Home
Archive
Newsletters
Video
Blogs
Discuss
About
Search
Donate
Advertise

Environment

Change You Can Eat: Obama's Pick for Secretary of Ag May Finally Shake Things Up

By Ari LeVaux, AlterNet. Posted December 15, 2008.


As someone who eats organic and knows what a CSA is, foodies have high hopes for Obama challenging Big Ag.
Advertisement
Upcoming AlterNet stories on Digg

The secretary of agriculture directs the USDA, setting governmental policy on food safety, labeling, farm subsidies, biofuels, genetically modified foods, school lunch programs, workers rights, and many other aspects of food and agriculture. As the U.S. Forest Service is part of the USDA, the secretary of agriculture oversees national forest issues as well.

Last May, when I interviewed presidential candidate Barack Obama about food and agriculture policy, I asked him what, as president, he'd be looking for in a USDA chief.

"As president, I would select a Secretary of Agriculture who shares my commitment to America's farmers and ranchers and the importance of developing the rural economy, yet is not afraid to challenge entrenched special interests in Washington," he replied. "I would implement USDA policies that promote local and regional food systems, including assisting states to develop programs aimed at community-supported farms."

These words gave many foodies the audacity to hope that with the election of Obama -- who feeds his family organic food, and who knows what community-supported agriculture even is -- long-overdue change might actually come to the nation's food system.

The Obama transition team has yet to tap a nominee for secretary of agriculture, and it may be a while before one is named, according to Jim Wiesemeyer, an agricultural economist, in a Dec. 2 speech to the Food and Agriculture Policy Summit in Washington, D.C.

"My list [of contenders] keeps growing, which tells me they don't know," Wiesemeyer said. "…I think USDA will be in the lower third of the cabinet secretaries announced."

"Thus far he's picked some pretty good, intelligent, pragmatic people," Wiesemeyer told his audience of agribusiness bigwigs (the event was sponsored by Monsanto and the United Soybean Board). "Now when it gets to the lower third tier of picks, remember, this is a president who promised change, and [there's] not much change so far at the cabinet level. So that ups the odds…that once we get to the EPA level, the USDA level…we could well see a surprise, and more of a reformer. Now, that's going to get the production agriculture people nervous…"

The production agriculture people might be even more nervous to learn about a letter, signed by all-star sustainable-food advocates Michael Pollan, Wendell Berry, Frances Lappé and others, recently submitted to Obama's transition team. The letter includes a wish list of change-oriented ag secretary candidates from within the mainstream political establishment, including:

  • Gus Schumacher, former undersecretary of agriculture for farm and foreign agricultural services at USDA.
  • Chuck Hassebrook, executive director, Center for Rural Affairs, Lyons, Nebraska.
  •  Sarah Vogel, former commissioner of agriculture for the state of North Dakota.
  •  Fred Kirschenmann, organic farmer and distinguished fellow, Leopold Center for Sustainable Agriculture, Ames, Iowa. 
  • Mark Ritchie, Minnesota secretary of state.
  •  Neil Hamilton, Dwight D. Opperman, director of the Agricultural Law Center, Drake University, Des Moines, Iowa.

(To read this letter, and sign if you wish, go to www.fooddemocracynow.org/).


Digg!    Share on facebook   submit to reddit    Bookmark on Delicious   Stumble This  

See more stories tagged with: agriculture, food, obama, organic, farming, sustainability, michael pollan, secretary of agriculture

Ari LeVaux writes a syndicated weekly food column.

Liked this story? Get top stories in your inbox each week from Environment! Sign up now »


Advertisement
Advertisement

 

Comments Turn comments off sitewide Give us feedback »
Comments closed.
The comments for this story have been closed. Thank you to everyone who participated.
View:
"With Americans overfed on empty, unhealthy calories..."
Posted by: ahmlco on Dec 15, 2008 11:39 AM   
Current rating: 1    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The article mentioned a lot of names, and threw around a few buzzwords, but failed to mention just WHY agribusiness needs to change.

The fact that Americans eat a lot of pizza and potato chips is more a matter of convenience and marketing by the food companies, and isn't, as far as I can tell, a direct result of agribusiness (i.e. the farmers).

We have an agricultural system that overproduces food and is the general envy of most of the world. Now, for some reason, it needs to be dismantled and everyone needs to grow their own tomatoes? (Like 1970-era Russia?)

Put me in the "unconvinced" column...

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

Agribusiness is doomed, with or without Obama's help
Posted by: Kevin Carson on Dec 15, 2008 1:57 PM   
Current rating: 5    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
The good news is that, even if Obama does appoint a shill for big agribusiness (and after all, he didn't have the guts to oppose ethanol), it won't make much difference.

As it is, big agribusiness can barely compete with local truck farmers even with the massive subsidies it currently receives.

And state capitalism is reaching a crisis of inputs in which the state will simply lack the resources to subsidize big agribusiness to the extent it needs to survive.

Peak Oil is here to stay. Since we're extracting as much oil as we ever will, the price is determined entirely by fluctuations in demand. So the spikes will get higher and higher each summer. Even if oil had stayed at its peak price of $130/barrel for a prolonged period, many truckers would have wound up abandoning their rigs on the shoulder because it simply didn't pay.

As the price spikes worsen in coming years, we can expect the trucking industry's capacity to shrink, and railroads to prioritize the most value-dense commodities that simply can't be produced locally. This means that there will be a renaissance in local production of anything that CAN be produced locally. As people get sick of the empty shelves at Megalo Mart, and sick of the USDA surplus commodities the National Guard brings in to avert starvation, people will be snatching food off the tables as fast as it appears at the farmers' markets. And besides a lot of spade- and forkwork on those quarter-acre lots in the cul de sacs, every bit of available land on the outskirts of cities will be brought under cultivation to expand output by market gardeners.

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

CSF01
Posted by: csf01 on Dec 15, 2008 4:45 PM   
Current rating: Not yet rated    [1 = poor; 5 = excellent]
To put this article in perspective read Michael Pollan's piece on why food policy is intertwined with everything.

www.michaelpollan.com/article.php?id=97

[« Reply to this comment] [Post a new comment »] [Rate this comment: 1 - 2 - 3 - 4 - 5]

  • AlterNetYour turn

Support AlterNet
Do you value the information you're getting from AlterNet? Please show your support with a tax-deductible donation.


Feedback
Tell us how we're doing.

Advertisement
Advertisement