Paula Crossfield

Paula Crossfield

Posted: November 3, 2009 08:10 AM

The Obama Administration and Food, Year One

digg Share this on Facebook Huffpost - stumble reddit del.ico.us RSS
What's Your Reaction?

A year after America voted for the change-agent they saw in Barack Obama, advocates hoping for deep improvements in our food system can point to only a few successes, while other policies that could lead to food insecurity are brewing in back rooms.

Nearly two years ago, candidate Obama said the following in a speech at the Iowa Farmer's Union:

We'll tell ConAgra that it's not the Department of Agribusiness. It's the Department of Agriculture. We're going to put the people's interests ahead of the special interests.

Then, less than two weeks before the election, Obama told Joe Klein at TIME:
I was just reading an article in the New York Times by Michael Pollen [sic] about food and the fact that our entire agricultural system is built on cheap oil. As a consequence, our agriculture sector actually is contributing more greenhouse gases than our transportation sector. And in the mean time, it's creating monocultures that are vulnerable to national security threats, are now vulnerable to sky-high food prices or crashes in food prices, huge swings in commodity prices, and are partly responsible for the explosion in our healthcare costs because they're contributing to type 2 diabetes, stroke and heart disease, obesity, all the things that are driving our huge explosion in healthcare costs.

Sure these comments didn't go silently into the good night; Big Ag pitched a fit. But wow! Our president once used the word monoculture in a sentence. And he made the connection between health care and food. And threatened to take back the USDA. I belabor this point only because I would argue that Mr. Pollan's piece has become required reading, even a blueprint, for the movement - and has set the bar ever higher for what food system thinkers have come to expect from President Obama. But whether or not these ideas are still in the president's mind, with an economic crisis, the health care debate and two wars to distract him, we can't be sure. At one point, though, we know he got it.

Perhaps as a result of the public conversation about food taking hold, Michelle Obama planted a garden on the White House lawn and used it as a jumping off point for a conversation about food choices with children. And because the movement showed up and made itself heard through the Secretary of Agriculture selection process, in which Tom Vilsack was nominated, when it came time to choose a Deputy Secretary of Agriculture this administration listened and selected Kathleen Merrigan, a Tufts University professor who'd previously helped develop the organic standards. Vilsack and Merrigan have together launched Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food, an initiative designed to connect consumers to producers, a "start of a national conversation about the importance of understanding where your food comes from and how it gets to your plate." In addition, the Justice Department is currently reviewing the consolidation of agribusiness for potential monopolies, which could result in a re-structuring of control over meat, seeds, processing, and grocery sales. This could mean the opening up of suffocated markets to competition, and more choices for consumers and farmers.

However, with an ever-increasing amount of meat recalls and hundreds of thousands of Americans sickened by food-borne illnesses every year, we still don't have anyone running the USDA's Food Safety and Inspections Service (FSIS) - the body that is responsible for the safety of our eggs, meat and dairy products. Back in March, the President launched the Food Safety Working Group, but the group has not had an affect on how food -- and especially meat -- is processed and regulated. Meanwhile, last month President Obama declared the swine flu a national emergency, and while bailouts totaling $150 million have been doled out to hog operations for their losses this year, those operations are still not required to test their pigs for the H1N1 virus. No one seems to be willing to discuss the obvious: that these pigs, living mostly in Confined Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), are standing in their own potentially bacteria and virus-laden shit, and are being given eight times the antibiotics of the average human, scientifically proven to lead to resistance. This means more virulent sicknesses could be getting passed on to farm-workers, their families, and the public.

Some have argued that there is an empty seat at FSIS because the Obama administration had trouble finding a non-lobbyist for the position who simultaneously wouldn't upset the meat lobby. Surprisingly, though, Obama recently nominated a pesticide lobbyist, Islam Siddiqui, from CropLife America (the organization that wrote a letter chastising Michelle Obama for not using pesticides on the White House garden) to handle our agricultural trade interests abroad. He also nominated Roger Beachy, former director of Monsanto-funded research facility, the Danforth Plant Science Center, to head the newly branded research arm of the USDA, the National Institute of Food and Agriculture (NIFA). Beachy promised to give ever more money to public-private sector research collaborations (read: technology-focused), despite a broken funding system that already favors agribusiness while we actually need more research on how the current food system affects our health and the environment.

Indeed, our Blackberry-toting president is fond of technology, and he seems to believe that all of it is moving us in the right direction when it comes to food. In July, President Obama secured $25 billion in agricultural aid at the G8 in Italy, and has stated his interest in a second green revolution for Africa in an interview (the first one brought genetically modified seeds to India, and created chemical dependence and debt in its wake). If his team, led by Secretary of State Clinton, and including pro-biotechnology Nina Federoff and Rajiv Shah, is any indication, instead of focusing on localized education, markets and infrastructure in countries in need of food security, this money could be invested in shiny new technologies that are years from implementation, have yet to fulfill the promise of high yields, and that are overly dependent on irrigation (water) and chemical fertilizers (oil). He will most likely be speaking in Rome this month at the FAO Summit on Food Security, so there is still time to retool the focus.

Maybe candidate Obama spoke out on food issues with the greatest of intentions, but didn't realize the scale of the task at hand. But there are issues ripe for the taking, that Big Ag just can't credibly pitch a fit about. Like research - Without facilitating necessary research that looks at the results of years of chemical agriculture on the land, how can we expect our president to see just how our current food system is making us sick, and then acknowledge sustainable agriculture for what it is - human-scale operations, which build soil and focus on diversification? And school food - who could argue with increasing the rate spent per child by $1 in the upcoming Child Nutrition Act and building relationships between farms and schools without looking like a bully?

And though there may be backlash, we need a strong regulator at FSIS. The Fairbank Farm recall has already killed two people, so no matter what the industry wants, we need to protect eaters first.

Despite my harsh critique of Obama's first year in food system reform, one takeaway is that no matter the business on the President's preverbial plate, he can be engaged about the actual food on our collective plates. It might take a team of skilled community organizers to keep showing him the movement. But once convinced, President Obama and his team have proven they will act.

 

Follow Paula Crossfield on Twitter: www.twitter.com/civileater

 
Comments
4
Pending Comments
0
iPhone App Promo
Post Comment

Want to reply to a comment? Hint: Click "Reply" at the bottom of the comment; after being approved your comment will appear directly underneath the comment you replied to

View Comments:
- Billy Hell I'm a Fan of Billy Hell 44 fans permalink
photo

Obama's Pesticide-Pushing Nominee

Senior CropLife America (CLA), executive Dr "Isi" Siddiqui has been nominated for a key post: Chief Agricultural Negotiator for the office of the US Trade Representative (USTR).

If confirmed, Siddiqui will be responsible for, among other things, negotiating international agreements governing the use of pesticides.

CLA is the American branch of CropLife International, a powerful global lobby; its members include agriculture giants such as Dow AgroSciences, Monsanto, and DuPont. Siddiqui joined the CLA in 2001 as a registered lobbyist, and since 2003 has served as its vice president of science and regulatory affairs. In that position, he's played a critical role in setting CLA’s domestic and international agenda.

In 2005, the group participated in secret talks with the Environmental Protection Agency and the Office of Management and Budget on permitting pesticide testing on children. In 2006, CropLife America helped secure an exemption for American farmers from a worldwide ban on methyl bromide, an ozone-depleting pesticide. It has also actively worked to remove what it terms "trade irritants" on pesticides under NAFTA. In its 2008 annual report, CLA highlighted its "relentless" efforts to persuade negotiators to cut language "discriminatory to pesticides" from the 2008 Farm Bill. Meanwhile, its parent organization has fought to eliminate all tariffs on pesticides in World Trade Organization (WTO) trade negotiations.

http://www.commondreams.org/headline/2009/11/13-2

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 06:26 PM on 11/13/2009
photo

Ms. Crossfield you wrote a very good article and I could not agree with you more. President Obama was elected to office and given a mandate from the citizens of the United States who voted for him to do what he said he believed in and what Democrats stand for. President Obama still has to learn that he can not get things done when he tries to work with republicans because they do not want change in any way. Further more, even if it is a good idea, republicans will not support it because they never as a party support Democrats or act in any way in a bi-partisan manner. In order for President Obama to change big Ag and food issues in this country he will have to simply shove it down their throats!

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 07:09 PM on 11/04/2009
- Kenshin I'm a Fan of Kenshin 4 fans permalink

first, someone in progressive circles needs to look carefully at what the one campaign is advocating. they and other poverty advocates may be biting the bait of big agriculture when it comes to "feeding the world" and population overgrowth causing food potential food crisises etc. a lot of that are cherry-picked stats, and even the ones that are troubling, they are all being used as lobbying/a­dvertising efforts for bio-tech and big ag. .

a big jab would be to investigate many of those biggest ag processors and producer's workers violations. it's a sore spot when vegans talk to omnivores about how killing animals to eat is immoral, cuz there's no way to really bring that on board completely--but when the company is treating animals like crap, they're most likely also treating their workers, and their customers, like crap too.

all poultry processors are guilty of wage theft. we should prosecute them--it's a squeeze on them, the way bringing up MTR helps out the climate change movement. it's a sign that these businesses are not as profitable as they seem, they are propped up by govt subsidy.

key to that is re-engaging farmers directly into their own lobbying group. we used to have one, the last time that sweeping ag reforms went thru, but now the only groups that represent "farmers" are actually big ag producers. we should do that now, while small farmers are actually growing in number.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 04:09 PM on 11/04/2009
- mouselion I'm a Fan of mouselion 123 fans permalink
photo

Our food system is maddeningly tangled up into an unsolvable, knotted-up mess. To change the way things are would require a radical approach way beyond what Obama seems to be comfortable with on this set of issues.

Obama needs to be treating the Big Ag industry players the way he's treating the Health Insurance industry -- as the pariahs that they are. I fear that our economically and environmentally debilitating food system is going to be many, many years in the reforming.

    Reply    Favorite    Flag as abusive Posted 10:53 AM on 11/04/2009

 You must be logged in to comment. Log in  or connect with 

Connect