The American Spectator

home
ADVERTISEMENT
The Public Policy
Print Email
Text Size

The Public Policy

Harvest Season in Washington

How does a farmer double his income?

(Page 2 of 2)

According to Wayne Arnold reporting in the New York Times ("Surviving Without Subsidies"), the government of New Zealand changed hands in the mid-1980s "and essentially canceled handouts to farmers...agriculture here has never been the same." Arnold claims that the farming community was "devastated -- but not for long."

"Today, agriculture remains the lifeblood of New Zealand's economy," says Arnold. "There are still more sheep and cows here than people, their meat, milk and wool providing the country with its biggest source of export earnings."

Arnold quotes the president of the Federated Farmers in the Waikato region in the heart of the country's dairy region, who served at the time of the policy shift: "Farming in New Zealand is now a cold, hard business...I think we have benefited hugely."

Arnold documents the sound business and scientific approaches which New Zealand farmers now use to achieve financial success in a global market. The changes were obviously difficult, but the result was an agricultural sector more entrepreneurial and legitimately proud of its accomplishments.

Tobacco is not everyone's favorite crop, but it does provide a useful case study supporting the proposition that the end of federal subsidies does not mean the end of farming, just the end of the federal gravy train.

Lauren Etter, writing in the Wall Street Journal ("U.S. Farmers Rediscover The Allure of Tobacco"), describes the boom in tobacco farming that has occurred three years after the federal government stopped subsidizing it. Driven by increased demand in China, Russia, and Mexico, U.S. tobacco acreage has risen 20 percent. Etter focuses on tobacco in southern Illinois which hasn't grown any significant amounts of the crop since the First World War.

Even factoring higher labor costs for immigrant workers, Etter describes farmers netting up to $1,800 per acre compared to $250 per acre for corn a crop blessed by both commodity subsidies and ethanol support by Uncle Sugar. One farmer has boosted his income by 35 percent in the last three years.

Simply put, there is no justification for continuing a Depression-era subsidy program for tobacco, corn, soybeans, or sugar, to name just a few of the usual suspects.

This writer would like to report that congressional Republicans have stood on their free-market principles and resisted this ongoing raid on the Treasury. But I would be lying to you if I did. Farm subsidies are bipartisan sins that reflect a deep corruption in our body politic.

Page:   12

topics:
Taxes, Business, Environment, Russia, Oil

About the Author

G. Tracy Mehan, III served at the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency in the administrations of both Presidents Bush. He is a consultant in Arlington, Virginia, and an adjunct professor at George Mason University School of Law.

Letter to the Editor View all comments (1) | Leave a comment

Leave a Comment

N.B. We encourage readers to share and discuss their thoughtful and relevant comments about this Spectator article. Comments are routinely monitored and will be deleted if profane, bigoted, or grossly impolite. Please be respectful. (And don't feed the trolls!) Thank you.

Related Articles

More Articles by G. Tracy Mehan, III

More Articles From The Public Policy

http://spectator.org/archives/2007/09/24/harvest-season-in-washington
ADVERTISEMENT

Clip of the Day

Most Popular Articles

Who Castrated Ann Coulter?

David Catron | 2.6.12

Bigoted Barack, Red in Tooth and Clause

George Neumayr | 2.10.12

Unsafe at Any Smoke

Eric Peters | 2.10.12

Access This

Ross Kaminsky | 2.10.12

The Delousing of a Movement

R. Emmett Tyrrell, Jr. | 2.9.12

The Show Me State's No Show Primary

Andrew B. Wilson | 2.10.12

Justice Ginsburg Should Resign

William Tucker | 2.8.12

No Double Play

Peter Hannaford | 2.10.12

ADVERTISEMENT