April 8, 2000

Providing key information on recent developments in rural America, including updates on the Farm Bureau and salient issues converging around water quality, farm sustainability and the protection of biodiversity.

*******************************************************************************

Hi Folks,

This communication is going out to all folks who have signed on to the call for an investigation into the American Farm Bureau Federation leadership and other GREEN Rural UPdates listings.

The following letter, leaked by farm bureau members, is a remarkable document. I highly suggest you read it.

The letter and talking points below were sent to County Farm Bureau offices in anticipation of a 60 minutes broadcast investigating the American Farm Bureau Federation. This letter went out about 12 days ago. We expect it may have gone out to all 2800 country Farm Bureau offices nationwide, though I cannot verify this.

A CBS press release on the same broadcast describes their broadcast with this headline "Farmers say the Farm bureau has abandoned them for big business, whose interests are a big factor in the demise of the family farm."

However, the "leaked" Farm Bureau letter describes the show as "a potentially damaging attack that goes to the very heart of our [farm bureau] farm organization." The letter describes Mike Wallace’s line of questioning saying it is a familiar theme Farm Bureau has heard from the "labor unions, animal rights groups, extremists environmental groups - and a few legislators!!"

With all the suffering in rural America, with the demise of family farms, with all the deception in farm policy, with all the debilitation of waterways, soils and biodiversity - it would be a shame if well-intentioned farm bureau farmers - people who cared about the future for their children - were not allowed to draw their own conclusions about this show.

It would be a shame if they could not view the show fairly and without prejudice, and judge for themselves if their leadership is truly serving them, or if, as one farmer said, "All [the farm bureaus] decisions are made for corporate America because they own part of it."

SUNDAY – APRIL 9th (7:00 - 8:00 PM ET/PT) on the CBS Television Network.

For the future,

Scotty Johnson
Rural Community Outreach Coordinator
GrassRoots Environmental Effectiveness Network
520 623-9653
sjohnson@albq.defenders.org

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~

Kansas Farm Bureau
2627 KFB Plaza
P.O. Box 3500
Manhattan, Kansas 66505-8508
(785) 587-6000

Dear Fellow County Farm Bureau Members,

I want to take this opportunity to alert you to a potentially damaging attack that goes to the very heart of our farm organization.

We have been notified by American Farm Bureau that the CBS television news show "60 Minutes" did an interview with the President of Iowa Farm Bureau, Mr. Ed Wiederstein. CBS made arrangements for the interview with Mr. Wiederstein under the guise of a discussion about the problems facing the American farmer and rancher.

However, after exchanging some pleasantries, the true intent of the interviewer, Mr. Wallace became evident. The slant of their story was that because Farm Bureau holds for-profit companies (i.e. property and casualty insurance companies) nationwide, we are not capable of representing the family farm or, for that matter, be a producer-oriented farm organization.

This is not so coincidentally a familiar theme that we have heard in our own state from the labor unions, animal rights groups, extremist environmental groups and a few legislators!!

During the interviewer, Mr. Wallace further probed with questions to the Iowa president about his personal government farm payments received over the past 14 years. They also quizzed him as to several of our policy statements that deal with ethics and morality. All of these attacks were of course, spun so as to make Farm Bureau look like a racist, narrow and out of touch farm organization that again is not capable of representing the "family farm".

Attached, you will find some talking points that your Kansas Farm Bureau has provided to address these misguided, mean spirited accusations. I would ask you to read and study them. And furthermore I would challenge you to ask yourself these questions.

Could it be that they read the same Fortune Magazine articles that rank Farm Bureau effectiveness number 22 among literally thousands of special interest groups in Washington D.C.?

And finally I would challenge you to answer the question... Is your Farm Bureau Organization worth defending and fighting for?

I hope you come up with the same answer that I do in regard to our Farm Bureau. As your president I want you to know the serious nature of these attacks. Make no mistake, these groups are well funded, highly organized and passionately motivated. Their true agenda is the ruination of our way of life. We cannot afford to take these attacks lightly, nor can we afford to allow them to divide us at a time when we have so much at stake.

As we all understand, we have fundamental economic problems on our farms and ranches today. Now more than ever we need to stand up for ourselves and get behind our organization so we can address our problems. It is time to refresh our pride in Farm Bureau and recognize the power that we can have if we stand and work together.

It is obvious to me that our opponents realize the potential and power our organization holds, or they would not render such a biased attack. I hope we realize it also! The decision is yours and the very future of our organization and the future of our "family farms" hangs in the balance!

Stan Ahlerich

Talking points for 60 minutes broadcast on Farm Bureau

If inquiries come to Kansas about this issue, it is recommended that calls be forwarded to the state headquarters or AFBF. Otherwise, the following points should be made

1. Any affiliated for-profit companies have been created according to law and help provide a means to represent family farmers and ranchers, the founders of the organization.

2. In virtually all cases, these affiliates, primarily the insurance companies, were formed FOR the members, because no one else at the time would insure agricultural industry.

3. Non-profits of all types have for-profit affiliates that support the parent organization. It is a prudent business action.

4. One issue was about the language concerning repeal of the Voting Rights Act. The language about the Voting Rights Act was an issue to do with rural legislative representation, not a question of who should vote, and not based on racism.

5. The current policy book also states: "We support carefully written legislation to prohibit the use of federal funds by any institution or agency that discriminates against a person due to sex, race, religion, national origin or handicapped status." That is not the statement of a racist organization.

6. Another issue concerned intolerance of homosexuals. The fact is delegates at the national level believed that homosexuals should not be given special rights or privileges, and the policy book states it is believed a married couple should be male and female. We are far from the only group with that belief.

7. If the question is raised that the above issue, or other issues, are not connected to agriculture, a response is they are connected to "America’s unparalleled progress based on freedom and dignity of the individual, sustained by basic moral and religious concepts." (Quotation from policy book). They may need respectfully reminded it’s still a free country.

8. There may be a question of membership numbers, in that our membership numbers are much higher than the number of farmers and ranchers in Kansas or the U.S. That’s right, we never said our total membership was made up of farmers and ranchers only. We can say in Kansas that nearly eight out of ten farmers and ranchers in the state are Farm Bureau members, and we’re proud of that.

9. As far as supporting the family farmer, the Farm Bureau long-term record is crystal clear. Tax issues, Use-Value appraisal, this year’s work on AMTA payments and support for producers, constant work on trade issues, support for ethanol, the fight against over-regulation and non-

science based environmental policy, protection from damaging court cases involving agriculture and family farmers, noxious weed laws, preserving farmers flexibility in seed laws, support for research to reduce input costs, etc., etc., etc. (You may add to the list)

10. At this critical time in agriculture, Farm Bureau’s voice is needed now more than ever. Farm Bureau was formed by farmers and ranchers more than 80 years ago to accomplish together what they could not do alone. Kansas farm Bureau is led by a Board of Directors made up of farmers and ranchers. Farmer and rancher members from all 105 Kansas counties, just as they did 80+ years ago, initiate and develop policy for the organization. That grass roots heritage is the core of the organization, and always will be.

11. It is unfortunate this whole situation had to come up. Several people are hurting in farm country, and political opportunities including labor unions, environmentalists, and some legislators, are using them to further their agenda with the help of 60 Minutes. Farm Bureau is happy to share its record of supporting agriculture and the family farmer any time.

12. Finally, we are surprised Mike Wallace of 60 Minutes didn’t do more research to achieve balance in the story. Had he done so he would have learned many of the things Farm Bureau does not only for farmers and ranchers, but also in youth programs, safety programs, and many other projects to benefit the general public. It is a shame when a once respected news program joins the ranks of pure sensationalism. We didn’t realize they needed ratings that badly.

13. We caution you that AFBF and KFB are preparing for the worst when this story airs. We are not, however, looking to make the issue public from our perspective. In other words, it is not prudent to raise unnecessary red flags by going public prior to the story. In the same vein it will not be productive to raise unnecessary red flags by a major, massive response when the story airs, however, that will be determined when the time comes. The fact is if the story does raise the interest of regional and local media, we’ll be contacted. That’s what each of us needs to be prepared for. There is a very slight possibility that if 60 Minutes continues to research the story enough to find some balance, they may find it may not be in the best interest to run it, but don’t hold your breath. Controversy can make ratings.