A very thorough and deliberate look at the Farm Bill by one of the best Ag writers around today with a lotta food for thought that's not part of the usual suspects talking points from any of the interested parties. Definitely worth a read.
--###--
original-gristIt's the Agronomy, Stupid
Why gutting subsidies shouldn't be the focus of Farm Bill reform effortsBy
Tom Philpott08 Nov 2007
A lot of people, myself among them, have spent substantial time this year trying to demystify the 2007 Farm Bill. But as it lurches into its stretch run -- with passage possible by year-end -- I fear that the bill is more shrouded in mystery than ever, even among sustainable-agriculture advocates.
Here's what we can all agree on: Late last month, the Senate Agriculture Committee passed a version of the bill that would generally preserve the crop subsidies that have become so infamous. It would also add funding to some important conservation and nutrition programs, the result of hard lobbying by sustainable-ag and anti-hunger activists.
The committee's version has now passed to the full Senate, and is currently under debate. The proposal has unleashed a hailstorm of criticism in sustainable-agriculture, public-health, and environmental circles, where hope had swelled for policy reform. Anger focused primarily on the version's commodity title, which -- like the House version passed last spring -- would continue delivering billions of dollars to producers of a few crops, mainly corn, cotton, wheat, rice, and soybeans.
Writing in The New York Times op-ed page on Sunday, Michael Pollan gave eloquent voice to the dismay. The boost in conservation funding was fine and well, Pollan wrote, but "
s long as the commodity title remains untouched, the way we eat will remain unchanged."
~snip~
.
.
.
complete article w/ links to related sources here