JLF: The American Agribusiness Industry
Johnny Lead Foot here, and I'm pissed...
I started a double-article on how the corn industry is trying to kill you, but then realized I needed a pre-article to explain how pissed I get at the lobby/campaign contribution system. I'll first focus on the American Agribusiness System's efforts (capitalized because it's such a monumental piece of crap), but I'm sure more industries will be given the JLF treatment.
As a citizen, you voice your opinion at the ballot box. Every couple of years you get the opportunity to put your one vote up against the million others fellow citizens, most of them idiots. Corporations, meanwhile, have millions and millions of dollars to hire representatives who persuade/bribe/influence politicians to shape policy. Their presence is constant, persistent, and, unfortunately, it is effective.
Someone hired by a company to persuade/bribe/influence politicians is called a lobbyist. A whole group of them is called a lobby of ass holes.
The effects of these lobbying groups is staggering and has shaped how we live. For example, it's the reason we don't have universal healthcare, gas prices are so high, why Halliburton gets billions of dollars in no-bid contracts and it defines who is providing you your utilities. Heck, it's the reason why our cell phones are slaves to their particular cell phone provider, why we only have one option for cable company for our houses and why the Sirius/XM merger is taking so long to approve. Corporations try to shape every policy possible to increase their bottom line. You can imagine, that isn't usually in your best interest.
So, lobbyist Jack Abmramoff was found guilty to three criminal felony counts and Congressman Duke Cunningham (R, CA) was busted for taking $2.4 million in bribes from contractors (and plead guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion), but really that's just scratching the surface. See there are very liberal rules as to what a lobbyist can do to offer favor. In fact, the very rules outlining what lobbyists can do were shaped by... well... lobbyists. I'm sure I'll cover this topic again, because it makes me full hot. FULL HOT.
Similarly, there are many rules around how to donate money to a candidate's campaign. I'm sure you are more familiar with those loopholes, but they will be also a JLF focus. FULL HOT.
Now, let's talk about agribusiness and how it plays this game.
It is undeniable that farming is risky work, what with cheap international competition and the potentially-deadly weather. The government tries to combat this by subsidizing farmers' salaries. In fact, as of 1933, they are legally obligated to subsidize farmers, which sets off all kinds of alarms with me. It was part of the New Deal, and it's been around ever since. President FDR blamed the Great Depression on the excesses of big business and his administration tried to empower farmers and unions through New Deal programs. Little did he imagine, though, that agriculture WOULD be big business one day... like today.
Under this Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the government subsidized farmers who slaughtered livestock and limited production and, therefore, shrunk the massive surpluses. The government has had its hand in shaping agriculture since, passing 15 bills, each one shifting what role the government played in agriculture. For example, in 1949 the government added another Agricultural Act that allows surplus food to be donated to friendly countries under the banner of developmental aid. How sweet of us!
With each bill, the agricultural corporations became more crafty in how they worked together to affect more favorable terms for them, as you'd imagine. Let's jump straight to the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act passed in 2002. This act distributes $17 BILLION PER YEAR as subsidies. $17 BILLION. A YEAR. Most of it is bookmarked towards grain production (or lack of production... it's all very complicated). It is expected to reach $190 BILLION of government subsidies over 10 years.
Now, no one cares if the government is spending its money wisely. Do we? No. In fact, we prefer it. Shoot: we should EXPECT it. But the truth is that these subsidies are not remotely effective. Brian Reidl at the Heritage Foundation has great analysis of why this 2002 Act is not effective. First off, over 90% of the subsidies go to farms that produce five domestic agricultural products: wheat, corn, cotton, soybeans and rice (the US produces over 400). Also, the size of the subsidy matches with the crop production, so the largest farms will receive the largest payments. Price supports, another technique used by our government to "help farmers" (they guarantee a market price), also favor those who produce the most of these 5 crops... again favoring the big boys. In fact, 2/3 of all subsidies go to 10% of the farms and 60% of farms, regardless of their level of need, receive nothing.
So, if the largest farms are getting the most subsidies.... and the subsidies only cover 1% of the crops we produce.... What happens to those billions? Well, the money is distributed to the richest farmers. Then a portion of that money gets distributed back to candidates who are running for office, who will then approve more subsidies, which will then feed back into the candidates, which then.... makes me want to put the pedal to the metal. There are lobbyist in there, too, raking it in and manipulating.
Well, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, the agribusiness industry reported giving over $45 million in campaign contributions in 2006. [I say reported giving because, as we saw with Duke and Jack Abramoff, it's not always above the table.] $45 million in campaign contributions in 2006.
The agribusiness also spent $51 million on lobbyists in 2007. $51 million for lobbyists in 2007.
Let's take a look at the 2004 House Committee on Agriculture in particular. Overall, the top 20 largest industry donations totaled to $32 million for these 54 lawmakers. A few industries that jump out at me, and again, these are donations to the 2004 HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE:
Everywhere you look, there's money flowing to the politicians.
So, what does this all mean? (Hold on to your shorts, pants and shirts... I wouldn't write this much if theres wasn't a crazy payoff!) It means that the 2002 bill that gives out $17 billion a year is expected to be replaced by a bill drafted in 2007 that boosts the annual farm subsidies to $288 BILLION OVER 5 YEARS. Yes, that's $58 BILLION A YEAR. I can imagine, if I look into it, that this bill is even more lopsided than the 2002 one, leaving more farmers in the dark and shoveling money to the biggest.
Holy fury.
This also means that I've set the platform, with this article, to go after industries that help shape policy through campaign contributions and lobbyists. Now that we know how these guys work with policy makers, I can shine a light on what policies they are pushing to line their pockets. First up? Grain industry, specifically corn.
Look for it next week. Find out how they are trying to kill you.
Always your pleasure.
- JLF
Find me on Facebook.com, and join the HAWTaction.com Reader group. My name there is Johnny LeadFoot (they didn't allow the space).
So, lobbyist Jack Abmramoff was found guilty to three criminal felony counts and Congressman Duke Cunningham (R, CA) was busted for taking $2.4 million in bribes from contractors (and plead guilty to federal charges of conspiracy to commit bribery, mail fraud, wire fraud, and tax evasion), but really that's just scratching the surface. See there are very liberal rules as to what a lobbyist can do to offer favor. In fact, the very rules outlining what lobbyists can do were shaped by... well... lobbyists. I'm sure I'll cover this topic again, because it makes me full hot. FULL HOT.
Similarly, there are many rules around how to donate money to a candidate's campaign. I'm sure you are more familiar with those loopholes, but they will be also a JLF focus. FULL HOT.
Now, let's talk about agribusiness and how it plays this game.
It is undeniable that farming is risky work, what with cheap international competition and the potentially-deadly weather. The government tries to combat this by subsidizing farmers' salaries. In fact, as of 1933, they are legally obligated to subsidize farmers, which sets off all kinds of alarms with me. It was part of the New Deal, and it's been around ever since. President FDR blamed the Great Depression on the excesses of big business and his administration tried to empower farmers and unions through New Deal programs. Little did he imagine, though, that agriculture WOULD be big business one day... like today.
Under this Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the government subsidized farmers who slaughtered livestock and limited production and, therefore, shrunk the massive surpluses. The government has had its hand in shaping agriculture since, passing 15 bills, each one shifting what role the government played in agriculture. For example, in 1949 the government added another Agricultural Act that allows surplus food to be donated to friendly countries under the banner of developmental aid. How sweet of us!
With each bill, the agricultural corporations became more crafty in how they worked together to affect more favorable terms for them, as you'd imagine. Let's jump straight to the Farm Security and Rural Investment Act passed in 2002. This act distributes $17 BILLION PER YEAR as subsidies. $17 BILLION. A YEAR. Most of it is bookmarked towards grain production (or lack of production... it's all very complicated). It is expected to reach $190 BILLION of government subsidies over 10 years.
Now, no one cares if the government is spending its money wisely. Do we? No. In fact, we prefer it. Shoot: we should EXPECT it. But the truth is that these subsidies are not remotely effective. Brian Reidl at the Heritage Foundation has great analysis of why this 2002 Act is not effective. First off, over 90% of the subsidies go to farms that produce five domestic agricultural products: wheat, corn, cotton, soybeans and rice (the US produces over 400). Also, the size of the subsidy matches with the crop production, so the largest farms will receive the largest payments. Price supports, another technique used by our government to "help farmers" (they guarantee a market price), also favor those who produce the most of these 5 crops... again favoring the big boys. In fact, 2/3 of all subsidies go to 10% of the farms and 60% of farms, regardless of their level of need, receive nothing.
So, if the largest farms are getting the most subsidies.... and the subsidies only cover 1% of the crops we produce.... What happens to those billions? Well, the money is distributed to the richest farmers. Then a portion of that money gets distributed back to candidates who are running for office, who will then approve more subsidies, which will then feed back into the candidates, which then.... makes me want to put the pedal to the metal. There are lobbyist in there, too, raking it in and manipulating.
Well, according to the Center for Responsive Politics, the agribusiness industry reported giving over $45 million in campaign contributions in 2006. [I say reported giving because, as we saw with Duke and Jack Abramoff, it's not always above the table.] $45 million in campaign contributions in 2006.
The agribusiness also spent $51 million on lobbyists in 2007. $51 million for lobbyists in 2007.
Let's take a look at the 2004 House Committee on Agriculture in particular. Overall, the top 20 largest industry donations totaled to $32 million for these 54 lawmakers. A few industries that jump out at me, and again, these are donations to the 2004 HOUSE COMMITTEE ON AGRICULTURE:
- Leadership PACs (Political Action Committee, surely comprised of those interested in supporting agriculture initiatives) = $2.5 million
- Retired citizens (Surely comprised of those who have made a fortune with agriculture) = $2.1 million
- Crop production and basic processing = $2.0 million
- Agricultural services/products = $1.2 million
- Lobbyist (directly from their pockets) = $0.87 million
Everywhere you look, there's money flowing to the politicians.
So, what does this all mean? (Hold on to your shorts, pants and shirts... I wouldn't write this much if theres wasn't a crazy payoff!) It means that the 2002 bill that gives out $17 billion a year is expected to be replaced by a bill drafted in 2007 that boosts the annual farm subsidies to $288 BILLION OVER 5 YEARS. Yes, that's $58 BILLION A YEAR. I can imagine, if I look into it, that this bill is even more lopsided than the 2002 one, leaving more farmers in the dark and shoveling money to the biggest.
Holy fury.
This also means that I've set the platform, with this article, to go after industries that help shape policy through campaign contributions and lobbyists. Now that we know how these guys work with policy makers, I can shine a light on what policies they are pushing to line their pockets. First up? Grain industry, specifically corn.
Look for it next week. Find out how they are trying to kill you.
Always your pleasure.
- JLF
Find me on Facebook.com, and join the HAWTaction.com Reader group. My name there is Johnny LeadFoot (they didn't allow the space).
High ranking state and federal Republican officials in Alabama are above the law; Bush has instructed his new Attorney General appointee not to investigate corruption in Alabama.
The GOP is deeply involved in the Jack Abramoff and Michael Scanlon scandal. Lobbyist Jack Abramoff who was a major GOP campaign fund raiser has almost 400 recorded visits to the White House. The documented prison confessions by these two along with these White House records have recently been declared secret by Bush and is being withheld by the White House. Abramoff and Lobbyist Scanlon con over sixty million dollars from the six Indian tribes that ran gambling Casinos. Abramoff also arranged secret meetings for foreign businesses and governments with the White House where Bush granted government and military favors in exchange for major campaign contributions to Bush supporters.
Now the GOP in Alabama has to depend on T. Roth and W. Canary to deal with the Choctaw Indians directly. The Choctaws aren’t the only ones that they are using scare tactics on. The GOP depends on contributions from large businesses in return for political favors. They also depend on kickbacks from military/government contractors. Some contractors in Alabama are charging tax payers as much as 80% over costs.
“THE ALABAMA GOP MISSION STATEMENT”
-We will support our present U.S. Republican senators, our U.S. Republican congressmen and our Republican governor.
-We will support our high ranking Republican judges, our Republican attorney generals and our three republican newspapers owned by Newhouse/Advance Publications, Inc. that persecutes and prosecutes those darn Democrats that keeps getting in the way.
http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/05/monsanto200805