...so says House Ag Committee Chair Collin Peterson. So, tell me, WHY is his name on the short list for Secretary of Agriculture? Obama's no "maverick" on agriculture issues, but he has made a few statements and they were certainly more progressive than Bush Dog Dem Collin Peterson.
The sad truth is that - if rumors can be believed - Obama's potential USDA picks are NOT the change I can believe in. (More on Peterson & other names being floated below)
Obama has a challenge: he wants to provide health care and restore the economy. Well, in tough economic times, people are more likely to eat crap for food. That will put MORE strain on the health care system. How do you induce people to eat the healthy foods that are more expensive when they are having trouble keeping their homes and paying for heat???
Additionally, Obama's administration could be THE eight years that determine whether or not we have any polar ice caps left. Food and energy are inextricably linked. Obama promised good energy, health care, and economic policy. That means his food policy is CRUCIAL - and so is his pick for Secretary of Agriculture.
First of all, let's take a look at what Obama has come out FOR:
- Payment Limits for Subsidies: If we set a hard cap on subsidies, we'll help small and mid-size farmers more than we help large farmers. Why? Because $250,000 (the proposed limit) is a meaningful amount of money to a small farmer, whereas it's pennies to large farmers. (This was voted on in the Senate last year and failed to get 60 votes)
- Increased Fairness in the Beef Industry: There are 4 beef packers that control 90% of the market. A ban on packer ownership of cattle more than 2 weeks before slaughter (a.k.a The Packer Ban) would help make the market a bit more fair for those trying to sell slaughter-weight cattle.
- Factory Farm Regulation: An Obama EPA will regulate pollution from factory farms, with fines for violators. Yes! Awesome!!!
- Country of Origin Labeling (COOL): This is actually now in effect as of Sept 30, 2008. However there are a bunch of loopholes in the way the USDA is enforcing it. Will Obama address that?
- Organic & Local Food: Hallelujah! Obama's looking to make certification of organics & crop insurance for organics more affordable. He also wants to "promote regional food systems." (I believe the quote is from his website)
- Help Young & Beginning Farmers: Terrific. We've got an aging farming population and it's a matter of national security that we can feed ourselves. This makes sense.
- Conservation: Obama pledges to continue existing conservation programs that pay farmers not to cultivate land that is valuable for fragile ecosystems like wetlands. Currently we have several successful programs for this in place but they are not well funded. Will an Obama administration actually fund these???
IMHO, this agenda here IS the change I can believe in. Maybe it's not ENOUGH, but it's CERTAINLY a move in the right direction. Now how can someone who campaigned on such a nice platform POSSIBLY do something as stupid and irresponsible as appointing a man like Collin Peterson to head the USDA??
As Chair of the House Ag Committee, Peterson did NOT put the packer ban in the House version of the farm bill. He was opposed to it. The Senate voted for it, the House did not, and in the end, it was removed from the final bill. Thanks, Collin.
What about organic and local foods? Peterson likes the idea that consumers are "dumb enough" to pay a premium for organics, but he doesn't feel that either organics or local food require any help from the government.
In fact, a fantastic program called Community Food Projects that finances some of the most exciting and progressive projects in the country (through its grant program) received NO mandatory funding in the House version of the farm bill. From what I understand, that was the way Peterson wanted it. The Senate version doubled the program's funding. In the end, they averaged the two numbers and the funding stayed the same.
Why on EARTH would Obama take a man like this who directly opposes his very own campaign platform and put him in the cabinet?? Hopefully he will not. Hopefully these rumors are just idle talk.
Other names I've heard (that I do not like) are Dennis Wolff and Tom Vilsack. Wolff is a slimeball, through and through. Shirah did a great diary on him here. Vilsack may be a good guy on the whole, but not for ag. Organic Consumers Association tells why.
The Challenges Facing the Secretary of Agriculture
As it is, the USDA has a problem. It's job is to market the food our farmers grow AND its job is to regulate agriculture and promote nutrition. The problem is that, often these goals conflict. How do you push more more more beef on Americans, while simultaneously telling the American people to eat less red meat? You can't. And usually the marketing side wins. You will NEVER see USDA advice telling you to eat less. Instead they say "choose" wisely and let the eater figure out what that means.
In this rough economy, it's important that we get a USDA that wants to promote small and mid-size farms. Why? Because they are proven to lead to more healthy communities than large farms. In studies, small and mid size farms lead to less crime, less family instability, less high school drop outs, and more, than large farms. The main reason is because large farms create a stratified society in which one class owns, one class manages, and a third class works. Small and mid size farms do not.
It's also important that we get a USDA that understands how our obesity epidemic is burdening the health care system. Asinus Asinum Fricat quoted a doctor saying: "pouring funding into cardiology, cancer and dementia without tackling the obesity epidemic that is fueling these conditions would be a disaster." YUP. Step one is prevention.
How do we solve health care and the economy if we're stuck in a catch 22 in which low incomes means we buy cheap (bad for you) food that sends us to the hospital? This will require not just change in the food system but also a living wage, in my opinion. But changing the profile of our food supply so that we aren't growing a huge glut of corn to turn into junk food is certainly something that is needed.
I feel like I am screaming and nobody can hear me. I'm not the only one screaming. But please, join in. Submit your thoughts to Change.gov on these issues. Do whatever you can to raise the profile of the importance of a good pick for Secretary of Agriculture and other USDA appointments. Our future depends on it!
UPDATE: Hey, people are actually reading this! Well, in that case, I've got a few amusing stories to share.
First... I've heard that if you go to the USDA building and stop at the front to ask where the National Organics Program office is, they have no clue. Who? What? Perhaps this is because the National Organics Program (NOP) has a teeny staff - something like 9 employees.
Second... I also heard an anecdote from someone who was taking out the NOP staff to lunch at an organic restaurant. The staff members from NOP were all excited like "Oh, boy, we've never had organic food before!!!"
Third... I heard from a different source that the USDA was holding a meeting about organics, and people who wanted to attend the meeting (USDA employees) were told by their bosses that their chances for getting promoted would be in trouble if they went to the organic meeting.
Obviously organics are very important to people at the USDA... not!
I saw that A Siegel weighed in about climate change. I can't agree enough! And you know what? There's a fantastic group called The Rodale Institute that has come up with a technique to grow food using 2/3 less oil AND sequester carbon into the soil at the same time. It IS organic, and it is also fairly compatible with current agricultural methods... this would involve a 5-year transition period of decreased yield for any farmer looking to do it, followed by increased yield most years after that. Government incentives for farmers to do this would be very helpful. But it goes to show - the solutions are right there in front of our face, we just have to take them!!!!!