Market Farming

["Rick Williams" <mrfarm AT frontiernet.net>]

RDH wrote:
> The general population vote the legislators into office based on media and
> hear say information.  I think that many farmers may actually pay more
> attention to who they vote for than the average citizen.

You will find that there are typically the mainstream voters who are either
Democrat or Republican and they each make up close to 1/3 each. The main
audience that the parties need to sway are those who do not have strong
political views. It is that 1/3 who typically decide the elections. In our
area which is fairly depressed historically the vote is heavily slanted
toward the Republican party. But other farming communities may be slanted
toward the Democrats.

> However many
> farmers are influenced by corporate supporters such as Farm Bureau who
> pretends to represent farmers in Washington.

This is a thinly disguished attack on the majority of farmers in the U.S.
Whether you like it or not the American Farm Bureau, with its State and
local (typically county) Farm Bureau Cooperatives represents the great
majority of farmers in the United States.  You may not like it that farmers
vote the way they do, and I sure don't agree with some FB resolutions or
policy. But that really is what the majority of farmers who provide any
input have supported.

The FB does take a size neutral position on farm issues. Unlike the vicious
attacks that I see portrayed here toward fellow farmers, they NEVER do this.
Now I am the first to give them a hard time that size neutral can benefit
the larger farmers due to economies of scale. But morally, it is the fairest
and for sure the most democratic position they can take. It would be highly
immoral and divisive if the American Farm Bureau Federation took the
position that they would only support large farms or similarly that they
would only support small farms. They support all farmers as best they can.
Wisconsin, does, for example, disagree on dairy policy with the national
organization, and it is clearly in writing that we do. Very open and on the
table for everyone to see.

Everything starts at the local level. It would be hard to imagine how you
could structure an organization as large as it is in a more democratic
manner. Each individual farmer has the absolute right to make a proposed
resolution at the annual meeting. And we had a few this year I might add. If
the majority approves of the resolution, it is county policy. Period. It
then goes to the state resolutions board for approval. EVEN IF THEY TURN IT
DOWN, you again have the right to bring it back again for consideration by
the entire state delegation.

Tell me how you can improve upon that?

So please quite attacking the farmers of America. Most farmers who make a
living farming are in fact members of the organization and most do accept
most of the resolutions and the policy that results. The Farm Bureau, just
like any other organization that represents a special interest, and we
farmers are no exception, is going to base its policies on the members
wishes. If they do not, they are in for some big shakeups. Look what
happened in a very undemocratic organization, namely the AARP, a decade or
two ago, when the leadership lobbied for a program that the members
disapproved of to the point of having congress repeal the law.

> After election, the constituents sit in the coffee shop and complain, but
> seldom put pen to paper and send their elected official a letter voicing
> their concerns.  Legislators will listen to individual concerns.  That is
> part of their job.

The people like me who show up to the meetings are the ones who decide for
the rest of the folks who do not show up. It is always that way in a
democratic system.

> Therefore as many have said here in the past, education (for both consumer
> and producer) seems to be our strongest option in achieving real
> solutions.
> Thoughts?

No question about it.

Sincerely,

Rick Williams
Misty Ridge Farm
Dairy heifers and dairy beef graziers
Viroqua, WI

www.mistyridgefarm.com