Agfax Buzz:
    May 16, 2014
    farmer_FI

    Commentary: Heritage Foundation Slides from Think Tank to Propagandist

    AgFax.Com - Your Online Ag News Source

    From Farm Policy facts

    The Heritage Foundation recently published a new report detailing its 10 “guiding principles” for agriculture. As in the case of other reports, this report also departs from the respected analysis Heritage was once known for in favor of what appears to be the talking point of donors.

    Over the years, Heritage increasingly starts with the answer to any policy question they want and then cherry pick information in order to arrive at their desired conclusion.

    For example, the recent report on agriculture claims that while “agriculture has changed dramatically” over the last 80 years, farm policies have remained “Depression-era relics.” This makes for a good quip but it confuses the facts. Actually, nothing of the Depression-era programs survive under the 2014 Farm Bill except a single provision that says if Congress ever fails to do its work in passing a modern 5-year Farm Bill the law will revert back to the 1938 and 1949 Act.

    In short, the only way we wind up with Depression-era farm policy is in the event the Heritage Foundation succeeds in defeating passage of a Farm Bill five years from now.

    This sort of error is unworthy of a think tank that years ago, whatever you might have thought of their conclusions, you still felt was credible.

    The 2014 Farm Bill, passed in February, marked a sea of change in farm policy that not only kept us free of Depression-era farm policy but threw off more recent policies that were not as cost effective as they needed to be.

    For example, direct payments, first introduced in 1996, were repealed as part of a more than 30% percent cut in the commodity title, which is actually proving even deeper under CBO’s most recent analysis with projections of roughly $3 billion more in savings than earlier expected.

    The only policies that are in effect after passage of the 2014 Farm Bill are policies that provide help only in times when a producer suffers a loss due to Mother Nature or market conditions affected by foreign subsidies and tariffs that are at record highs and rising even as U.S. support for farmers and ranchers reaches record lows.

    The report calls for “free market principles” for U.S. farmers and ranchers while turning a blind eye toward heavily subsidized and protected foreign competitors.

    For instance, the Heritage Foundation would have American rice farmers compete on their own against the government of Thailand, which pays farmers above market prices for their rice – about $4.4 billion above market prices in the 2011-2012 crop year alone.

    Heritage would also have America’s sugar farmers stand alone as they compete on the world market against governments which have made headlines in their open and notorious subsidization of their sugar farmers.

    And Heritage would leave our nation’s cotton farmers to contend alone with China, the 800-pound gorilla in the world cotton market. This command and control economy not only dictates its internal cotton policy but it calls all of the shots in the global market, with actual world supply and demand rendered immaterial.

    Many readers would wholeheartedly agree with the author’s conclusion that “a free-market vision for agriculture starts with having principles that recognize the flaws of government intervention while embracing freedom and individual rights.” But that doesn’t blot out the reality of the world market where foreign government manipulation of agricultural markets is the rule and not the exception. It also ignores the fact that the U.S. is already leading by example with the most market-oriented farm policy in the world where crop prices are set totally by private markets.

    What Heritage cannot get straight is if you strip out any federal involvement in crop insurance, farmers would have no insurance on their crops because no private company would sell them a policy because no farmer could afford the premium so risky is agricultural production.

    Heritage also can’t get straight that everyday Americans don’t buy into Heritage’s view that it is just great if other countries want to subsidize their producers so they can undercut American farmers and ranchers and drive them out of business. Most Americans don’t recognize this as a free market.

    Every five years, U.S. farm policy changes. We have gone from Depression-era policies in the 1930s to more modern policies in the 1970s, ’80s, ’90s, and earlier in this century, each decade shedding more and more of the policies of 80 years ago. And, the 2014 Farm Bill represents the most fundamental shift yet. The old Heritage Foundation would have observed this slow but certain evolution and constructively contributed to the landmark change made to farm policy earlier this year.

    Undoubtedly, farm policy is going to continue to change as agricultural market conditions change. We are nearing the time when 9 billion people will inhabit the earth. Norman Borlaug, whom our nation just honored with a statue in the U.S. Capitol, taught us that we can be knee-jerk in our response to a hungry and growing world or thoughtful.

    Heritage, and all of us, would do well to follow Borlaug’s thoughtful lead.

    Tags: , , , , , , ,

    Leave a Reply

    Name and Email Address are required fields. Your email will not be published or shared with third parties.

    Agfax Cotton News

    AgFax Cotton Review: Australia Looking for Cotton Pickers; India Sells from State Stocks4-17

    Florida Cotton: Rain Delays; Limited Supply of New Seed ReleaseS4-17

    Cleveland on Cotton: Trading Range Stretching Topside; MidSouth Water Logged4-17

    Rose on Cotton: Spring Rally Coming. Are You Ready?4-17

    Old World Bollworm Arrival Eminent: USDA Invests $1.2M in Detection, Control – DTN4-17

    AFB Cotton Close: Dec. Falls Below Support4-17

    DTN Cotton Close: China Discusses Disposal of Reserve Stocks4-17

    How Will China’s Investments in Agriculture Affect U.S. Producers?4-17

    Conservation Compliance: 5 Steps Needed Before June 1 Deadline4-17

    Georgia Cotton: No Counter 20G Approval for 20154-17

    Weekly Cotton Market Review – USDA4-17

    DTN Cotton Open: Global Stocks Fall4-17

    Mississippi Corn, Soybeans: Slugs Appearing in Emerging Fields4-16

    DTN Cotton Close: Short Covering Allows Late Rally4-16

    AFB Cotton Close: Sluggish Demand, Improved Weather4-16

    USDA Reminds Farmers to Certify Conservation Compliance by June 1 Deadline4-16

    South Carolina Cotton: Counter 20G Not Approved for 20154-16

    U.S. Drought Outlook: Improvements Expected Across the Plains4-16

    Drought Monitor: Mississippi River, Gulf Coast Get Drenched4-16

    U.S. Drought Monitor Quick Look Video – AgFax4-16

    Texas Fertilizer Fire, 2013: What Did We Learn? – DTN4-16

    DTN Cotton Open: Contracts Break from Higher Trade4-16

    AFB Cotton Close: Pressured by Improving Weather4-15

    Propane Stocks Continue Climb4-15

    Gasoline: Strong Regional Price Movements4-15

    Diesel Prices Move Lower4-15

    DTN Cotton Close: Commercial Selling in Quiet Trade4-15

    5 Business Practices to Take Home From Ethiopian Farmers – DTN4-15

    Texas: 6 Counties Declared Natural Disaster Areas4-15

    Kansas: 2 Counties Designated Natural Disaster Areas4-15

    North Carolina: Test Soil Now to Avoid New Peak-Season Testing Fee4-15

    Arkansas Cotton: Pre-Plant, Pre-Emerge Applications for Brake F24-15

    DTN Cotton Open: Light Support Tied to China4-15

    AgFax Editor and Photographer’s Work on the Road and the Web4-14

    DTN Cotton Close: Pressure from Noncommercial Selling4-14

    USDA Launches Website For New and Beginning Farmers4-14

    AFB Cotton Close: Beneficial Rains Drag on Prices4-14

    Oil Crops Outlook: U.S. Soybean Stocks Worked Down by Record Demand4-14

    Texas Crop Weather: Cotton Planting a Week to 10 Days Behind4-14

    Tennessee Cotton: Late Burndown Options4-14