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

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

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

GREEN GrassRoots Environmental Effectiveness Network is a project of Defenders of Wildlife designed to serve grassroots wildlife and wilderness advocates. GREEN policy positions do not necessarily represent those of Defenders of Wildlife.

If you would like to subscribe to this list, send a reply to sjohnson@albq.defenders.org

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

FARM BUREAU LEADERSHIP: UNDER THE CORPORATE THUMB

For the last two weeks, all across America, Farm Bureau’s have been holding their annual state conventions. Reports have been filtering in that farmer members in many regions are questioning their leaderships involvement with corporate agribusiness. Many allege leadership is in bed with global corporations at the expense of the family farmer and the environment. They claim Farm Bureau policies are not followed and that Farm Bureau state and national lobbyists advance positions crippling farmer members. In several state Farm Bureau’s, a reported "policy-turmoil" with members demanding to know why Farm Bureau aligns itself with factory animal farms, trade liberalization, market control and corporate concentration.

MEMBERS WANT ANSWERS

It was the impeccable American wit, Mark Twain who once said, "Truth is a precious commodity, perhaps that is why most people are so economical in its use." As Farm Bureau farmer members begin demanding accountability, it remains to be seen how much of Twain’s precious commodity Farm Bureau leadership is willing to employ.

At the Mississippi State Farm Bureau convention last week, their members passed a unanimous resolution "rebuking" Farm Bureau national leadership for opposing Senator Wellstone’s merger moratorium. They cited conflict of interests and said it appears national leadership is "in bed with agribusiness". While this resolution passed the state, no response has been issued from the American Farm Bureau headquarters in Park Ridge, Illinois.

At the Illinois state Farm Bureau several resolutions were passed including a resolution opposing packer ownership of livestock and supporting a change to amend Co-op laws requiring farmer dividends be returned to farmers when requested. They also passed a resolution opposing continued mergers and acquisitions.

As one farmer, who chose not to be named said, "This is groundbreaking stuff for Farm Bureau - now we have to hold their feet to the fire."

In Iowa it was reported the state Farm Bureau’s policy positions were in complete disarray. Similar stories have surfaced of growing member dissatisfaction in Wisconsin.

In Kansas, another state bitterly divided over the issue of the factory animal farms, state Farm Bureau delegates reportedly left the state convention up in arms at the way the state president is chosen. The recent president, Gary Hall, was "let go" by the state board of directors. At the state convention, instead of letting delegates vote on who the new president would be, the state board of directors blocked a floor vote and installed a new president of their choosing.

Jim Suber reporting in the Topeka Capital-Journal in an article entitled "Kansas Farm Bureau in Trouble" said about the affair.

"Many are asking if this was a conspiracy carried off in covert concert to avoid traditional Kansas Farm Bureau ways to change leaders. It is an honest question given many facts of timing, as well as extreme secrecy in the case." It is reported that county delegates are investigating a way to change the by-laws. That may be harder than some members realize.

FARM BUREAU KICKS OUT A COUNTY

While the AFBF proudly announces their outfit is a true GrassRoots democracy - their history speaks louder than their words. In his book, "Dollar Harvest - an expose of the Farm Bureau" author Sandy Berger documents examples of Farm Bureau’s lack of Democracy saying, "This organization is largely controlled from the top. It’s leadership is self perpetuating, and its policy, although nursed through an elaborate procedural labyrinth, is rarely permitted to wander very far afield."

One example Berger quotes is the "Webster" county Farm Bureau.

This Nebraska county attempted to get some resolutions passed at the state level - but got blocked. So they decided to send their own representatives to Washington to talk with law makers.

Nebraska Farm Bureau got so upset they "rescinded" Webster County’s charter. In a letter describing the "grounds for expulsion" the Nebraska State FB said Webster County "has accused the Nebraska Farm Bureau Federation of preventing Farm Bureau members from exercising their freedom of speech...."

In discussing the affair, then Webster county president Alfred Schutte said, "When you vote on the county level everything looks good. It usually is. From there on, your votes are all delegated to someone else, someone who is brainwashed by state and national officials, someone whose vote you can never check on to see if he represents you."

Berger cites numerous other case histories where Farm Bureau members who dared to buck the system were overtly, and less overtly, removed from power.

AFBF LOBBIES AGAINST MERGER MORATORIUM

The concern about who Farm Bureau leadership is representing reached a peak three weeks ago when word got out that AFBF had successfully lobbied to defeat Senator Paul Wellstone’s proposed merger-moratorium legislation. This legislation was designed, in part, to halt mergers until their effects on family and independent producers could be studied. But instead of lobbying on behalf of the family farmer the Farm Bureau’s Washington DC lobbyists were busy delivering letters to congress urging them to oppose the bill. The Farm Bureau triumphed; but for whom? Farm Bureau members are demanding answers.

Another recent example of Farm Bureau’s "corporate-support" is the current packer ownership bill before congress. This legislation is intended to slow "vertical-integration" and keep markets free and unrestricted. Farm Bureau opposes this legislation. Why?

Farm Bureau positions on these bills is confirming what some farmer members had long suspected; Farm Bureau leadership supports family and independent farmers only when those efforts also benefit big Ag. When those interest conflict - as for example, in the setting of commodities prices? Well, that’s appears to be a different story. Numerous other examples abound. The issue of factory animal farms is another illustration.

In every state where the factory animal industry blights the landscape, it has been the well-paid efforts of clever state Farm Bureau lobbyists who have ushered in factory animal farms, even when family farmers have made it clear they are not welcome. In each and every state it has been Farm Bureau’s powerful state lobby that convinced politicians these were good for agriculture.

For years, many have struggled trying to understand why Farm Bureau, supposedly the champion of the family farmer, worked so diligently against the interests of the family farm. Finally, corporate connections were uncovered and it was discovered that Farm Bureau owns 16,000 shares of stock in Premium Standard Farms; one of the worst bad-neighbor hog factory outfits around.

Loyal farm bureau members were shocked.

While it may seem unethical for a "non-profit" to work against its members on the behalf of "for-profit" corporations, this clearly seems to be the situation. One does not have to look any further than the portfolios of Farm Bureau stock "holdings’ to draw a direct connection to corporate agribusiness. In fact, the stock portfolios for Farm Bureau’s immense, nationwide "combine" of insurance (and re-insurance) companies reads like a who’s-who of agribusiness giants; Archer-Daniels Midland, ConAgra, Monsanto, Phillip-Morris, Dupont, and Novartis, to name a few.

It has been asked: Can Farm Bureau serve two masters - their farmer members and their corporate stockholders? In these days of market concentration and corporate abuse of privilege, this conflict seems increasingly impossible to resolve.

In fact, Berger claims the Farm Bureau’s highly-touted "grass roots" style is less like democracy and more like distillation. A two-phase, watered-down system where only the most loyal Farm Bureau members are hand-picked to be wined-and-dined as voters at the state and national election.

UNREST CONTINUES

With all the unrest currently underway at various state farm bureaus, it remains to be seen what changes will occur at the national policy level. Equally important, it remains to be seen which policies are actually adhered to at the national lobbying level.

With massive over-supply of farm commodities guaranteed to keep market prices down for years to come, it would be unjust for Farm Bureau leaders to orchestrate a policy "charade" where resolutions are passed only to placate farmers and then put on the shelf.

The situation is dire in rural America. The plight of the family farm is growing worse, and the corporate takeover of agriculture is escalating. It’s clearly time for some of Mark Twain’s precious commodity to shine on who really advances domestic farm policy in America.

Sunlight is said to be the best of disinfectants.

-- Louis Brandeis

(From the inside cover of "Dollar Harvest - an expose of the Farm Bureau)