Environmental Defense Warns About Conservation Spending

In a statement published on Tuesday, Environmental Defense said that the latest plan being put before the House of Representatives' Agricultural Committee does not do enough to meet the needs of most farmers or the environment.

In the proposal, USDA spending on conservation measures would only increase by $3 billion over the next five years. Iowa Democratic Senator Tom Harkin and the Bush Administration have given estimates on conservation spending needs that greatly surpass that amount.

Environmental Defense says that its analysis shows numerous farmers and ranchers whose representatives are sitting in Congress would benefit significantly more if Congress drastically reduced farm subsidies and rewarded environmental stewardship instead of merely voting "the status quo".

The call for reductions in U.S. government farm subsidies does not begin or end with this matter. Foreign nations including Canada have repeatedly said that the United States is in violation of its World Trade Organization cap on farm subsidizing and that American farmers are so heavily subsidized that their exports distort the world market and make competition almost impossible, especially for smaller farmers in developing nations in places like South American and Africa, who have plenty of valuable crops to sell in the global marketplace if only they could get fair prices for them.

Only the European Union more heavily subsidizes farmers, and it, too, has been called upon to reduce the amount of essentially free money that it gives away to farm and ranch owners to allow fair market principles to flourish.

A study published by the Cato Institute in February of 2006 gave an analysis of what the benefits would be if the U.S. government killed all farm subsidizing.

According to study authors Daniel Griswold, Stephen Slivinski, and Christopher Preble, there would be lower food prices for American families, as many food products sold on the world market would go for less than what Americans have to pay for them because of having to finance the subsidies.