Support for small and mid-sized farms: Implement policies to support small and mid-sized farms, promoting diversity in agriculture and reducing the dominance of industrial-scale meat production.
PROBLEM
According to Farm Action, Giant meatpackers like Cargill and JBS are the beneficiaries of billions of dollars of U.S. government subsidies. But they don’t get this money directly.
- List item
Instead, the government subsidizes farmers to grow crops like corn and soybeans. With lifeline subsidies favoring these crops above others, many farmers find themselves with little choice in what they grow. The result is a market often flooded with cheap corn and soybeans, with meatpackers standing at the ready to accept feed prices at below production cost.
The plot twist: at some point, the corporations realized they didn’t need to pay farmers their corn and soybean production cost. Instead, government subsidies could be leveraged to compensate farmers. This is the system we see in place today.
Billions of dollars in taxpayer-funded bailouts, subsidies, and crop insurance are paid out to farmers each year. These subsidies drive farmers to grow the crops most beneficial to big meatpackers, including soybeans and corn — what a coincidence.
- List item
Also driving the farmer is the need for bank loans. With government-funded crop insurance disproportionately allocated to corn and soybeans, the bank is more likely to lend the farmer needed capital when it sees a plan to grow those crops, knowing that good ol’ taxpayer funded insurance is there. Other crops like most fruits or vegetables? Too risky.
Pressured by loan policies, trying to keep their families fed, more and more farmers have started to grow corn and soybeans, leading to an oversaturated market and ever-lower feed prices. This chain reaction is not lost on big meat corporations.
The takeaway here is that big meat corporations are paying for very little within the system they have created. It’s been working, so you can bet that there is an incentive to keep it going.
- List item
Commodity checkoff programs were designed to collect a tax from all producers of certain commodities, cattle for example, and put these dollars towards advancing the beef industry through market research or technological innovation. Big Meat saw their opportunity and have effectively co-opted this system. Today we see already low income farmers paying this mandatory checkoff tax on their undervalued goods just for it to be funneled to a select few pro-corporate lobbying organizations.
These now-infamous lobbying organizations like the National Cattlemen’s Beef Association and the National Pork Producers Council have taken the lead on behalf of Big Meat to pressure policy makers into adopting further pro-corporate consolidation policies.
- List item
According to Organic Consumers “Big Meat” companies sell billions of dollars worth of beef, pork and poultry and processed food products to schools, hospitals and nursing homes. This is where some of our most vulnerable people should be getting healthy, nutritious food, not contaminated factory farm and processed meat products.
- List item
According to multiple news sources Industrial meat producers also export billions of dollars worth of meat to China and other countries.
- List item
“Big Meat” company: Tyson. The company says that consumer sales made up about 45 percent of Tyson’s 2019 total annual sales of $42.4 billion.
In 2019, Tyson sold about $23.3** billion worth of products into schools, hospitals, nursing homes and the export market.
So even if consumers stop buying their products, “Big Meat” companies will keep running their factory farms— as long as food, farming and environmental policies make it possible for industrial meat producers to offload the costs damages to taxpayers.
POSSIBLE SOLUTIONS:
- List item
An analysis and change of subsidies needs to take place to encourage healthy ecosystems from small and medium size regenerative farming. To stop promoting big business such as big meat and synthetic meat.
- List item
These subsidies and the reasons behind them need to be more transparent to taxpayers including the health impacts and special interests.
- List item
Reduction of processed meat quantities in school meal standards: Limit the amount of processed meat served in school meals, promoting healthier options and reducing demand for industrial-scale meat production.
- List item
We must demand policies that stop subsidizing industrialized “cheap meat” and that level the playing field for independent producers of organic regenerative meat and animal products.
- List item
Stop farmers dependence on exporting meat to China.
-
List item
Stop attacking cows to promote globalists and synthetic meat agenda of reduction in methane and net zero carbon when science and common sense do not support this approach. Promote healthy ecosystems and regenerative farming respecting the earth’s and nature’s design. Experts in this area include Allan Savory and Joel Salatin. -
List item
Invest in local and regional food systems to enhance market transparency and competition. Empower people, not corporations, and create a resilient food and agriculture system that will feed us even if emergencies strike. Build local means citizens can eat local.
Farmer Action suggests the following:
-
List item
-
Prohibit checkoff programs from contracting with any organization that lobbies on agricultural policy (with an exception for institutions of higher education, such as our land grant institutions).
-
Require transparency through the publication of checkoff program budgets and expenditures.
-
Require periodic audits of compliance with the act by the USDA Inspector General.
-
List item
Food, Not Feed look like?
A shift in government support from feed grains for industrial livestock production toward vegetables, fruits, nuts, legumes, mushrooms, and cereal grains, allowing farmers more choices to profitably grow food for their communities.
Increased financial and technical resources in the Farm Bill for farmers transitioning away from industrial agriculture and toward conservation and regenerative practices. Over time, a more climate-smart agriculture system would be more resilient and less costly for taxpayers.
- List item
Subsidized insurance programs offer protection in the case of crop failure, but they primarily benefit farms that grow corn, soybeans, cotton, sugar, and wheat. These same farms also receive the lion’s share of disaster payments — without any requirement that they work to mitigate the extreme weather patterns that contribute to the rising costs of these taxpayer-funded programs. In order to benefit from these programs, recipients should be required to commit to conservation and regenerative practices.
- List item
Everyone deserves a fair chance to succeed, but the USDA has admitted to discriminatory practices that stack the deck against marginalized farmers. We will all benefit in a fair and inclusive society, so we need to make credit accessible to all, ensure robust representation on government boards and commissions, and direct funding to organizations led by members of disadvantaged communities that provide technical assistance.
Resources