Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

Obama's agriculture policies are great

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:29 AM
Original message
Obama's agriculture policies are great
Edited on Fri Feb-08-08 02:30 AM by dmesg
Obama will limit farm subsidy payouts to $250,000 per farm, and tighten loopholes that allow Monsanto and ADM to subdivide their huge sharecropper empires into hundreds of paper companies to rake in taxpayer money. He wants farm relief to help keep family farms sustainable, not to keep Monsanto profits rising.

He will strengthen pollution standards on large megafarms so that they don't keep dumping their toxic sludge into our waterways.

He will push through a packer ban so that meat packers no longer own the livestock and treat herders like sharecroppers.

He will immediately and strongly implement country of origin labeling on foodstuffs.

He has an investment program to strengthen regional food systems and organic farms, and a crop insurance modification to end discrimination against organic farmers.

He will implement a recruitment and education program to help more young people learn to farm, as well as tax incentives to help new farmers start their first farm.

Obama: he's got it right about agriculture.

(And yes, I am going to keep posting stuff like this until the "all style no substance" BS disappears from GD-P)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:30 AM
Response to Original message
1. A much overlooked and very problematic area
Out of curiosity, do you know what he considers "a farm"?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:32 AM
Response to Reply #1
3. I don't have that on the top of my head, but I think 20 non-fallow acres
I don't know that he wants to change the current legal definition, which I think is 20 non-fallow acres. I'll see if I can find out and post back.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:35 AM
Response to Reply #1
5. My bad, no acreage limit
Damn, greplaw is a cool site...

A farm is any private land used for the primary purpose of obtaining in profit in money by raising, harvesting, and selling of crops or by the feeding, breeding, management, and sale of, or the produce of, livestock, poultry, fur-bearing mammals or honeybees.

That is apparently a 50-state uniform code, which is then applied to Federal definitions as well. Any lawyer please correct me.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:37 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. The question remains, then, of how many "farms"
a person or corporation can hold.

Acreage limitations on Federal water were upheld by the SCOTUS in 1968; it's somewhere around 9000 for a married couple iirc.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:53 AM
Response to Reply #6
10. As far as the actual implementation of tightening the loopholes, I'm not enough of a lawyer to know
Though I might be able to find a whitepaper. He does, at least, recognize it as a problem and specifically mentions it as something he wants to fix.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 09:21 AM
Response to Reply #10
24. In this Congress Obama chose to not vote on the farm bill - in 2006 he supported corps in
Edited on Fri Feb-08-08 09:22 AM by papau
their fight to keep their massive welfare subsidies.

In fact, in 2006, Obama supported legislation that would have reversed $2 billion in cuts for U.S. Department of Agriculture programs and supported legislation providing full funding for agricultural programs that were authorized by Congress in the 2002 Farm Bill. - meaning he fought against cutting the massive welfare checks to corporate farms.

No farm provision sponsored by Obama has ever passed the Senate

On edit: (sorry -I just noticed you replied to an earlier post that is identical)
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Radical Activist Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:31 AM
Response to Original message
2. But that lacks substance.
Because, as we all know, if someone is too lazy to look at a candidates website, listen to his interviews, or read his book then it must be the candidates fault for lacking substance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
crimsonblue Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:55 AM
Response to Reply #2
11. I couldn't agree more.
It pisses me off when the media touts that Obama is all rhetoric and no substance. A simple look at his website clearly details specific plans on every issue that, in my own observation, exceed Hillary's in regards to specification. Obama has ideas on how to fix the economy and stop the trend of the middle and lower classes getting screwed over..... if only people looked at it...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:23 AM
Response to Reply #11
15. When has the media ever touted that?
:eyes:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:30 AM
Response to Reply #15
16. Err.. I've heard it from about half the Sunday morning talking heads
I'm noticing both sides are growing selective ears; I don't remotely exclude myself.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:31 AM
Response to Reply #16
17. I have never heard it. - seriously. But I am glad that the issue is finally out of the bag.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:32 AM
Response to Reply #17
18. So, anyways, what do you think of his agriculture policies?
And where is a good place to find Senator Clinton's?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:37 AM
Response to Reply #18
20. Obama's agriculture policies are good. I would give them a B+. John Edwards'
Edited on Fri Feb-08-08 03:37 AM by jlake
were considerably better. I would give his an A
Hillary's can be found on her website. I would rate them a B
It is an important issue, but definitely not high on my priority list.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:39 AM
Response to Reply #20
21. Definitely with you on Edwards
He had the best farm plan, bar none. And it's really only because of him that our two picked up the packer ban.

Actually I really like Clinton's commodity purchase ideas -- hopefully Obama will run with that idea also.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 11:56 AM
Response to Reply #20
25. It's funny to me how people rate ag a low priority,
yet it's one of the few things that we all have in common--we all eat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
jlake Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 12:46 PM
Response to Reply #25
26. It's not up there with civil rights, the economy, foreign policy, healthcare or eductation.
Edited on Fri Feb-08-08 12:47 PM by jlake
The plans are mostly about government subsidies - not food - it is mostly for corn for ethanol and corn syrup.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 12:51 PM
Response to Reply #26
27. It will be someday soon. And it's one of the biggest
environmental issues.

As for the rest:

Healthcare can fuck itself for now--I'd rather die than sign up with an insurance company, literally.

I really haven't seen an education plan from either candidate, they both mouth empty anti-NCLB talking points, but what an ESEA reauthorization under each of them would actually look like remains to be seen.

I don't think the president has much control over the economy, which I don't have a lot of stake in anyway; you can only hope a non-free-market-ideologue is in charge when the shit really hits the fan.

Civil rights: neither candidate supports drug decriminalization so neither of them can talk to me about civil rights.

I'd say healthy food that doesn't kill rivers and oceans is about the best thing I can expect out of these candidates.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 12:52 PM
Response to Reply #27
28. Education thread is on its way tonight
I intend to keep these going...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 12:54 PM
Original message
Drug policy thread coming too
I think you just gave me the two Obama policy threads I'm going to post tonight.

You're right, unfortunately, that Obama has backed down from full decriminalization of marijuana, and has never advocated decriminalization in general. Still, maybe you'll like what he does propose, if we can't have anything better...
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 12:53 PM
Response to Reply #26
29. It is for me
But I don't expect everybody to be on board with that. Though I think few things are more important than making sure people can eat.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:34 AM
Response to Reply #17
19. Ah, found it on her site
Pretty good, too. I like the commodity payment program reforms.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FlyingTiger Donating Member (340 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:33 AM
Response to Original message
4. What? I thought he just planned to miracle everything to perfection with gobs of Hope and Change.
You mean to tell me he's actually thought about PLANS?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:38 AM
Response to Reply #4
7. All cult leaders have secret dastardly Plans, didn't you know?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
papau Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:44 AM
Response to Original message
8. In this Congress Obama chose to not vote on the farm bill - in 2006 he supported corps in
their fight to keep their massive welfare subsidies.

In fact, in 2006, Obama supported legislation that would have reversed $2 billion in cuts for U.S. Department of Agriculture programs and supported legislation providing full funding for agricultural programs that were authorized by Congress in the 2002 Farm Bill. - meaning he fought against cutting the massive welfare checks to corporate farms.

No farm provision sponsored by Obama has ever passed the Senate
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:52 AM
Response to Reply #8
9. Yeah, I disagree with his 2006 vote
I never said the guy walks on water. But his plan is nearly as good as Edwards' was.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:59 AM
Response to Original message
12. That is a good farm program
I hadn't read it, it's got excellent proposals to it. I'm glad he's committed to country of origin labelling and helping organic farms. Those are the things family farms need.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Recursion Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:07 AM
Response to Reply #12
13. I particularly support the packer ban
Edwards' support for the packer ban was what got me interested in him back in '04. I'm really really glad to see Obama is running with it.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
sandnsea Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:18 AM
Response to Reply #13
14. I know that's big in the midwest and east
I don't think it's much of a problem here in Oregon, that I know of. We don't raise animals here too much. We're the grass capital of the US, lol, both kinds I think! Anyway, we have a lot of organic family farmers and those are the proposals that would most help them so it looks like he's considered the whole country.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
caligirl Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:54 AM
Response to Original message
22. Bookmarked.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
YankeyMCC Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 06:32 AM
Response to Original message
23. This is what prompted me to vote for him in my state primary
I'm really torn between Obama and Clinton, his mention of agriculture in his published policy plans is the main reason I went with him this last Tuesday.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Kitty Herder Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 12:54 PM
Response to Original message
30. Thanks for posting this. nt
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
L0oniX Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 01:10 PM
Response to Original message
31. When we run out of gas, agriculture, water and conservation will be the top priority.
It really should be the top priority right now, before the shit hits the fan.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:05 PM
Response to Reply #31
32. See #26 for the knee-jerk Iron Age Democrat response...
It seems that some people don't think something is important unless it has been marketed to them as important.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Armstead Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 02:07 PM
Response to Original message
33. HOW DARE YOU!!!!!!
You've violated the "Issue Free Zone" here.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 03:30 PM
Response to Reply #33
34. Yeah, the bastard!
That's why I'm going to keep kicking his thread from here to tomorrow morning!
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jed Dilligan Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Fri Feb-08-08 07:23 PM
Response to Original message
35. A kick for all the people who say Obama's got no policies.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Tue Apr 23rd 2024, 04:13 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion: Presidential (Through Nov 2009) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC