A little enviro-political post of mine, over at Council of Fifty.

The Sexy Farm Bill

Because it has to be sexy if you want to read about it, right?

I know this is a departure from the election stuff (which could be a good thing, yes?). But I’m a foodie, an environmentalist, and I’m tired of hearing how each presidential contender’s nose twitched.

So for those of you who missed the farm bill drama, it was supposed to be resolved last year, but a number of watchdog groups, environmental groups, consumers, and Michael Pollan fans have been insisting on changes that would help the smaller, more-sustainable, more-local, and more-artisan food businesses. Ideally, the farm bill would stop subsidizing Big Ag and prizing efficiency for its own sake, other virtues be damned (hum, say, competition? entrepreneurialism? maybe even a little sustainability?), but with Big Ag’s lobbying budget vs. the grassroots budget, focusing on gains for the little guys is a smart strategy, IMO.

The bill has finally passed Congress, but Bush has promised a veto because, according to this Grist article, it “lacks meaningful farm program reform and expands the size and scope of government”. Because we all know G.W. Bush as a gov’t program reformer dedicated to reducing the size and scope of government. And it’s likely he has other goals in mind besides greening the nation’s food supply. However, if the farm bill is vetoed and the veto is not overridden, then Congress must address it again next year. If it stands, it won’t be addressed again until 2013. Which prompts the debate amongst the grass-rooters–which scenario is more beneficial? The Grist article has a number of comments debating these points and I, myself, am still undecided about which scenario I’d prefer. Initially I thought the veto would be better, so that the current momentum could build, but some of the comments have made me reconsider.

So I leave that all for you to digest as you may. But, to take a little turn here, when I heard Michael Pollan speak at Abravanel Hall in March (listen to the podcast, it’s great), he commented that food issues and the farm bill are a hugely under-noticed political issue right now and that if politicians were to tune into it, focus on it (in their campaigns??), there would be some pretty surprising results. And changes too, I like to think.

But nobody seems to pay much attention to the farm bill because it’s not sexy. And it’s a little overwhelming trying to get a handle on all the minutiae. And yet, I think it’s probably one of the more significant issues facing our nation because:

1. the mainstream, industrial food system we have is heavily dependent on fossil fuels, including pesticides, fertilizers, refrigeration, and transportation needs. If we really want to reduce our dependence on foreign oil, we should really take a look at our gluttonous consumption of it in our food production.

2. the mainstream, industrial food system is a huge environmental liability because of fuel consumption, environmental damage from feedlots (including putrid cesspools of waste and overuse of antibiotics), environmental damage from soil erosion and reduction of soil fertility (overuse of pesticides and fertilizers, creation of marine ‘dead zones’), and serious reduction of animal and crop diversity, to name just a few

3. What little competition in the market is dwindling as big corporations take over and consolidate, a bona fide oligopoly near completion. These are the Wal-Marts of our food supply and are similarly squeezing local competition and local wealth, to say nothing of those business trying to eke out a living in sustainable agriculture. Any economist will tell you that this only creates more wealth for the wealthy and less wealth for the less-wealthy. The Wal-Mart effect.

4. this crazy, over-processed diet we get handed to us (because it makes money for Big Ag) is also really helping Big Pharma and costing the taxpayers millions in healthcare costs–whether by subsidizing increased Medicare etc. costs because of more need for treatment, you paying for treatment out of your pocket, an exponentially increasing market (and cost) in drugs to cope with diet-related disease, and increased insurance premiums (again, more need for treatment). And ditto the oligopoly argument for Big Pharma.

These are significant issues. There are others. But the farm bill just seems to be off most people’s radar. And I wonder, what would it take to reach the critical mass of people clamoring for better management of it, at the very least in a way that actually helps family farmers instead of Big Ag? How do we get this issue on the radar?

Comment here.