Letter to the editor: Farm Bill is a microcosm of politics
To the editor:
The 2018 Farm Bill didn’t pass. It had some things in it though that exhibits the differences between who are for the Farm Bill and those who oppose it.
The bill would have ended the Conservation Stewardship Plan, another USDA program providing government oversight for: planting schedules, crop yields and erosion management. And, the SNAP (food stamp) program would have been reformed so that able-bodied people could participate in job training and employment as part of an obligation to receive benefits.
This will come as a shock to some, but there’s been a lot of progress in agricultural industry. It’s not the 1930s anymore. Farmers don’t want to create a dust-bowl, lose their property or legacy. People that work with the earth appreciate it and study the best, practical and consequential methods to provide the most resources, for the greatest possible shared results.
Another government micro-management program, like CSP, is not adding value. Small and large business producers actually have a healthy self-interest in preserving the planet and at the same time creating resources now and for the future.
Regarding SNAP reforms, able-bodied people want the dignity of work and have an obligation to the taxpayer to lift up their personal situation; create positive plans for themselves and their families. There are now more jobs available in Minnesota; so it’s a great time to encourage people to break the mold of dependency.
While the 2018 Farm Bill didn’t pass, it represents the microcosm of politics today and for the future. Some candidates side with the individual and others wants more government. So far, most people aren’t real happy with bigger government, but the next election will tell. A key factor will be if people are paying attention to the details because, while a Farm Bill wasn’t glitzy, it represents the bottom line.