Farm Bill 2012: Will the West Coast Set its Own Table?

The West Coast is a place where, on a recent rainy winter night in Seattle, hundreds of people turned out to discuss food policy. Like their counterparts in Portland, San Francisco, and other cities and towns, these folks were hungry for information about the connection between healthy food and community health. They saw local and regional food as an engine to revitalize economies. At events like these, it’s easy to imagine that Washington, Oregon, and California could become a regional force in the national dialog leading up to the next Farm Bill.

I am often asked what audience members can do to affect change in the food system. To my mind, individual action takes place in radiating circles, starting with the personal and moving out to the local, regional, state, national, and global. I am increasingly drawn to the personal and local, where influence and outcomes are most powerful and tangible. Raise your own fruits, vegetables, or chickens and you know exactly what goes into the entire process. Work on a campaign to protect open space or build a school garden and you can have personal contact and investment.

Things are not so clear or accessible at the national level. The Farm Bill, driver of federal food policy, is so complex that it is hard to know where to begin. Absent campaign finance reform, you are swimming with the sharks: grain monopolies, corn growers, farm bureaus, livestock associations, sugar lobbies, ethanol processors that pour billions of dollars into the political process.

We can’t let this intimidate us from righting a broken food system. By pulling back to the regional level, it might be possible to form an alliance of concerned eaters with political power at the national level. In January 2011, the City of Seattle approved a Farm Bill platform. Given the growing awareness of the importance of food and farm policy on the West Coast, it is reasonable to expect that city councils in Olympia, Portland, Eugene, Ashland, Ukiah, Santa Rosa, San Francisco, Los Angeles, and all the way down to San Diego may consider and eventually sign on to a similar document. Its main tenets share a lot in common with a California Farm Bill platform drafted by the nonprofit Roots of Change in Los Angeles in November 2010:

  • a health centered food system;
  • sustainable agriculture practices;
  • community and regional prosperity and resilience;
  • equitable access to healthy food;
  • social justice and equity; and
  • systems approach to policy making.

While the Farm Bill is the Big Kahuna in the food and agriculture system, there are other forceful unifying levers. In 2008 California passed Proposition 2, an animal welfare initiative that will ban three forms of egregious confinement systems: cages for laying hens; confinement stalls for pregnant sows; and veal crates for male dairy calves. Proposition 2 can’t be dismissed as a purely California phenomenon. It passed with 63 percent of the vote. Seven states have now banned certain animal confinement systems, and the Humane Society of the United States has introduced similar initiatives in two more key states: Washington and Oregon.

In addition to unified Farm Bill platforms, imagine the entire West Coast agreeing on advanced animal welfare standards. Most citizens believe that food animals deserve humane treatment while they are alive, yet there are no laws at the national level to protect livestock during their production cycles. Intervention is still possible at the state level.

Health practitioners are also joining the food policy reform movement, concerned about the epidemic of obesity, diabetes, heart disease, and other nutritionally related ailments ravaging adults and children in their communities. They are following the lead of innovative programs like the California Farmers’ Market Consortium that links the food stamp program (SNAP) with regional growers of fruits and vegetables in 60 farmers markets, from Santa Rosa to San Diego. SNAP recipients can receive up to double the value of their purchases of fruits and vegetables—money that goes right into the hands of farmers. They can also watch demonstrations on how to cook and eat more healthfully. Doctors are collecting data on the medical benefits of such programs to analyze their effectiveness.

Coastal livestock producers and consumers interested in high quality, pasture-raised animal food products are united around a common concern: a lack of slaughter facilities within reasonable driving distances from production centers. In years past, each large town had some sort of slaughter facility. But decades of massive consolidation have devastated local processing capabilities. Small-scale slaughter facilities are one of the crucial missing links in local food system capabilities. In California, for example, only about a dozen remain, and some of those aren’t open to all producers. Just as Farm Bill dollars once built the giant monoculture farming infrastructures and Concentrated Animal Feedlot Operation industry that dominate today’s food system, it can do the same for the modern pastured livestock movement. Assistance can come in the form of value added producer grants, loan guarantees, important research, and regulations tailored to smaller operations—to complement necessary private investment. Reformers could ask for 10 new West Coast processing facilities, for example, in the upcoming Farm Bill as a pilot project.

If we citizens don’t impact policy at the national level, there are plenty of agribusinesses and food manufacturers already working to set the rules and spend taxpayer money for us. As the old adage says, we reap what we sow. The West Coast can set its own table.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

4 thoughts on “Farm Bill 2012: Will the West Coast Set its Own Table?

  1. There is much that is excellent here.
    1. Reconciliation takes work, and all of this farm bill working out of positions is important work (work, work, work).
    2. The Farm Bill is an essential priority.
    3. Concrete, pro farmer steps like restricting the worst aspects of total confinement are great initial priorities.
    4. Yes, marketing infrastructure needs help. Iowa got reduced to only 1 inspected chicken processor in the eastern 3/4 of the state, as millions in forgivable loans is given to single agribusinesses giants that don’t need it.
    The concrete items are more important than the principles, which are also spun by exploitative agribusiness.
    Yes, it’s challenging for a food movement to De-Mystify the farm bill. The key is understanding that the core policies manage markets, (Commodity Title, but we have zero price floors/ceilings and zero supply management/reserves, so there’s nothing there). This is huge, bigger in global impact than all else. This generally is the first place to fix many things, (“Farm Bill Planks” “Food from Family Farms Act”) but it must be supplemented by other titles. A decent Antitrust/Competition/Livestock/Concentration Title is an important regulatory supplement to the Commodity Title, to make markets fair. Subsidies are a diversion from fixing the Commodity Title. Free markets solve nothing (ie. mere subsidy elimination/capping,) and green subsidies cannot make up for the massive impacts of zero price floors.

  2. Thanks for this post–I think it’s helpful for people to see that small acts can help spark civic action. At Chefs Collaborative, we are trying to (in the words of the commenter above)de-mystify the Farm Bill for our members (mostly chefs) so that they can see a place where it makes sense to participate–whether it’s subsidy reform, or another program or piece of policy that supports sustainable production.

  3. Pingback: » Farm Bill Catalyst Commons

  4. Pingback: Dan Imhoff on The Farm Bill | Acre Gourmet