Toward True Farming Abundance
Toward True Farming Abundance
By Baylen J. Linnekin
The Legacy Of Depression Era Farm Programs
By Patricia Patnode
Baylen Linnekin's essay provides a concise historical overview of influential men who have shaped American food and farm policy, our agricultural forefathers. While they may not have envisioned the modern logo redesign of the USDA or foreseen the agency's involvement in areas such as drone sprayers and financial support for struggling rural colleges, they were undoubtedly focused on increasing the power and production capacity of states and farmers. Their policies laid the groundwork for the corporate-dominated agricultural landscape that exists today.
Notably, Baylen highlights the persistence and amplification of farming policies that originated following the Great Depression. Rather than fading away, these policies have gained greater influence and impact over time.
When my great-grandfather lost his farm early in the Great Depression there were no helpful USDA programs to guarantee crop purchases, his family just lost everything and moved into a shack. My family’s story is not unique in the midwest, and this emotional fear of farmers loosing their land and killing their herds because of falling prices and economic collapse is based in reality. However, some of the policies born out of this desire to protect vulnerable food producers have gone haywire (pun intended).
While policies aimed at protecting vulnerable food producers were initially well-intentioned, it is true that some of them have had unintended consequences or deviated from their original goals. The complexity of the agricultural sector, coupled with changing economic dynamics and evolving societal needs, can sometimes lead to policies that may not effectively address the challenges at hand or unintentionally create new problems.
Check our the full essay below to understand the philosophies that guided USDA during it’s creation and at notable points in it’s history.
Highlights:
“..today there are fewer farmers per capita in America than at any time in our nation's history.”
“[Our present state of food abundance] has been largely built on the support of taxpayers, which has had detrimental effects on many, including small- and mid-sized farms that used to be scattered across the American landscape.”
“Through subsidies, the government incentivizes farmers by offering them financial support to grow specific crops. Simultaneously, by promoting yield maximization and consolidation, the government encourages farmers to produce as much of those crops as possible on as much of their land as they can, or to “get out” so a bigger farmer can do a better job.”
“The policies implemented by USDA secretaries Henry Wallace, Earl Butts, and their successors in both political parties have had far-reaching effects on American farming. While food is abundant today, so too are the negative unintended consequences of these policies.”
Key Recommendations:
USDA should analyze their crop support programs for the effect on small farm business.
Eliminate inefficient crop subsidies, particularly ethanol.
In a 2015 Mercatus Paper, Agricultural economist Jayson L. Lusk concludes that the reduction or elimination of subsidized crop insurance, SNAP, and ethanol production mandates would reduce food prices for many consumers, benefit food producers who are not heavily subsidized by the government, and provide an overall economic benefit to taxpayers across the United States by potentially decreasing taxes.
Toward True Farming Abundance
By Baylen J. Linnekin
On May 14, 2012, then-President Barack Obama issued a proclamation celebrating the 150th anniversary of the creation of the U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA), which was founded that same week in 1862 under President Abraham Lincoln. In his remarks, President Obama celebrated USDA policies and staffers over the years who, he said, had made "our fields grow richer [and] our abundance grow greater."
The first USDA building on the National Mall around 1895
In farming, as in other fields, we rightly celebrate abundance. Abundance is a sign of good health, of progress, and of wealth and affluence. Throughout recorded history, scarcity and the lack of agricultural or farming abundance has been tied to disaster, famine, forced migrations, war, death, and the precipitous decline and fall of even the mightiest civilizations. With farming abundance we may thrive. Without it we may not.
So when President Obama celebrated the USDA's significant role in shaping America's farming abundance, he was highlighting and praising policies that have dramatically increased the crop yields and output of American farmers, particularly over the past several generations. However, President Obama, as well as his predecessors and successors, failed to note that, thanks largely to those same USDA policies, today there are fewer farmers per capita in America than at any time in our nation's history. When President Lincoln established the USDA, dubbed “the people’s department,” in 1862, data show 90% of Americans farmed. By 1930 that number had fallen to 30%. It fell to 3% by 1981. Today, data show just 1.3% of Americans are farmers.
Though such a dramatic decline in the number of American farmers doesn’t suggest abundance—in fact, the figure sounds terrifyingly low—those dwindling numbers of American farmers today produce more food than this country has ever seen. That's because many farms today have become larger in size, production, or both. In 2021, USDA data showed that while most U.S. farms are small, the biggest ones, just 3% of all U.S. farms, account for nearly half the dollar value of all U.S. farm production.
At first glance, these data suggest dramatic increases in farming efficiency. And it’s true innovations in technology—including in seed stocks, planting, fertilization, pest-management, irrigation, harvesting, storage, and transportation—have paved the way for America’s biggest farms to produce more food than ever before.
But the involvement of the federal government in this phenomenon—particularly the USDA—since the implementation of policies championed by USDA Secretaries Henry Wallace (1933-1940) and Earl Butz (1971-1976) and their successors has played a significant role in creating America's modern farming abundance. The truth is that this farming abundance has been largely built on the support of taxpayers, which has had detrimental effects on many, including small- and mid-sized farms that used to be scattered across the American landscape.
One of the central policies behind today's abundant food production is the taxpayer subsidy for many of America's largest farms, particularly those engaged in the production of “commodity” crops and other food products favored by the government and powerful special interests. Farm subsidies, implemented under USDA Secretary Wallace during the New Deal era under President Franklin Roosevelt, were initially designed to combat the Great Depression. Though that economic crisis has long since passed, taxpayers are still left to foot the bill for today’s farming abundance. This has been true regardless of which political party has held power in Washington.
Data from the nonprofit Environmental Working Group (EWG), which monitors government subsidy payments, reveal that taxpayers have provided nearly $500 billion in direct and indirect subsidies to American farmers since 1995, spanning both Republican and Democratic administrations. It is important to note that these subsidies have had little or no connection to the economic needs of farmers. Recent EWG data show “farm subsidy funding still goes to the largest and wealthiest farms.”
Another policy central to the abundance of today's American farmers, championed by USDA Secretary Earl Butz during President Richard Nixon's administration, is the encouragement for every farmer to maximize both the size and scope of their farming operations. Butts, one report notes, envisioned a government-supported, “centralized food system that rewarded overproduction.”
He is widely recognized for his telling American farmers to "get big or get out" of farming and for encouraging them to maximize their yields by planting crops, often those subsidized under policies developed during Secretary Wallace's tenure, "from fencerow to fencerow."
Through subsidies, the government incentivizes farmers by offering them financial support to grow specific crops. Simultaneously, by promoting yield maximization and consolidation, the government encourages farmers to produce as much of those crops as possible on as much of their land as they can, or to “get out” so a bigger farmer can do a better job.
As the data indicates, the policies implemented by Wallace and Butts have largely achieved their intended goals. Presently, the United States possesses large, taxpayer-subsidized farms that produce an abundance of food surpassing the nation's needs. However, a growing number of consumers, farmers, ranchers, policymakers, and scholars are raising questions about the validity of those original goals.
They recognize that these same policies, in tandem with regulations skewed against the competitors of many subsidized foods, have also resulted in a myriad of negative unintended consequences—from helping to cause the nation’s obesity crisis to promoting food waste and other negative environmental consequences, stifling innovation, depressing the number of choices available to farmers and consumers, costing taxpayers billions of dollars, and eliminating many of the country’s small- and mid-sized farms.
Many are now questioning whether we deserve a different and improved form of farming abundance compared to the existing model.
Can we implement policies that reduce regulatory burdens and help American farmers by allowing more freedom in farming?
Might we foster true farming abundance—a greater diversity of American farm types and sizes, producing all the food Americans need—by making American farmers less reliant on taxpayer handouts?
May government regulate farming and food production in such a way that fosters a greater number of choices and options for consumers? If so, how?
The Mercatus Center’s ongoing Farming Abundance project seeks to address these challenges. Within this project, writers specializing in American agriculture and farming policy will explore strategies to achieve genuine farming abundance in the United States. The objective is to ensure that American farmers and ranchers have increased autonomy and options in determining the foods they produce, while granting American consumers access to the rich variety of diverse foods—from animal products such as meat and dairy to products of the soil such as fruits and vegetables, and from conventional and organic foods to innovations that break new ground—at prices consumers can afford.
True farming abundance encompasses all types of farmers and farms, regardless of size. The policies implemented by USDA secretaries Henry Wallace, Earl Butts, and their successors in both political parties have had far-reaching effects on American farming. While food is abundant today, so too are the negative unintended consequences of these policies.
Addressing these challenges requires a reevaluation of America’s farming and agricultural policies. By recognizing and addressing the unintended consequences of generations of American farm policies, we can pave the way for a future where farming abundance benefits everyone who grows, raises, produces, sells, and buys food in America. Only then, as President Obama remarked in 2012, will our abundance truly have grown greater.
Baylen Linnekin is the author of Biting the Hands that Feed Us: How Fewer, Smarter Laws Would Make Our Food System More Sustainable, an adjunct professor at George Mason University Law School and American University and an attorney.
Further Reading:
Biting the Hands that Feed Us: How Fewer, Smarter Laws Would Make Our Food System More Sustainable by Baylen Linnekin
Food Regulations: Myths and Games by Richard Williams for Farming Abundance
Phony Demand and Underpopulation: Problems Plaguing American Farmers by Matthew Yglesias for Farming Abundance