Payment Limitation

Two DTN columns relating to payment limitation:

• Grassley wants tighter limits
• Chambliss' reelection means a vigorous opponent to changes.
  

Misleading Graphs

Having screwed up on turkey weights, I return to the fray with a graph from Sebastian Mallaby's oped in today's Post. He argues for government intervention in the short term, but for cutbacks and wiser spending in the long term. He has a graph showing the percentage government expenditures are of the total economy, going from 20 percent in 1947 to 33 percent today.

But during the Ford administration we first breached the 30 percent level (guessing, about 32 percent) and since Reagan we've been in the 30's (except 1999). So for 25 or more years the size of government hasn't increased. That's not the inference one would draw from his words.

The CSA Experience

The Post had a writer join a CSA this year, doing weekly reports on her experience. Wednesday she interviewed other participants and posted her thoughts and on the year. She and they are not uniformly favorable:

• waste happens--too much produce at awkward times (vacations) or which doesn't please (beets)
• guilt (knowing the farmer creates a personal tie and personal obligations)
• risk (IMO this year had reasonable weather, though that may reflect poor memory) CSA's aren't uniformly successful--you take your chances.
  

So next year, her family is switching to a farmers' market.

Seems to me it encapsulates the trade-offs in CSA's. For a rigid personality (like me) who hates the unexpected and change, it's not a good choice. For someone who is more experimental, it may be. (Or maybe it's a question of age--the younger are more accepting but time leads you into ruts.)

How Soon They Forget--John Block

Agweb has an excerpt from a symposium with eight former Ag Secretaries:

“A Conversation with the Secretaries” was held Dec. 3 in Washington D.C., in conjunction with Farm Journal and Farm Foundation. Pictured, from left, Steve Custer, Farm Journal Publisher; Charlene Finck, Farm Journal President Editorial; Roger Bernard, Farm Journal Washington and Policy Editor; Michael Johanns, former secretary 2005 to 2007; Anne Veneman, former secretary 2001 to 2005; Dan Glickman, former secretary 1995 to 2001; Michael Espy, former secretary 1993 to 1994; Clayton Yeutter, former secretary 1989 to 1991; John Block, former secretary 1977 to 1981; Neil Conklin, Farm Foundation President; Sheldon Jones, Farm Foundation Vice President; and Mary Thompson, Farm Foundation Director of Communications.

John Block was Reagan's first Ag secretary, Bob Bergland was Carter's.

Ever Hear of Dean Foods?

Neither have I, but here's a long article in the Bangor newspaper on the Maine milk industry. And it mentions Dean Foods:

The report says that Dean Foods now controls around 40 percent of the nation’s fluid milk supply, 60 percent of all organic milk and 90 percent of soy milk. Consumers may not see Dean’s label in the dairy case, but the company owns or sells Borden, Garelick, Hershey’s fluid chocolate milk, Land O’Lakes, Verifine, Horizon Organic, Organic Cow of Vermont, Silk Soy milk and several dozen others.

Picking a Secretary of USDA

The Post has an article on USDA (food safety is the top priority according to GAO) and a sidebar for three candidates for Secretary: Gov. Sebelius, Charles Stenholm, and Dennis Wolff. Interesting choice for Obama, not that I know any of the candidates or their capacity, but when does ignorance stop a blogger?

Stenholm would be strongest in the area of reforming farm programs and reorganizing the county agencies, but he doesn't exactly fit Obama's agenda or public face. Nor is there a farm bill on schedule in 2009-12. Neither Wolff nor Sebelius would bring any expertise in dealing with Congress. So the choice: take a chance on someone strong who might go off the reservation, or do a figurehead like most previous Secretaries. "Figurehead" is too strong, but IMHO Obama would be wise to go that way--USDA is simply not that important on his priorities.

A Concentration of Wealth in Tomatoes

From Ethicurean [senility approaches, corrected from "Epicurean" to "Ethicurean"], a piece on concentration in growing tomatoes. A portion:

Before World War II, there were commercial growers and canners in many states — including Delaware, Virginia, Utah, New Jersey and New York — and California produced only 20% of the nation’s tomatoes. Thanks to the development of both mechanical harvesting equipment and tomato varieties that can be picked by machine, the number rose to 50% in 1953, and reached 95% in 2007. (The 20% and 50% figures are from the “Oxford Companion to American Food,” the 95% figure is from the Chronicle.) There are several reasons for California’s dominance in the processed tomato business, with the biggest one being a climate that allows a far longer harvest period (90 days vs. 45 days) and is less hospitable to disease because of its low humidity and lack of summer rain.

The Potato Referundum

Via the Blog for Rural America, the Onion on the potato referendum. I can only say, someone at the Onion knows USDA.

(For those who may not be familiar, commodity referendums are one legacy of New Deal programs--essentially a way to cartelize agriculture, if, like Megan McArdle, you're anti New Deal.)

SNAP--Keep Up With the Times

You really should keep up with the good bureaucrats at USDA--don't call it the "food stamp program" any more, call it SNAP (Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program). (Of course, the FNS webmaster didn't change the path to the page.)


(Actually, it wasn't USDA which renamed it, but USDA's masters in Congress, as part of the 2008 farm bill.)

Unrealistic Expectations--Pollan

A delayed reaction to Professor Pollan, who opined at Grist:

The challenge is to align the goals of federal agricultural policy with the goals of public health, energy, and environmental policy (for the first time), and no one cabinet department has an interest in making those connections. The USDA is largely a captive of the farm lobby and can't be counted on to protect the public health when formulating farm policy; responsibility for food safety is, absurdly and fatally, divided between different agencies (with USDA charged with protecting meat; the FDA fruits and vegetables); jurisdiction over the environmental regulation of agriculture is similarly divided among the USDA, EPA and FDA. This balkanized approach suits the food industry, naturally, but it jeopardizes food security while making real reform impossible. Only when we have in place a White House adviser with the power to coordinate policies across the various relevant agencies and Cabinet departments will the government truly begin to represent the interests of America's eaters in its policies.

My opinion: For the first three sentences, Pollan is operating in the real world, although I'd quibble with some of his assertions. (For example, the "farm lobby" is splintered into many pieces, each trying to capture its own agency, but yes, it mostly represents the interests of producers, not of consumers.) The last sentence is where he gets unreal. USDA and FDA operate within their legislative authorities, as pushed by the various interest groups--i.e., the organic people push their legislation, etc. Because there's no legislative basis for his adviser and no support for establishing one there's no prospect this will work. The best an adviser could do is coordinate legislative and budget proposals, which is already the job of OMB.