Market Farming

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

paul and barb wrote:
> Wrong. That website she sent does NOT "attack the majority of farmers in
> the U.S.", nor "disparage the majority of farmers" at all. It focuses on
> the questionable activities and priorities of the national FB organization
> and some states.

It does tend to focus on the FB, but to be fair, they also attack several
other groups such as the NCBA.

> The accusation is false on its face as anyone can see who
> looks through that website. It would be more helpful to address the
> evidence it presents instead of dismissing it as the enemy of farmers.

Let's take a look at some of the accusations and see how logical or not so
logical they are.

1. "Farm Bureau has collosal political clout in Congress" - well, this is
quite true. But this does not make the organziation automatically bad as is
constantly implied in the many articles that follow.

2. "bank headed by AFBF's president", again this is a cooperative owned by
... the farmer members. Why attack this?

3. Same thing with the insurance products owned by ... the farmer members.
Why attack this?

4. "fighting environmental initatives" ... there are some things that the
majority of farmers think is at best foolish and at worst dangerous to
farming that so-called environmentalists want. Should farmers accept all
environnmental groups wants and desires no matter?

Why is it wrong for farmers and ranchers to oppose some of these ideas? And
least you forget, the actual resolutions calling for these viewpoints are
clearly expressed by the members in the form of resolutions. Once those
resolutions proceed from the county level to the state level and then in
some cases to the national level ... the leaders are required to follow
through on these resolutions. What is wrong with this? It is NOT coming from
the leadership for the most part and comes from the grassroots farmers.

Do I personally agree with all resolutions? Of course not. It is unlikely
that any individual would. But in a democratic organziation that is the way
things are done. Do you folks oppose that concept? It seems so by the
statements that have been made here.

5. They go on and on about the fact that the elected leaders of some state
FB's are also the officers in the insurance companies and other cooperatives
that are owned by that State Farm Bureau. How can this possibly be a
negative thing? This is REQUIRED by the by laws of the organziations so that
farmers have actual control.

If you don't have the elected leaders of your organization controlling your
assets ... who do you folks think should be doing it? Lets hear some
response on this instead of the continuous innuendo.

6. The FB gives money to candidates.

This says to me that the view of this group is that farmers should not be
able to band together to give money to candidates selected by their
organization. Do other groups such as radical so-called environmental groups
criticize themselves for doing this? I hardly think so. Why is that? They
are not even democratic organizations in many cases. Whether you like it or
not the FB is.

> The biggest problem with the national FB is spending money lobbying in
> policy areas that are totally inrellevant to agriculture. No one denies
> this is going on. They can take any political positions they want to, but
> spending money on issues outside agriculture will keep them from getting a
> dime from me.

Again, you don't seem to understand that the FB has many, many positions
about numerous issues that are then added to the current policy and is
updated annually. Currently it is 25 pages long and covers things such as
taxation, transportation, marketing, dairy, livestock, farm finance, land
use, natural resources and the environment, energy, health and safety,
labor, education, and general government.

It is not one dimensional as some special interest groups are that only form
for one reason. It is a multi-faceted group. Because it is democratic, you
do not have to support the organization if you truly do not believe in what
they stand for.

The main purpose of the FB is "an independent, non-governmental, voluntary
organization of farm and ranch families united for the purpose of increasing
net farm income by analyzing their problems and formulating action to
achieve educational improvement, economic opportunity, and social
advancement and thereby, to promote the national well-being. Farm Bureau is
local, county, state, national and international in its scope and influence
and is non-partisan, non-sectarian, and non-secret in character. Farm Bureau
is the voice of agriculture at all levels.

If you can not support this concept, then you ought not be involved. It is
clear that there are many here who do not support such views since they do
not support agriculture at all levels and should not be in a big tent
organization such as FB.

Sincerely,

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

www.mistyridgefarm.com