Write a Letter, Save a Farmer

Jul 13th, 2007 2:30 PM EST
By Peter Shadzik the Intern

Write a letter

As our astute ONE members may already know, the Farm Bill is making its way through Congress. The bill only shows up once every five years, and is in major need of reform.

The agricultural subsidies contained within the bill use taxpayer money to allow large farms to out compete small farmers by driving down prices. Only the largest 8% of farmers receive these subsidies, leaving small farmers the world over unable to compete.

This legislation has a particularly strong impact on poor farmers living in extreme poverty, who rely on farming as their sole source of income. However, its negative effects don’t stop there. The other 92% of American farmers also struggle to compete with large subsidized farms.

The Farm Bill has been around for many years, and to reform such a deeply rooted piece of legislation, we will need to get the attention of Congress, the media, and the American public.

As the bill moves in front of the House of Representatives, we are presented a rare chance to take action on this legislation. Please help spread the word about this opportunity by sending a letter to the editor of your local newspaper. Your letters are a crucial part of the effort to reform the Farm Bill.

With your help, we can send a message to Congress that the American public does not embrace damaging subsidies that prevent small farmers across the world from producing and selling their goods.

TAGS: Agriculture, The ONE Blog

12 Comments

Larry Woodssays: Jul 13th, 2007 3:07 PM EST

July 13, 2007 at 3:07 pm

It is good you are still farming.

My grandfather was unable to continue in the 1950s, largely because subsidies, which he hated, had hurt our farm’s sales and the local coal company wanted to mine our land. It’s a stip mine.

My brother still lives on the family farm – he is the service manager at a farm implement dealer, his wife is a 4-H leader. I became an agronomist (soil scientist) and live many miles from there.

It is not just small farmers in the third world that have been hurt by this payoff, which was established to “help the family farm.” Like many well meaning programs, it has helped the large farms at the expense of people like us.

Marlycesays: Jul 15th, 2007 1:35 PM EST

July 15, 2007 at 1:35 pm

I have been unable to find the sample letter to the editor on this topic. I have limited access to a computer and am not to savvy but would like to raise awareness, (mine and others), on this subject. HELP! marlycechilders@yahoo.com

Jacksays: Jul 15th, 2007 4:49 PM EST

July 15, 2007 at 4:49 pm

I would like to know specifically which parts of the Farm Bill have a direct effect on the farmers of Africa and other countries with high levels of extreme poverty so we can direct our letter campaign to those areas.

The purpose of One and One.org is to end extreme poverty in our lifetime. This is a huge task we have taken on and if we are to be successful we must stay focused. If we start trying to right every wrong in the world (and here at home) we will accomplish nothing. I am sure the current Farm Bill causes hardships for many small farmers and I am not suggesting that should be ignored. I do feel that this organization and web site must be careful that it does not get away from its stated purpose or it will become worthless.

A letter writing campaign on this issue can be an effective tool but I think it should address specifically the what should be included (or removed) from the bill to directly benefit farmers in countries with extreme poverty.

Farm Bill Girlsays: Jul 16th, 2007 11:38 AM EST

July 16, 2007 at 11:38 am

subsidies are not about hurting small farmers vs. big farmers. subsidies are about benefitting ADM, Tyson and other buyers of cheap commodities to put into high fructose corn syrup or factory farm feed.

subsidies do NOT cause overproduction. overproduction is inherent in agriculture markets as farmers everywhere are pricetakers, not price setters. to solve the problem of overproduction and low prices, you need supply management and a price floor for commodities.

The ONE campaign is falling for a very dangerous myth, and in its attempts to do good, may make life WORSE for farmers here and in Africa.

This is the equation that is being made:

Subsides –> Overproduction –> Low prices –> dumping in Africa

in reality, it is:

Low prices –> Overproduction –> Subsidies (to help make up for the low prices)

Look at coffee. No subsidies. not grown in the first world. yet still excess supply and extreme poverty everywhere for coffee farmers.

Kylesays: Jul 19th, 2007 2:25 PM EST

July 19, 2007 at 2:25 pm

Jack (and others),

Here’s a great resource for everything you need to know about the Farm Bill:
http://www.oxfamamerica.org/resources/files/FarmBill101.pdf

Let’s focus on the issue in the US first (which ONE addresses in order to generate support from both sides of the fence, expressing how lowering commodity subsidies is not just about benefitting farmers in less developed countries, but also about benefitting farmers right in our own backyards).

Despite your argument, Farm Bill Girl, you cannot deny the fact that subsidies directly benefit only 25% of all American farmers, with the top 10% receiving more than three-fourths of all payments. Clearly, as you directly explain, only the top-tier big-business farmers are benefitting, while small farmers (such as Mr. Woods grandfather) are unable to compete.

Commodity subsidies are not associated with job
growth, do not reduce rural-urban migration, and actually make it harder for new farmers to start up because of higher land prices. This is why organizations such as ONE and Oxfam (among countless others) are proposing a shift away from subsidies and toward nutrition, rural development, and conservation, NOT an overall cut in the bill’s budget.

Regarding the effect of subsidies in Africa and other regions of the world, I have to admit, your argument did make me think twice. But, subsidies do inherently distort the market value of goods by decreasing the price of that good under all circumstances.

For instance, if the costs of producing a good are too high and not profitable to farmers, they will leave the industry. In this case, the government will provide a subsidy to those farmers, thus covering the excess costs of production and therefore decreasing the price of the product.

This was exactly the reason commodity subsidies were introduced by FDR to curb the effects of the Depression era in which farmers rapidly left their fields and American food supply dropped. However, as Oxfam notes, “they no longer serve their original intent of providing farmers temporary support to help overcome economic hardships.”

So yes, in any case where there is a subsidy, the market is distorted. Therefore, it is not low prices which cause overproduction (otherwise the market would adjust itself), but rather the subsidies themselves. There would be no surplus to dump in Africa (and other regions) otherwise.

Your point about coffee farmers is particularly interesting. As it is not grown in the U.S., and regions such as Latin America and Africa clearly have comparative advantage, there is obviously no need to subsidize it or place tariffs on it.

However, the International Coffee Agreement (of which I admit I was not previously aware of) greatly devastated the coffee industry during the Cold War (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Coffee#Economics_of_coffee — scroll to economics). Furthermore, big multi-national corporations such as Starbucks have been accused of exploiting coffee farmers for decades by sharing profits disproportionately with them.

Thankfully, recent agreements have been made to curb these practices, and organizations such as USAID have been working to raise awareness among farmers in Africa and elsewhere.

Apologies for the length and/or harsh tone of this response. It was mostly for my own enjoyment