'll need a bit of a break. But the rabbit-hole is beckoning. See you there!
Wow ... I appreciate your summary of this arcane ( to most of us) topic. Well done. I always thought that putting SNAP (formerly Food Stamps) made little sense. Very well done and superbly written.
Thank you for writing about this hidden truth. To be honest, I can’t even read this before bed because I won’t sleep. The “Humane” article I cannot finish . It isn’t that I was ever lazy. Far from it. I am trying to rise above the devastation of Chronic Lyme disease. It debilitates as one ages as we have never had answers or effective diagnosis in order to get well.
Not unlike the farm bill. The more the public doesn’t know the more we will fatten animals and patients with unnecessary feed lot poison. Not, you don’t need me and my cynical self.
But, we do need you and your very very important writing and your digging out of the truth . Thank you always. I want to help in my old tired heart.
So sorry to hear about your condition, Jean. I've read many of your comments on other substacks, and never once did I think of you as lazy. But I do know what you're talking about.
I was watching a TV show recently where the main character was celebrating his 60th birthday and remarked "Turning 60 isn't unacceptable. Being weak is unacceptable!" And I found myself exclaiming agreement out loud. It's not aging that's hard, it's the loss of physical strength and energy.
Thanks for your support and encouragement. Keep on keepin' on!
Well done Jerry. Glad you finally got to describing the Farm Bill as the boondoggle it is. In addition to the information about how corporate agriculture profits are supported, it would be interesting to know how many members of Congress receive payments, who they are, how much they get, and what machinations they use to avoid legal restrictions on such payouts. Mr. Grassley's comments on this subject are more interesting every election cycle.
Thanks, Dave. I knew you'd be among those interested in this subject. During my research I did stumble across a reference to Senator Grassley's subsidy payments, and those of his son. But I don't have anything specific about any Senators.
In the House, 8 members of the Ag Committee (or their family members) receive subsidies, as well as 17 other Representatives.
Here's a link to a chart showing current House members who receive subsidies, and the total amounts they've gotten over the years:
https://static.ewg.org/upload/pdf/EWG_MoC-Subsidies_05.23_House.pdf?_gl=1*gfpb1p*_gcl_au*NjU3NjQ1NTA3LjE3MTY3NjI3MzI.*_ga*MzQ4NDc5ODguMTcxNjc2MjczMg..*_ga_CS21GC49KT*MTcxNzgyMTE3NC4yMC4xLjE3MTc4MjE1MDcuNjAuMC4zNjg1MzkwMjc.&_ga=2.199499182.1413070954.1717552735-34847988.1716762732
Whew!
Totally agree, Nancy. That's exactly how I felt this morning!
Please go on the website of the Humane Society of the United States, and read the article from May 24th 2024 titled “Proposed Farm Bill Would Create a Nightmare for Animals.”
Thank you so much for this, Hollywood. I've been considering whether to write a follow-up piece on other parts of the Farm Bill that I couldn't include this time. The Humane Society article pretty much convinces me of the need to do so. Everyone should read this.
Here's a link: https://www.humanesociety.org/blog/farm-bill-animal-welfare-nightmare
Thanks again.
"But let’s keep it in mind for a complete overhaul during President Biden’s second term, when Democrats once again control both Houses of Congress." I wish I shared your optimism, Jerry Weiss. I'm very worried about the future, and your very comprehensive analysis of the Farm Bill didn't allay my concerns. Peanuts? Is the peanut crop that valuable?
My take-away from what little I ever knew about the annual Farm Bill was that farmer's got money from the government for NOT growing certain crops. And I do know that factory farming gets huge subsidies and the little guys get just that, "little." Am I showing my ignorance here? Probably! But thanks for all the effort you put into this analysis....maybe I'll read it again when I'm more alert!
What you already knew about the Farm Bill is completely correct, Catherine. There's just so much more, and much of it is really bad -- especially this version currently in the House. We'll be hearing more about it in the next few weeks. Meanwhile, check out the Humane Society article mentioned in the comment above from Hollywood Gothic.
Jerry, a good job for such a short time in that rabbit hole. You can only touch on so much in a short piece like this, but I would have liked to see a couple paragraphs summarizing how the Farm Bill originally got started and why it included provisions, which started with dispnsing excess commodities to school lunch programs and to the poor, and went from there.
In grad school I went down the same rabbit hole you just did, only deeper. Not sure I ever completely emerged. I come from farming families who were dirt farmers, sheep herders (wool and meat), small-scale egg producers (no, not a back yard flock, but a business of several hundred chickens and supplier to most stores in a rural valley. Grandma did eggs. Grandpa did the pork and rabbits).
That lifestyle ended with my grandparents. Every one of their children on both sides- my parents and all their siblings and some of their cousins- left the land. They had no desire to spend their lives in debt. When the Farm Bill came along, it was not meant for small farmers. It was meant to support trade in commodities and ensure the USA's capacity as a major producer. This meant that the focus was on the big farms. Corporate agriculture was really taking off post-WW2. Think Earl Butz, who was the worst thing that ever happened to American agriculture. As Secretary of Agriculture, he pushed for buyouts and corporate takeover of huge tracts of ag land. He advocated for chemical-based agriculture and encouraged farmers to monocrop. By the sixties, corporate ag was claiming to "feed the world". It was a bogus claim: my deep dive into records showed that nearly all of the USA's trade was in five main crops- you know which they were: for the most part, the crops that the Farm Bill subsidized. And nearly all of the trade went to wealthy nations (Canada, Japan, western Europe). Very little went to smaller, poorer nations, and when it did, it was marketed in such a way that tended to suppress their ability to become self-sustaining because their farmers couldn't make enough to compete with the artificially low prices of American commodities. Thus, malnutrition and suppressed economies in those countries.
Your analysis of the current situation is quite good, and much needed, because very few people, including farmers, really understand just what the Farm Bill is. I just wanted to add a little background to give some context that really needs to be in the picture too, if we are to understand where the Farm Bill went wrong and why.
Thanks for adding your perspective on the history, Catherine.
As I said in the post, this is all new territory for me and I feel like I've only begun to scratch the surface. I had learned that Earl Butz was largely responsible for the dramatic expansion of crop subsidies and the consequent consolidation of farm acreage. But I didn't realize the reasoning behind it. What you explained is enlightening, to say the least.
Also, I appreciate your encouraging words in general. I've been considering whether to write a follow-up on the conservation and environmental elements. And given the unexpectedly enthusiastic feed-back, I probably will be doing so.
Right now, I'll need a bit of a break. But the rabbit-hole is beckoning. See you there!
Wow ... I appreciate your summary of this arcane ( to most of us) topic. Well done. I always thought that putting SNAP (formerly Food Stamps) made little sense. Very well done and superbly written.
Thanks, Tom.
I especially appreciate "superbly written", coming as it does from a writer himself.
Jerry,
Thank you for writing about this hidden truth. To be honest, I can’t even read this before bed because I won’t sleep. The “Humane” article I cannot finish . It isn’t that I was ever lazy. Far from it. I am trying to rise above the devastation of Chronic Lyme disease. It debilitates as one ages as we have never had answers or effective diagnosis in order to get well.
Not unlike the farm bill. The more the public doesn’t know the more we will fatten animals and patients with unnecessary feed lot poison. Not, you don’t need me and my cynical self.
But, we do need you and your very very important writing and your digging out of the truth . Thank you always. I want to help in my old tired heart.
So sorry to hear about your condition, Jean. I've read many of your comments on other substacks, and never once did I think of you as lazy. But I do know what you're talking about.
I was watching a TV show recently where the main character was celebrating his 60th birthday and remarked "Turning 60 isn't unacceptable. Being weak is unacceptable!" And I found myself exclaiming agreement out loud. It's not aging that's hard, it's the loss of physical strength and energy.
Thanks for your support and encouragement. Keep on keepin' on!
Thanks for this primer on a complex subject that I knew nothing about. Now my head is spinning.