美国农业法争论凸显了美国农场主政治影响力的下降

U.S. farm bill debate illustrates the declining influence of the ag lobby

 

Posted Aug. 8th, 2013 by Barry Wilson

 

 Not so long ago, Canadian farmers who thought governments have an obligation to support the industry in hard times cast their lonely, envious eyes south.?

 

Their gaze often rested on the U.S. farm bill. Now there was a safety net from a farmer-friendly government. ?

 

Grain farmers were guaranteed a price that reflected cost-of-production, government doled out enormous amounts of money for set-aside and weather calamities and the support was largely predictable.?

 

With an over-represented farm and rural presence in Congress and a legislative system that functions on trade-offs between regions and sectors, the farm community had clout on Capitol Hill. It generally was regarded as one of the most effective lobbies in Washington.?

 

Of course, that generous government support gave American producers an advantage, kept their debt levels far lower than in Canada and drove U.S. competitor country governments crazy, including Canada’s.?

 

And of course, Canadian producer organizations generally agreed with the condemnation of rich U.S. subsidies, but their members also saw them as leverage to pressure Ottawa for more.?

 

The mantra was that Canadian farmers are competitive, but Canadian farm policies and supports are not. Pony up, Ottawa.?

 

What a difference a decade can make to rural entitlement programs: a political shift, a growing urbanization trend and an essentially bankrupt U.S. government with a debt of more than $16 trillion US.?

 

Last week, there was some irony and envy from Americans in the room when agriculture minister Gerry Ritz told a meeting of the U.S. Grains Council in Ottawa that the five-year Growing Forward 2 program was essentially Canada’s farm bill.?

 

Many Canadian farm leaders are critical of support cuts in the GF2 program, but at least there is a five-year program.?

 

The U.S. Congress has been unable to come up with a new farm bill, so the old one has been extended for a year as political wrangling continues. ?

 

And the fight isn’t about how rich farm supports should be because the days of guaranteed prices and billion dollar payouts are over. The pot is empty.?

 

The battle is over what share of the limited (but still large) farm bill budget should be devoted to what the Americans call “nutrition” — really government school lunch and food programs for the poor.?

 

Washington lobbyist Scott Shearer, who attended the U.S. Grains Council meeting to dissect the farm bill impasse, said in an interview the farm lobby carries less weight these days than it once did.?

 

Congress increasingly is populated by urban and suburban representatives with little knowledge of or innate sympathy for farmers, which their often poor constituents consider an asset-rich and taxpayer-subsidized privileged class.?

 

He said the farm lobby has been slow to pick up on the significance of the change.?

 

“They often see their role as lobbying politicians from rural and agriculture areas, but really, what they have to be doing is talking to urban and suburban representatives and convincing them there are benefits to their constituents to have a strong rural economy and a farm bill,” he said.?

 

As well, House and Senate agriculture committees should no longer be the primary lobby focus. Health, energy, trade and many other committees now touch on their file.

（特约编辑：张宏洲供稿）