Agricultural and Food Policy, Public Economics,

Paarlberg, Don

English

Research Papers in Economics

SOUTHERN  JOURNAL  OF AGRICULTURAL  ECONOMICS  December, 1970
FARM  POLICY  REQUIREMENTS
AS  SEEN  FROM  THE
PERSPECTIVE  OF  GOVERNMENT
Don  Paarlberg*
For  many  years  my  interest  in  farm  policy  was  perhaps three-fourths of the pages devoted to this one
focused on the substance of the issues we confronted.  item.  All  of  this  to  the  exclusion  of  those  many
What were the alternative means by which the current  farmers  who  produce  unsupported  products,  to  the
questions  could  be  answered?  What  were  the  con-  exclusion  of those farmers  who  produce  only  small
sequences  of the  alternative  solutions?  But  recently  quantities of crops or livestock,  and  to the exclusion
I have  found  myself focusing  on  a different  set  of  of those  rural residents who  have little if anything to
questions.  These  questions  have  to do, not with the  gain from commodity  programs.
substance  of  the  items  that  happen  to  be  on  the
agenda,  but  with  the  makeup  of the  agenda  itself.  I  have  been  in  the  Department  of  Agriculture
How  did  the  present  questions  get  on the  agenda?  almost  a  year.  What  are  some  of the  farm  policy
Who  is intent  on  keeping  them  there?  What  other  issues  with which  we have  had to deal? And how did
questions  are  there,  questions  not  on  the  agenda?  they  get on the agenda?  It  is an interesting list:
Who  wants to  put  them on?  In short,  are we asking
the  right  questions?  Many  years  of  teaching  have  1. Limitations on the amount of payments going
convinced  me  that  it  is very  difficult  to  get  the  to any one farmer.  This  was put on the agenda,  not
right answer  if we ask  the wrong questions.  by the  old  agenda  committee,  but  by  a number  of
urban  Congressmen  and  Senators.
The  older  I get,  the  more  important  the  agenda
seems  to  me.  A  person  wise  in  public policy  would  2. Expanded food programs  for the poor. This was
rather  have  the  opportunity  to  prepare  the  agenda  put  on  the  agenda  by  a citizens  committee,  a CBS
than  to  have  decisive  power  over  items  put  on the  documentary,  and a Select Committee of the Senate.
agenda  by  someone  else.
3.  Collective bargaining  for hired farm labor. This
For  many  years  there  has  been  an  agenda  com-  can attribute to Cesar Chavez, who had assistance  from
mittee  for agricultural  policy.  There  have been  four  hired  labor,  student  activists,  and  organized  church
members  - - the farm bloc  in the Congress,  the farm  groups.
organizations,  the Department of Agriculture,  and the
land  grant  colleges.  These  four  have often  quarreled  4. Meat inspection. This  came, in large  part, from
among  themselves,  as committee members do. But on  efforts of Ralph Nader.
one  thing  they  were  agreed:  they  were  the  agenda
committee.  Few  agricultural  issues  got  before  the  5.  Civil rights in the administration of agricultural
public without the approval of the committee.  programs. This  came  from  the Civil  Rights Commis-
sion, with help from the  Reverend Ralph Abernathy.
For  almost  four  decades  now,  the  number  one
agenda  item  for  farm  policy  has  been  commodity  6. Pollution of  the environment,  through DDT
programs:  price  supports,  production  controls,  and  and other  things.  This  came  from  the  conserva-
payment programs for the major farm crops. This item  tionists.
has  taken  much  of the  time,  intellect, and financial
resources  devoted to public programs  for agriculture.  7. Limitations on the amount of fat in hot dogs.
If  you  pick  up  almost  any  book  on  farm  policy  This was put on the agenda by the medical  profession,
written  during  the  last  three  decades,  you will  find  concerned  as they  are about  cholesterol.
*Don  Paarlberg  is  director  of  Agricultural  Economics,  U.S.  Department  of  Agriculture,  Washington,  D.C.
158. The effect of tobacco on human health. This also  that, while important to us, will also enlist  the support
came from the medical profession.  of  non-farm  people.  We  will  have  to  make  friends,
which  a  minority  rmust  always  do.  We  shall have to
9.  Rural poverty.  This  item  was  lifted  up  by  a  give  support  to legitimate  urban  interests,  as  Under
Presidential  study  commission  and  amplified  by  the  Secretary  Campbell  has  repeatedly  said,  if we  are  to
Poor People's March.  except reciprocal help. The time is past when we could
sharply  delineate  agricultural  interests  from  urban
Virtually  all  of  these  items  got  on  the  agenda  interests,  supporting the one  and opposing the other.
without  the  approval  of the  agenda  committee,  or  That  strategy  might  be  valid  for a  majority,  and  we
the  agricultural  establishment,  to  use  today's  term.  are  no longer  a majority.  There must be a broadening
Meanwhile,  the  agenda  committee  has  been  trying  of  the  base  of  public  concern  for  matters  of  im-
with limited success to see how it can get the Congress  portance in rural areas.
to  act  favorably  on  the  perennial  farm policy  issue,
commodity  programs.  We  must  conclude  that  the  One  issue  on  which  we  could focus more  sharply
agricultural  establishment  has,  to  a  considerable  ex-  is  rural development.  Rural development  is concerned
tent,  lost  control  of  the  farm  policy  agenda.  The  with  creating  job  opportunities  in  the  rural  areas,
agenda  committee  has  lost  the  initiative  and  is  checking  the  depopulation  of  the  countryside,  im-
reacting  to  the  initiative  of  others.  This-is  a  very  proving  the  levels of education,  developing  our rural
serious matter.  I noted one thing during the holidays  resources,  and  improving  the  social  services  to rural
watching  all  those  football  games.  You  don't  score  people.  Surely  these  are  important  matters  to  rural
any points unless  you have the ball.  people,  whatever their  income level.  All  the statistics
show  rural  areas  to  be  at a  disadvantage  in terms  of
We  need  to  get  the  ball  back. We  have  plenty  of  education, job opportunities, social services, and living
difficult  problems  in  agriculture  and  in  the  rural  levels.  Parity  of opportunity  might  be  a  better goal
areas,  plenty  of problems  that call for  the intelligent  than parity of prices.
help  of an understanding  government.  If a vocational
group  wishes  to  have  help  from  the  government  it  It may be said that there is not a sufficient  political
must  have  either  strong  political  power  or  a  large  power base to support an expanded rural  development
stock  of good will.  We  have  been losing out on both  effort,  but  there  is  a  large  and  growing  political
counts.  The loss of political power is easily explained  power  base  for this kind of effort,  and it would be a
and quantified.  Farmers now constitute  5 percent  of  tragedy  if  those  who  have  responsibility for shaping
the  population.  When I  was a  boy,  farmers made  up  the  tarm  policy  agenda  were  to  be  unaware  of  the
one  fourth of our people.  The  loss of political  power  change.  The  Land  Grant Colleges  are expanding their
has been  proportionate.  The  loss of good  will is hard  work  in  this  area. They  have  found  a  power base  of
to  quantify  or  to  document,  but  no  one  can doubt  some kind for this extra effort. The farm organizations
that there has been a loss.  are  showing  increased  concern;  the Farm  Bureau  has
a  bill  that  supports  non-farm  job  training  for  rural
The  agenda  committee  gave  commodity  programs  people  of  low  income.  The  Department  of  Agri-
top billing for  too long  a time. There is a limit to the  culture  has  expanded  its  rural  development  work,
public's  attention span  regarding policy  items.  Forty  and  the  Congress  has  provided  increased  funds  for
years  at the head  of the farm  policy  agenda, with no  this purpose.  The  last four Presidents, beginning  with
solution  yet  produced  - - this  may  be  long enough.  President  Eisenhower,  have  supported  an  expanded
What  answers  have  escaped  forty  years  of  diligent  effort  at  rural  development.  President  Nixon  has
search  on the part of so many able people?  appointed  a  Rural  Affairs  Council,  at  Cabinet level,
and  has  set up a  Task Force  on Rural  Development.
We  cannot  recapture  the  agenda-making  role  by  He  spoke  strongly  on this subject in his State  of the
reviving  or  recasting  or  reformulating  the  old  price  Union  Message.  He  said nothing  about  corn,  wheat
and  income  issue.  The  non-farm  Congressmen,  who  or  cotton.
are  vastly  in  the  majority,  once  thought  that  farm
programs  were  for  the  poor  and  the  downtrodden,  Perhaps,  most  surprising,  many  city Congressmen
and  voted  for  them.  They  no  longer  feel  this  way,  support  rural  development.  They  have  become  con-
and  vote  against  them.  vinced -that a number of the urban problems, so much
in the public eye, have their roots at least partly in the
Agriculture  is  now  a  minority,  and  will  have  to  rural  areas.  The  enormous  farm-to-city  migration  of
adopt  the strategy  appropriate  to a minority. We will  the last 30 years brought to our non-farm communities
have  to  propose  issues  that  have  appeal  to  the  pro-  and  cities some  28 million rural people.  small farmers
ducers  of  many  farm  products  rather  than a  few to  and  farm  laborers,  many  of whom  were  ill equipped
small  farmers  as well as to big ones, to rural people as  in  education  and in  life-style,  for  urban  living.  The
well  as to farmers.  And  we shall  have to  select issues  result  was  a  problem  both in  the  area  they left  and
16the  place  to which they  came.  They depopulated the  If neither  side can win  the campaign  on the terms
countryside and generated  an urban crush.  How much  in  which  the  issue  is  joined,  what  do you  do? You
better  it would have  been to  have  created job oppor-  reformulate  the issue  or you  move it  a notch or two
tunities  in  the  rural  areas,  and  to have  provided  the  down  on  the  agenda.  You  talk  less about  it. This  is
social  services  that would  have  made  life  rewarding  what  is  in  fact  going  on,  not  as part  of a  conscious
where these people really wanted to live!  effort,  but as  the  intelligent  outcome of the process
of  representative  government.  We  shall  get  better
The city Congressmen  have been interested enough  answers  to the  very  real  problems of corn, wheat and
in  rural  development  to  have  generated  programs  cotton, I believe, if we lower our voices on commodity
with an important  rural thrust, sponsored  by Health,  programs by a few decibels, drop this old issue a notch
Education  and Welfare,  Housing  and Urban Develop-  or two on the agenda, and turn our attention to policy
ment,  and  other  federal  agencies.  In  combination,  issues  that  have  the  twin  attributes  of being  really
these  programs,  which  we  think  of as  urban-based,  important  to  a  broad  sector  of  rural  America  and
have  a  larger  rural component  than agriculture's  own  having some  appeal to urban people.
rural development  program.
This  change is already far advanced.  Note what has
We  can't  rewrite  history,  but  we  can  still  make  happened with respect to food programs,rural  develop-
changes,  which we  must do if we are  to escape  being  ment, housing,  water resources,  and the rural  environ-
almost  totally  an  urban  society.  I  have  spoken  of  ment.  What  a  tragedy it would be  if, while this con-
rural  development  as  an  agenda  issue  that  could  be  structive  change  is  underway,  those  who  have  res-
promoted  to  reduce  the  intensity  of  concern  long  ponsibility  for  shaping the  farm policy agenda,  would
conferred  on  commodity  problems.  Rural  develop-  continue,  out of inertia,  to harangue  one  another  on
ment  is  but  one  example.  I  could  have  suggested  the same  old issues!
other  issues:  food  programs,  resource  development,
and  environmental  questions.  Any  and  all  of  these  We  are  now  in  the  nineteen-seventies,  and  the
merit  advancement  toward  the  top  of  the  agenda.  statute  of  limitations  is  about  to  run  out  on  the
issues that absorbed  so much of our time and treasure
What  I  am  suggesting is  a  re-ordering  of priorities,  during  the  'thirties,  'forties,  'fifties,  and 'sixties. We
a  new  emphasis  on opportunities  for rural people.  I  need  to take  the  initiative and formulate  issues that
am not recommending that we take commodity prob-  will  help  agriculture  strengthen  its role in shaping the
lems off the agenda; we can't do that. Our dependence  farm  policy  agenda.  The  number  one  criterion  for
on these  programs  is  so  great  that  we  can't quickly  farm policy  is that  it be  sufficiently  in tune with the
phase  them  out,  and  the  opposition  to  them  is  so  times  so  as  to  receive  an  appropriate  measure  of
great  that they  probably can't be expanded.  Neither  public  support.
the  proponents  of big  commodity  programs  nor the
opponents  thereof  can  win  the  battle  in  the  terms
that  victory  has  long  been  stated.  We  need  an
accommodation  that  would  somewhat  abate  the
argument  over  the  commodity  programs  so  that  we
can  get on  with other  things.  This  should  be  done in
low  key.  Public  processes  being  what  they  are,  the
redefining  of  goals  is  best  accomplished  by  em-
phasizing  what  is  elevated,  rather  than  by  calling
attention  to what is being de-emphasized.  There must
be  some  way  of  developing  markets  and  expanding
outlets to increase  that share  of farm income derived
from  the  market  relative  to  that share  which  comes
from the  commodity  programs.
There  is  some  penitence  in  my  plea  for  de-
escalating  the controversy  over commodity programs;
I have in  the past  contributed more than my  share to
keeping  the  issue  alive.  What  we  need  now  is  the
opportunity  for  people  like  myself  and  others  to
achieve  some  degree  of disengagement  so  we can  get
on  with other  matters.
The  desire  to  impose  unconditional  surrender  on
one's  rival  is  a  very  costly  form of self-indulgence.
17/

FARM POLICY REQUIREMENTS AS SEEN FROM THE PERSPECTIVE OF GOVERNMENT

Abstract

Similar works

Full text

Available Versions

Research Papers in Economics