Regarding the lead story in Monday’s Gazette (“Farm bill inaction could turn clock back to 1949”) describing “nightmarish scenario is looming for Iowa’s agriculture industry” if a farm bill is not passed in five weeks.
Dale Moore of the U.S. Farm Bureau warns of the evils of a “market-based approach.”
Iowa’s Sen. Tom Harkin says farmers need “the certainty that comes from enacting a new five-year bill.”
Rep. Bruce Braley, Iowa 1st District, says lack of a farm bill would “move us backward — 63 years backward.”
Iowa’s Sen. Chuck Grassley says lack of a bill is inconceivable and suggests corn might reach $18 a bushel — as if that might be bad for farmers.
Rep. Dave Loebsack, Iowa 2nd District, notes that Republicans will bear the blame if there is no farm bill.
These politicians say lack of a farm bill would have the disastrous effect of giving Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack the authority to set price controls, production limits and prices processors pay for corn, soybeans and wheat. The likelihood of Vilsack doing any of that is zero.
It is no wonder the public has such a low opinion of our Congress. It seems to me that farmers would be better off without subsidies, mandates and the quagmire of regulations already enacted by Congress. I’ll side with the farmers who can better and more profitably run their business without federal government intervention.
So perhaps the “disaster” might not be lack of a farm bill, but indeed, the bill itself.