Like
many folks, I have been wrestling with some of the questions Secretary Tom
Vilsack posed recently regarding the future of rural America, citing the recent
farm bill process. In December, at the Farm Journal Forum in Washington, D.C., and
in subsequent speeches around the country, Secretary Vilsack contended that
rural America “is becoming less relevant” in Washington and that it’s time “for
an adult conversation” on that topic.
Indeed,
the Secretary has given those of us who are from and care about rural America a
lot to chew on. For me, Secretary Vilsack’s challenge underscores the need for
those of us who care about the land and the bounty that it produces to listen
carefully and to observe keenly the changes going on around us. How we respond to the difficulty in passing a
farm bill will give us a good early test to see if we are heeding warning signals
that lie before us.
My
focus, quite naturally, is on America’s greatest natural resource – our
farmland. More people than ever seem to
care deeply about how their food is produced and what kind of care we give the
land. Finding means to continuously
improve how we farm is positive action that shows the public that we are deeply
committed to securing a “clean,” as well as a productive, future for
agriculture.
Congressional
agriculture leaders in the last Congress served up a set of conservation proposals
that were reasonable, reformed and cost-effective. It was an area where agricultural and
environmental interests were strongly unified.
That unity can serve as a good example of what a coalition of broadly based
interests can do to connect with the public’s interest and secure the political
support necessary to pass a farm bill when they work toward mutual goals
Conservation
of our land doesn’t happen by accident. It takes careful planning and
management. It requires financial resources, some of which come from farmers
and some from others with an interest in conserving soil and water. The dividends
that come from this shared investment of time, effort and resources will accrue
to the benefit of people on and off of the farm.
When
everything works, the soil is healthier, the water is cleaner, wildlife is more
plentiful and the farmer’s bottom line is improved. This is an important model as
we look for ways in which the farm bill is to be relevant to more people and to
serve the broader public interest. It is worth noting that for years the farm
bill has been considered the product of coalition politics. The federal Food
Stamp Program was added into the 1977 Farm Bill, just three years before American
Farmland Trust was founded. Adding
nutrition into the farm bill codified for subsequent omnibus farm bills the
political relationship between food commodity support and nutrition
programs. That relationship, however,
has always been a parallel partnership.
Both sides count on the other to achieve their own distinct goals. Over the same more than three decades,
however, conservation has evolved into a true mutual coalition.
Going
into this new year, agriculture and rural stakeholders are in a period of
reassessing what is needed to pass a farm bill in the current political
climate. What held up the farm bill can perhaps be attributed to election-year
politics, or to the year-end fiscal debate. Or perhaps Secretary Vilsack is
right, and we simply don’t have the muscle we once did to push a bill
through. Whatever the reasons, there is
simply too much at stake to allow this legislation that represents one of the
single largest investments in rural America to languish.
What
is needed more than ever is a unified and strong voice. That voice needs to
include those who may not live on the farm but care deeply about what our farms
and ranches produce and how it is produced. As the 113th Congress
begins its work anew on a farm bill, let’s take a deep breath and reflect on
what most benefits our national interest.
Conservation
is absolutely relevant to the public good, both on-farm and off. Long, hard
work went into building that shared perspective. There is a need to build these same
coalitions of mutual interest between agricultural policy and nutrition, trade
and energy to keep future farm bills relevant.
About
the author: Jon Scholl became the President of American Farmland Trust in July
2008, after serving as Counselor to the Administrator for Agricultural Policy
at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) since 2004. Prior to
that, Scholl served the Illinois Farm Bureau for 25 years. He is a partner in a family farm in McLean
County, Illinois.
#30
For
more news go to: www.Agri-Pulse.com