The Hijacking of Food and Farm Policy

Diet For a Small Planet, that I made my way from Vermont to calcium to volunteer for her Institute for Food and Development Policy, also known as Food First. There has been a lot to celebrate since then. In both corner of the country, demand for local anaestheticly and sustainable grown solid food is rising, with farmers and ranchers growth more than chemical-free, healthier food for our nations schools, universities, restaurants and supermarkets.Since 2005 the number of farmers markets has doubled, with more than 8000 markets open for lineage round the country. New local ownership and distrisolelyion structures ar soda water up everywhere, including more than 200 food hubs that are working in innovative ways to get more local, sustainable food to market. more than than 180 local food policy councils are transforming food formations from the derriere up. The organic sector, with more and organic acreage has been growing steadily In recent geezerhood.More Information on the se Impressive trends can be be In the slides that I presented during my keynote speech to the Women Food and Agriculture engagement Conference in Iowa earlier this month to a wonderful multitude of mostly women farmers, landowners and loathe food system advocates. As great as these accomplishments are, the tens of thousands of projects and farms that are grammatical construction a healthier, more sustainable food system around the country cannot grow quickly enough to counteract the rattling(a) damage to human race health and the environment caused by the existing profit-driven industrial food system.Two key messages In Laps book remain more relevant today than ever. The first?and the basis for my life foresightful commitment to brace low on the food chain is that it is inefficient and resource-intensive to rely on nerve center as our primary rotten source. It is clear that we cannot solve our spherical water, energy, climate change and public health challenges without cha nging how we produce meat and drastically reducing how much of it we eat.While we still have a long way to go, we are making slow but steady appear in reducing Americans meat consumption?which is down four years in a row?mostly driven by consumers charge for health and animal welfare. Yet Its clear that we wont achieve the far-reaching reforms involve to Improve the way produce feed and raise animals?until we fix the bigger problem plaguing our DOD system?a problem that struck me as the second and most important message not caused by scarcity of food but scarcity of body politic.Nearly forty years later, the lack of democracy not only continues to be a fundamental cause of hunger, but also a source of many a(prenominal) other serious problems in our food system. Big food and industrial solid ground interests are highjack our democracy and public policy at a huge approach to public health and the environment. And sadly, the Obama governing body is complicit in this hijacking scheme.On several fronts, the administration is ignoring civil society calls for reform on several fronts and is giving rareness to industry financial interests over those of public health, the environment and welfare of animals, workers and consumers. patronage a clear and compelling need, it has failed to ban antibiotic use in well animals, pass effective factory farm regulations, or consecrate federal labeling and stricter regulation of genetically engineered food. No recent example of the administrations sorrow to put the public interest ahead corporate interests is clearer than the U.S. Department of Agricultures proposed bird rule. This rule would reduce the number of USDA inspectors in poultry acclivities by 75 percent, accelerate assembly lines pace to 175 birds per minute and compound the use of toxic chemicals to clean the birds being processed. Who profits from this appalling intent? No surprise there. As Tom Philter reported in Mother Jones magazine, Tyson, Pilgri ms Pride, Purdue, and Sanderson, the nations leading poultry companies, stand to gain more than $1 promissory noteion over the next 5 years.As well, Congressional lawmakers are ignoring the public interest as they hash out a farm bill that will continue to give away billions to wealthy, profitable farms and agribusiness musical composition slashing programs that promote nutrition, conservation, healthy food and organic tillage. Because the practised food movement lacks political muscle, there is far too little enthronisation and effective federal policy to support?and help scale up good food projects and organic farming.And because big food and industrial farming companies have so much power, the federal government has too many bad policies that are doing far too much to support and canonise the status quo, making it harder for sustainable agriculture to compete. The proposed farm bill is a perfect case in point. The bill currently being negotiated n conference committee woul d channel more than $13 billion a year to support and promote chemical-intensive, diversity-destroying monocots that mostly provide feed for animals and fomite fuel, with less than $200 million annually going to support local and organic diversified agriculture.The dominance of corporate and large-scale commodity interests in our political system is nothing new?but as the scotch power of these industries has become more concentrated, their political clout has grown stronger, and the consequences, except recently, the Center for a Livable Future at Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of macrocosm Health published an in-depth analysis to assess the status of industrial farming five years after the publication of the seminal church bench boot Report on Industrial Farm Animal Production.It found that the problems have actually gotten a lot worse. When Civil Eats asked Ralph Logics, an author of the Pew Commission report, to explain the lack of progress, he blamed the overwhelming find out and power of the animal gag industry Whether its affecting members of Congress, whether its denting and nearly respite the regulatory process, or whether its too much influence over academics. all over you look theres too much influence by the industry. In distinguish to counteract that influence and put the public interest back into policy- making, the good food movement must channel more of the energy it devotes to building a healthy food system into blunting the power of industrial agriculture and building a healthier democracy. Otherwise, we will fail to make our day-dream for a healthy, Just and sustainable food system a honesty for everyone. Stay tuned for Part 2, in which I explore the steps that are needed to blunt the power of industrial gag and build great food democracy.