Support organic farmers in the 2007 Farm Bill
Photo courtesy of PDPhoto.org
Every so often, the broad coalition of organic food supporters
- which include food companies, retailers, farmers, advocacy groups, and of
course consumers - coalesce around one crucial issue.
This happened in 1997, when the first draft of organic regulations were
released by the USDA and included such anti-organic practices as
irradiation, genetically modified crops and sewage sludge fertilizer. The
community sent an unprecedented number of comments to the USDA opposing the
so-called "Big Three" and they were struck down in the final version of
regulations.
In 2003, when a Georgia Congressman inserted a rider onto a bill in the dead
of night and won passage for the right to use non-organic animal feed
(sought by one of his chicken processors), the community rose up again. Led
by opponents in Congress, the measure was rescinded in a subsequent bill.
Now, arguably, it's time again for the organic community to rise up again,
spreading the word through advocacy groups, in email, on blogs and most
potently, at the check-out counters of natural food stores and co-ops.
What's the issue this time around?
The Farm Bill. Organic supporters have been pushing very hard in Congress to
win a few crucial programs for organic farmers but the buzz is at a low
level in Washington. Organic doesn't even win a mention as a worthwhile
alternative (evident in this recent
farm bill.
What are supporters of
organic farming seeking?
- Basic research funds. Currently organic farming research and education
gets about $13 million from a patchwork of USDA programs. But only $3
million of those funds is specifically dedicated for organic farming.
Supporters want to increase those targeted funds to $15 million annually in
mandatory funding - this, out of a USDA research budget of about $2 billion.
- Certification cost share. Farmers can get up to $500 annually to offset up
to 75 percent of the costs of organic certification. (This is the only
"subsidy" specifically targeted to organic farmers and is meant for smaller
farmers). But many states have run out of money and they won't get any more
until the new farm bill is approved. Supporters are looking to increase the
cost share to $750 through $25 million in funding over five years.
- Crop insurance. Organic farmers must pay a 5 percent premium to receive
crop insurance but their crop losses are compensated at the same rate as
conventional growers (even though the organic crop is worth more). They want
the USDA to correct this unfair practice.
- Transition Support. Transitioning farmers must follow organic methods for
three years before they can sell their crops under the organic label. That
means their costs are usually higher but they are still getting paid
conventional prices for their crops. The lobby is looking for $50 million
per year to help with the transition process, with the funds split between
technical and financial assistance.
- Data Collection. Right now there is little reliable data on organic
product, on the amount and sources of organic food imports, on the prices
farmers get for their crops or the usual information available to
conventional farmers. That discourages investment, skews crop insurance
decisions and undermines the market. So the lobby wants some dedicated funds
for this type of research. (For more detail on these issues, see this
PDF from the Organic Farming Research Foundation).
Although the House Agriculture Committee nodded in the direction of organic
farming in the mark up of the farm bill, much of the funding under
consideration would be discretionary - not mandatory. The programs will only
get funded if money can be found, which is highly unlikely in this tight
fiscal climate.
Why Does organic need these funds?
Demand for organic food now exceeds supply, but US farmers are not
converting fast enough to fill the gap. The costs of transition, the lack of
knowledge about organic methods, and uncertainty about the market all play a
role in inhibiting conventional farmers from making the switch. With
American farmers lagging, production is increasingly shifting overseas -
meaning U.S. farmers will lose out on a lucrative market.
Consumers will see more organic products from Mexico, China, Chile, Brazil,
India, Australia, Italy and Turkey, including fresh and frozen produce,
soybeans, grass-fed meat, grains and beans. That's not a bad thing, in terms
of agricultural practices and opportunities in those countries, but it won't
do anything for farming in the US.
So what can we do?
The Environmental
The point is to win baseline funding for organic agriculture, so that it can
be increased in the next farm bill. If the baseline is near zero, it isn't
going to move at all - not in the next bill, or the one after that and
farmers will continue to sit on the sidelines.
When you wonder why so many organic products are originating overseas, you
will have your answer: the modest government incentives and research U.S.
farmers needed to pursue organic farming weren't available. So they didn't
bother to switch.
Samuel Fromartz is the author of
at Chews Wise
