The Corner -
AG SUBSIDIES: A READER'S DEFENSE [Ramesh Ponnuru]
"I must say that I am really uncomfortable with free-market conservatives' knee-jerk opposition to farm subsidies. I understand that many wealthy individuals and large corporations benefit, but so do many farm families. Right here where I live, a family farm that has been around for generations has begun growing pumpkins (in addition to their regular crops) and hosting a month-long fall festival during October. It is really industrious of them to do this, but the reason they do it is because they need the extra income. They happen to be lucky in that they live in town - I doubt a farmer in the middle of nowhere would have any success with such a venture. And the farm I am talking about is pretty successful by the standards of family farms these days, even without the pumpkins.
"The point is this: I -- and I believe many others, as well -- value family farms as an institution. We don't want to see them die out and be replaced with corporate farming operations. Of all the things the French are bashed for (usually with good reason), I have always defended their dedication to their family farms (yes, the 'farmer's unions' over there are out of control, but that's the French for you). Considering all the billions and trillions we spend on complete crap in this country, I see no reason not to help our farmers, especially if the subsidies can be tailored to help family farms. And yes, I'm willing to pay more for food, too. Normally, it's not advisable to subsidize inefficiency. But family farms can never be as efficient as corporate farms, yet what they give us goes far beyond mere agricultural products. They are the lifeblood of rural America, part of our national birthright, and a source of many of the values that conservatives fight for all the time.
"Often in the headlong rush to modernity, it is easy to leave behind that which is close to your soul. Western society as a whole has strayed too far from our agrarian roots, and I loathe the idea of straying farther. Count me in with the farmers on this one."
My response: I'm against the knee-jerk dismissal of knee-jerk reactions. And while I often find this particular correspondent's emails interesting, I am not in great sympathy with this argument.
It is not clear that current farm programs actually do help family farms. Here's how Rich put it in his column today: "Family farms aren't big enough to garner the largest subsidies and are squeezed by the way the federal payments increase land values and stimulate overproduction. 'The subsidies reward the guy who gets higher yields with higher subsidies, and he's able to buy out his neighbor and get even bigger,' says Dennis Avery, an agriculture expert at the Hudson Institute."
If someone were proposing the creation of a federal program that would help family farms, I would oppose it, too. There are a lot of good things that shouldn't get federal money extracted from taxpayers. The fact that my correspondent "is willing to pay more for food" doesn't justify making others--including others who can afford it less--pay more, too. |
