Food to fuel, just a sign of whats to come. Limits on purchasing food.

[Gary_C]

Everybody just loves to hate the farm bill, including the farmers.  And now I just heard they have just reached tentative agreement on a new one.  :

But there are a few things you should keep in mind while you join the crowd in hating the new one. First, I remember one year they were writing a new farm bill and one of the long time congresmen who had a major part in writing that bill put up a bar chart that represented the federal budget for the year. He then pointed out that the entire USDA budget was the width of one of the lines between the bars on the chart. And he said "heck (not an exact quote) they lose more than that over their lunch hour over at HUD."  ;D

Another thing is something I heard some years ago from a man who had been asked by two presidents to be Sect. of Agriculture and turned both offers down. He responded to a question by reciting from memory all the past farm bills, what they consisted of, and how they failed. His point was the farm bill covered so many diverse areas and had to satisfy so many interests, that it was never the best thing to do, nor the right thing to do. It was simply the only thing that could be written that could satisfy enough of those diverse interests to get passed.

So I am getting prepared to hate this new one too, just like most of you, but I probably will not fully realize what I hate about it for a few years after I see what is going to fail in this one.  ;D ;D

[Don_Papenburg]

DanG , I only know what is absolutely needed to get by .  The farm bill is like a HMO agrement lots of bs  little substance.   But yes you have to be in the program .   I never had to worry about the fines till this year I want to plant a small plot to veggies  .  Hoping that it will pay my everincreasing realestate tax burden.   I might just plow up some of my grass  to save my ....  from the fines. 

[DanG]

Don, I'd like it very much if you could explain your own situtation a bit for us.  I'd much rather hear of the actual experience of someone we know and trust, rather than some essay that was just copied off the web.  I'd certainly like to see you make a nice profit for your effort and investment, and I'd also like to learn a little something from it if you'd be willing to share some info.

I'm a Farm Bureau member, and I get their monthly magazine, "Florida Agriculture."  In it every month is a column about the various farm bills that are going through congress, or are about to expire, etc.  I find the information there fascinating, though I'm not a farmer.  I am a voter, though, and I don't see how anyone can be serious about thier vote without some knowledge of what is happening around us.  I think this sort of information should be in every magazine and newspaper sold.  Agriculture is so important to all of us, I don't understand why so many tend to ignore it.  It is even more important to the city dweller than it is to me, since I could grow most of my own food if I had to.  For someone living in an apartment, the professional farmer it the ONLY one keeping him/her alive!

One factor that most people don't seem to understand about farm programs, is the actual purpose for them in the first place.  Some of them, probably most, are there to ensure a steady flow of all commodities, so that prices will remain stable.  I know it is hard to go in the grocery store right now and believe that it is working, but food is cheaper here than anyplace else in the world.  And because of these programs, you can get most anything you want at any time of the year.  One example of  a farm program that worked was the now defunct Peanut Price Support program.  It simply guaranteed the farmer a certain price for a certain portion of his crop.  He would have an allotment of so many pounds of goobers, and the Govt would make up the difference to him if his crop didn't bring the minimum price.  He could grow as much as he wanted to, but the program was only for his allotted tonnage.  It was an incentive for farmers to keep up production of this important crop.  If a farmer didn't plant peanuts at least one year out of three, he would lose his allotment.  The peanut industry thrived and the program was no longer needed, so it went away.

Other programs, such as the CRP, are intended to help ensure that there will always be sufficient agricultural land available to meet our needs.  Most of the general public scoffs at these programs, and laughs about farmers being paid to not grow things, but that is because they are ignorant of the real purpose of this practice.  If a landowner had to pay regular tax millage on large acreage, and had no income from it, he would be forced to sell it off to the developers, and we would have no farmland in reserve for our future needs.

People also wringing their hands over corn these days, thinking all the cows will starve to death if we use it all for making alcohol.  How ignorant is that!?  Cows don't even need corn at all.  In fact, we'd all be better off if no beef cow ever ate another kernel of the stuff!  Beef is better, and better for you if the cow just eat's its natural food, grass.  The big producers, Armour, Swift, etc., have convinced the public that their beef should have a big ring of useless fat on it, so they can sell you a bunch of 3 cent/lb fat for $14.99 per pound.

Well, DanG.  Here I started out asking Papenburg a simple question and ended up blabbering on like some kind of old fart.  How 'bout it Don?

[stonebroke]

The vegetable clause was put in because the vegetable growers( rightly I think ) were afraid that some grain prroducers would convert large acreages of land to vegetables while still receiving money from the government. This would put the vegetable growers at a disadvantage. Thank you for being a Farm Bureau Member. We need all the members we can get.

Stonebroke

[LeeB]

I be's a member too. Don't know nothing about farming, but I got 140acres of trees. Huh, don't know nothing about that niether.  :D

[Patty]

The Farm Bill

LINK TO STORY

Here is the recent version of the 2008 Farm Bill. I don't think most folks are aware that such a small portion goes to the farmers, and the majority goes to welfare recipients in food stamps and school lunch programs.

[Sawyerfortyish]

You should live in the garden state. Our governor just eliminated the dept of agriculture in N.J. the DEP is taking it over. What a mess thats gonna be. Along with closing a lot of the parks he's become very popular :

[Don_Papenburg]

Dang , You have the farm program down quite well .  I was just surprised that when they came out with the "Freedom to Farm " farm bill , That I did not have the fredom to farm as I saw fit .  I also think that it was to protect veggie growers . I don't think that they have any programs to help if they have a bad crop.  There is some provitions for fruit growers on intermitent basis ,if I recall proper.     I have a small grain farm in the midwest .  I was interested in growing veggies that I could sell to small Mom & Pop stores in the area.  My idea was to sell to them at a low enough price that they could compete with the chains.  But I would still make a lot more than growing comodity grains. The other reason to sell to M&P stores was then I would not have to run a farm stand or hit the farmers markets to sell produce . I really do not want to be in the retail buisness again.
So anyway I was surprised that I could not grow veggies on my program ground.  After all it was called the freedom to farm bill. 
I have only a small amount of land that I can vegg .  A lot of my good land went into the streambank filter strip CRP program .  I went with the 15 year provision.   Basicly the gov. rents the land from me and I plant it with the grasses that htey want and I take care of it for them .  Reseed bad spots and keep weeds out are my major tasks.
  This year I put in the last of the CP33 .  That is a field border that they call the quail program.  But the grasses and forbs that we were told to plant are to attract pheasants.   I questioned them on that . I asked if it would not have been better to encorage the prairie chichen to make a comeback and try to eliminate the pheasant.
I think that there is only one county in Illinois that has prairie chickens now .  The pheasants lay eggs in the PC nest and then they hatch a week or so earlier than PC eggs . The hen thinks it was her eggs and goes about raising pheasants.  The pheasants also are hard on quail coveys ,they tend to drive them out of the area.
Did I answer your ? or just ramble on? 

[OneWithWood]

The Farm Bill would be more correctly titled 'The Subsidy Bill'.  All the programs in the bill I think would then be viewed appropriately.  Be it a subsidy for crops or a subsidy for urban living.  I would like to see the bill broken up into components so the support for the vairous components could be guaged accurately and congress held accountable for the earmarks that make it through under the radar while important programs are held hostage.  I agree the farmers take a disproportionate share of the heat for all the bloated programs just because of all the stuff that was piled on to the original idea.

[tcsmpsi]

What I would like to see/hear, is the People telling the government to Stand Down.

The only thing the government knows how to grow is debt.  No nutrutious or fuel value in that.

Unfortunately, there are too many who actually believe the government knows more about farming and every other industry, and actually need them telling when, what, how and to whom.

It is no wonder there is a problem in buying day to day necessities to live, when over half the money goes to government to intrude.

[DanG]

Did I answer your ? or just ramble on? 

That was a great answer, Don....very informative.  Like most good answers, it brings some more questions to mind.  Unfortunately, I'm having computer problems and have very little time on here right now.  As soon as I can, I'd like to ask a few follow-up questions.

[DanG]

I don't see the Government Farm Programs as an intrusion on anyone's rights.  The Gov't offered money in exchange for a guarantee that certain crops would be in dependable supply, or that certain land would be set aside for specific purposes.  The recipients of this money didn't have to enter into the agreements, in most cases.  I'm not familiar enough with the programs to know how much flexibility is built into the agreements.  I think it would be wise for there to be a system by which a farmer could modify his commitment so that he could do things like Don wants to do.  Now, Don apparently accepted some sort of compensation in return for his commitment to grow grain on his land, so it isn't wrong that he should give something in return for an easing of that commitment.  I think there should be a way for him to modify his contract in a more graceful manner than simply reneging on it and paying the fine.  If the plan was being fairly administered, he would be able to negotiate a settlement, perhaps gaining a release on part of it by extending the length of commitment on the other part.  Of course, that would require some thinking on the part of Congress that may be a bit deeper than they are accustomed to.

The other day, I caught a snippet on the News about the current debate on scaling back the ethanol program.  Some Senator was waving a loaf of bread over his head, claiming that the price of it had gone up to $4 because the price of grain had doubled.  Well, doing a bit of quick math in my head made my BS detector scream in agony!  Now I don't know how accurate this figure is, but I've heard that the value of the wheat in a loaf of bread is about four or five cents in the farmer's combine hopper.  If that is true, and the value of that wheat doubled to ten cents, how in the cat hair(thanx Charlie) does that translate to a $1.50 increase in the price of the bread?  The only thing I can think of that might explain it is that the thieves in the marketplace are pulling the wool over the people's eyes.  They are using a nickel's worth of additional overhead to justify a $1.45 obscene profit for themselves!  I am a lifelong proponent of the Free Enterprise system, and have always had an appreciation for the important role that large companies play in keeping us safe, well-fed and free.  That has not changed.  I also have a healthy disdain for Government regulation of business. I certainly don't want to see Gov't price controls!  Lately, I've about concluded that we need a "Truth in Business" law that would force companies to fully disclose the distribution of their costs and profits.  I'm not talking about the Corporate level of financial disclosure, but a cost breakdown printed on the package of every product sold.  The label on that loaf of bread the Senator was waving would have a cost breakdown that would reveal to the consumer exactly who was making the money out of it.  If that were the case, the Gov't could shut down all the regulatory programs except for those regarding National Security and Public Safety, and the American people could regulate the economy for themselves.  I have a feeling we would do a pretty good job of it, given truthful information to go on.  Such a proposal would never pass the Congress though, because it would remove all doubt as to what a bunch of stinkers they really are!

[Larry]

Missouri was the third state to mandate that ethanol-blended fuel be sold at all gas stations.  And here are some of the folks reaping the profits.

Farmer Lawmakers Reap Money From Missouri Tax Credits

It's fine for farmers to receive tax credits for investing in ethanol plants...but farmer/legislators?

I'm not a big fan of producing ethanol...at least from corn for other reasons, but it looks to me right now the consumer is paying in more ways than one.