In light of the recent reports (Defenders of Wildlife and CBS' "60
Minutes") about American Farm Bureau Federation, its proprietary
investments in agribusiness companies, and the tax exemptions granted AFBF
by Congress, I think you'd have to include this in your calculations of
subsidies to corporate agriculture.
Also note the following commentary from A.V. Krebs.
>he AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER
>Issue # 70
>April 16, 2000
>Monitoring Corporate Agribusiness From a Public Interest
>Perspective
> A.V. Krebs
>Editor\Publisher
>
>
>COMMENTARY:
>Investigating the American Farm Bureau
>
>To those farmers, consumers and elected representatives who have
>traditionally entertained the notion that the American Farm Bureau
>Federation (AFBF) is "the voice of American agriculture" the recent
>"60 Minutes" expose of the Farm Bureau's financial affairs may
>have come as a shock.
>
>Likewise to many farmers, weaned on AFBF propaganda, Mike
>Wallace's report may have appeared as yet one more attack on
>agriculture by a corporate dominated media, a renewed attempt to
>portray farmers and farm organizations as more concerned with the
>bottom line than with feeding people.
>
>Unfortunately, the "60 Minutes" piece contributed in some measure
>to such an impression by making it appear that the Farm Bureau's
>financial interests and the rewarding of their officers with lucrative
>financial investments was all of recent origin. Such is not the case,
>however, for from the days of its very founding the Farm Bureau's
>bureaucracy has solidly aligned itself with the interests of corporate
>agribusiness, treating its members not as members, but rather as
>docile paying customers.
>
>Anyone familiar with Dale Kramer's timely The TRUTH About the
>Farm Bureau, published in the mid-30's and reprinted in 1950,
>Wesley McCune's well-documented The Farm Bloc, published in
>1943, Samuel R. Berger's telling Dollar Harvest: An Expose of the
>Farm Bureau, published in 1971 and Grant McConnell's thoughtful
>The Decline of Agrarian Democracy published in 1977 knows that
>the Farm Bureau has indeed been the "enemy within" agriculture,
>that it's leadership has paid scant attention to the needs of family
>farmers while enriching themselves at the expense of those same
>members.
>
>Had "60 Minutes" simply made a passing references to the
>pioneering work of these authors, in addition to the efforts of the
>late Rep. Joseph Resnick (Dem-N.Y.) in the late 1960's to expose
>the Farm Bureau, the viewing public would have soon realized that
>the Farm Bureau is an 80 year-old scandal in agriculture that not
>only our elected representatives, but the nation's major farm
>organizations have refused to confront.
>
>In a speech on the House of Representatives floor in 1967 that still
>resonates today Rep. Resnick charged that the Farm Bureau had
>done more to prevent the economic and social advancement of
>rural citizens than any other organization in America.
>
>"The Farm Bureau is entitled to its full share of the blame for the
>fact that our rural areas are burdened with the most poverty, highest
>unemployment, least social and economic development, and
>poorest health facilities in the Nation. Their crime has not been
>mere indifference. Quite the contrary. They have intensively fought
>every attempt to correct these ills."
>
>In brief touching on the fact that the Farm Bureau still opposes the
>Voting Rights Act of 1965 and calls for the abolishment of the
>Department of Education, eliminating the Department of Energy,
>opposes the Equal Rights Amendment, opposes gun control, "60
>Minutes" failed to note that much of the AFBF's political activity, as
>Resnick, his one-time legislative assistant Sandy Berger (yes! the
>same Sandy Berger that now heads the nation's National Security
>Agency), Wes McCune and others have found particularly
>unsettling is the Bureau's close ties with the political far right in the
>United States.
>
>"What might once have been a conservative, business-oriented
>organization is now considerably more," Resnick declared in his
>House speech. "By my calculation, the Farm Bureau is the most
>efficient conduit now in existence for the dissemination of right-wing
>propaganda. The Bureau is perfect sewer line for transporting right-
>wing ideology, particularly to our young."
>
>It would be unfair to blame the AFBF entirely for the recent spate of
>fascist, racist, anti-Semitic vigilante farm groups which have sprung
>up throughout the U.S. in the past 20 years, born in frustration and
>nurtured by a depressed farm economy. However, the Farm
>Bureau, through its long-standing role as a visible propaganda
>agent for right-wing extremism, certainly made itself the spawning
>ground for much of the misdirected, unsocial and violent behavior
>that one finds in many of our depressed farm communities.
>
>Thus, the time is long overdue for a thorough Congressional
>investigation of the Farm Bureau and its business practices, its tax-
>exempt status, its very structure, its hidden motives behind its
>vigorous efforts to expand the nation's crop insurance program, and
>in general its political muscle, often exercised not in the name of
>family farm agriculture, but in the promotion of the interests of its
>corporate agribusiness brethren. Certainly, Mike Wallace's "60
>Minutes" essay was a good start.
>
>Now Defenders of the Wildlife is currently spearheading such a
>national effort to get such an investigation underway and while the
>campaign has the support of many environmental organizations it
>still needs the solid backing of many more local and national farm
>organizations to succeed for such an investigative effort must not
>be seen as renewed conflict between farmers and
>environmentalists, but rather as a concerted attempt to bring
>long overdue economic and social justice to rural America.
>
>A Defenders report, Amber Waves of Gain, highlights many areas
>of Farm Bureau operations and demonstrates that the Farm Bureau
>is an intricate web of interconnecting business interests, including
>insurance companies,agribusiness giants and banks, linked with
>the national federation, the 50 state bureaus, more than 2,800
>county bureaus and 4.9 million members, although 1997 Census of
>Agriculture figures show that there are only 1.9 million farms in the
>U.S.
>
>To obtain a copy of Amber Waves of Gain or a list of the 180-plus
>groups joining in the call for action, contact Ken Goldman at (202)
>682-9400 x237. The report is also available in PDF format at
>http://www.defenders.org
>
>EDITORS NOTE: The few sustaining the many! That has been
>pretty much the story in the some 19 months since THE
>AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER first began appearing on computer
>screens. During the course of its existence, a small, but financially
>loyal group of folks have provided me with most welcome support,
>but their number is small compared to the near 1000 folks who
>today receive THE AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER.
>
>In conceiving THE AGRIBUSINESS EXAMINER, this editor wanted
>to make it as inexpensive to readers as he possibly could; hence,
>no subscription price, just personally affordable contributions.
>Thus, donations will, as always, be gladly accepted. Checks made
>out to A.V. Krebs, P.O. Box 2201, Everett, Washington 98203-
>0201 (NOT to the "Agribusiness Examiner") will continue
>to be received with much gratitude. To those loyal folks who have
>sent me financial support in the past my sincere thanks for your
>continued support.
>
At 01:58 PM 4/17/2000 , Tad Williams wrote:
>Dear List,
>
>I am trying to locate some figures on Corporate Agriculture. Specifically a
>dollar amount of subsidies and tax breaks given to the likes of ADM,
>Cargill, Monsanto. And if it is known a dollar figure on subsidies or tax
>breaks to individual or family farms. Not loans.
>
>Thanks for any help.
>
>Tad Williams
>Tad Williams
>ProgressivePubs, Inc.
>P.O. Box 11335
>Washington, DC 20008
>202-238-0010 Fax: 202-238-0011
>twilliams@progressivepubs.com
>
>http://www.progressivepubs.com
>NEW PUBLICATION FOR GRANTSEEKERS: 111 Visionary Program Officers: A Who's
>Who of Progressive Foundations.
>
>
>
>
>
>To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
>"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
>"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
>
>All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
>http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
Organic Farming Research Foundation
Mark Lipson, Policy Program Director
ph: 831-426-4006 or -6606; fax: 831-426-6670
PO Box 440, Santa Cruz, CA 95061
<http://www.ofrf.org/policy/index.html>
To Unsubscribe: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg". If you receive the digest format, use the command
"unsubscribe sanet-mg-digest".
To Subscribe to Digest: Email majordomo@ces.ncsu.edu with the command
"subscribe sanet-mg-digest".
All messages to sanet-mg are archived at:
http://www.sare.org/san/htdocs/hypermail
This archive was generated by hypermail 2b29 : Thu May 11 2000 - 22:02:10 EDT