|
Hansen: Policies hurting farmers
|
|
By RANDY MUDGETT- Managing Editor
|
|
DENISON — According to John Hansen,
president of the Nebraska Farmers Union, current U.S. trade policy is
crippling rural financial infrastructure, leading to a complete financial
collapse in rural America.
Hansen, NEFU president since 1990 and a member of the U.S. Agricultural
Technical Advisory Committee for Grains, Feed and Oilseeds, spoke to a
group of producers in Denison last week about the status of agriculture
today. He said, basically, anyone in agriculture anywhere in the world is
having a hard time making ends meet because the market is not paying
farmers enough for the products they raise.
‘‘Farmers everywhere are doing worse now then they were 10 years ago,’’
Hansen said. ‘‘However, ag processors are doing very well.’’
Hansen spoke bluntly about the current trade policies that directly
affect how farmers here compete in the global market. He said trade
negotiators have sold the farmer out and are continuing to push for
lowering tariffs in the U.S. plus pushing for lowering income supports
for farmers.
‘‘Processors like Cargill and ADM are using international organized
efforts to drive prices down to the lowest possible cost of origin,’’
Hansen said. ‘‘They are pushing for an elimination of all domestic income
support in all of the high cost producing nations in the world.’’
Hansen said, in the meantime, while processors are lobbying for lowering
trade barriers across the globe, the same companies continue to expand
their operations, recording record profits while farm prices have
remained stagnant for much of the past 30 years.
For example, Hansen said since 1993, when the U.S. entered into the North
American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), farm prices have steadily
decreased. Corn prices have dropped 20 percent, soybean prices fell 32
percent, wheat is down 14 percent, cotton prices have fallen 53 percent
and rice is down 46 percent. In comparison, during the same period retail
food prices for consumers have risen significantly.
Since 1975, consumer food prices have climbed nearly 250 percent yet the
farm price for a bushel of corn has gone from $2.54 in 1975 to $2.35 in
2002. Hansen said it is clear corporations and retail food outlets are
garnering the profits.
Concentration and trade
One of the factors which is related to the current structure of
agriculture is market concentration. The U.S. Department of Justice and
the USDA has failed to address the issue of market concentration,
relegating farmers to rely on commodity watch groups to push for action.
Hansen said the major players like Smithfield Foods, Tyson Foods, ConAgra,
Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland own or control much of the grain or
livestock trade.
‘‘Tremendous economic disparities, made worse by market concentration
issues and trade issues compound the problem,’’ Hansen said
|
|
|
|
|
|
.
Currently, several Washington lawmakers, including Iowa Sen. Charles
Grassley, are pushing for legislation which calls for a ban on packers
owning livestock. Hansen said the issue has bipartisan support in Congress,
but is still one of the sticking points with corporate agriculture. Many
companies feel the only way they can compete with other countries who have
a lower cost of production is to vertically integrate the system, meaning
the packers own, feed and slaughter their own animals. Hansen said if this
system comes to fruition, competitive markets would collapse.
‘‘Right now, 96 percent of all the income on the farm comes from off the
farm,’’ Hansen said. ‘‘We are now selling our products for below the cost
of production and that is bad business, bad for our rural communities, bad
for our schools and bad for our small businesses. If farmers are not making
money, they are not spending it either and right now we have more farmers
in trouble than we have ever had.’’
Some of the solutions Hansen offered to the group were simple price support
programs which used to be included in national farm policy prior to 1996.
He said if the government reverted to price support program which was based
on supply management, profits would return to the farm.
‘‘We have a small group of winners now and a large group of losers and
right now, we are losing the battle,’’ Hansen said. ‘‘In Nebraska, due to
the drought last year, we have a mental health voucher we disperse to farm
families who are seeking general counseling on their financial problems on
the farm. Last year, we dispersed $76,000 in vouchers and we had to ration
the $50 vouchers in order to have enough to go around.’’
In Nebraska, many producers were forced to sell their cow herds rather than
purchase expensive hay or other feeds. Still, this spring, subsoil moisture
levels are lower than they were one year ago. Hansen said many farmers are
just hanging on, hoping for good weather or financial assistance to help
them stay on the farm.
‘‘I am not here to tell you to leave farming,’’ Hansen said. ‘‘It is my job
to help you stay on the farm. For many of you it is a financial decision
you will have to make yourself. Farm income supports are dropping and trade
negotiators would like to see them end for good. Should that happen
farmland values would drop and many farms would be hurt even more then they
are now. The processors want to make money and they will do it by driving
costs down, meaning the farmer will make less. The government represents
the traders and the traders represent the company they work for. The
sociological implications of what to come in rural areas could be
tremendous if they have their way.’’
|
|