The Bigger Uncle Sam the smaller your Liberty
Written for the High Plains Journal
School is back in session and I was honored again to speak at York High School, addressing food and fuel issues with mostly freshmen and sophomores. I was waiting in the theatre and most of the students were already seated before someone made their way to the light switch and enabled vision. That motivated me to do a deep dive on how vulnerable our electric grid and a reliable supply of electricity truly is; we could all be in the dark for a considerable amount of time.
In the second class, I walked down the path of the creation of the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) in 1862. This would be something completely foreign to most all high school students, not just freshmen. But it appears to me that we ALL need a refresher course on exactly what the purpose of the USDA was intended to be.
I find it interesting that on one hand we brag about Lincoln and the formation of the USDA during the Civil War, but it was really about ramping up food production in the North because the resources of the South had been destroyed and hunger was eminent. The original intent of the USDA was a very narrow mission focused on the disseminating information about agriculture and “to procure, propagate and distribute among the people new valuable seeds and plants.”
Now the USDA has grown to be something more than it ever should have been. During the last 160 years, the scope of USDA’s work has expanded well beyond that narrow mission—and well beyond agriculture itself. In addition to being a distributor of farm subsidies, the USDA runs the food stamp program and other food-related welfare programs and covers issues including conservation, biofuels, forestry, and rural farm programs. Based on the USDA’s fiscal year (FY) 2023 budget summary, outlays are estimated at $261 billion: $221 billion for mandatory programs and $39 billion for discretionary programs.
With that said, I received an email from Eric Allen last week suggesting that any cuts to USDA Farm Programs would be a terrible move. I reached out to Eric and asked him to come on my radio program to discuss his stance but he refused. He feels the USDA needs to keep programs in place to maintain a surplus of food. My initial question is simple: if we constantly have a surplus, will we ever have a profit in production? Oh no, instead maybe we should rely on taxpayer subsidized dollars to keep our farms going forever.
I can make the case that farm subsidies have moved us all into an era of high consolidation and concentration in the food business. It is widely reported that ten companies now control 80% of all food distribution. When was the last time anybody attended a livestock market meeting when packer concentration was not the topic item of discussion?
I happen to live in the transition area of Nebraska where corn country meets the Sandhills cow country. The Sandhills used to be west of me until the USDA started doling out subsidies through the EQUIP program to pay farmers to convert native rolling hills into corn fields with water-sucking, fuel-guzzling center pivots. Now we have more corn than the market desires and a water table that causes guys to lose water rights they’ve held for generations.
Not to mention what conversion to irrigated land has done to increase land value assessments and lead to higher property taxes. Even for those with 100% grazing land, the increased land values are taking a toll on our ability to own land.
From my perspective, it is easy to see that every single USDA program picks winners and losers. The payments go to folks that want to keep the farm in the family yet the more we move away from the oldest economic principle on earth, supply and demand, the closer we get to the government tapping you on the shoulder to say your time has come.
My microphone is always open for anyone that wants to have an honest discussion about the real issues of farming in today’s world. The best way to farm “climate-smart” would be to eliminate the erosion of farmers by the USDA. I think Ronald Reagan wraps it up very well:
I hope we once again have reminded people that man is not free unless government is limited. There’s a clear cause and effect here that is as neat and predictable as a law of physics: As government expands, liberty contracts. – 1989