Podcast Summary
USDA's shift towards corporate agriculture: The USDA, originally created to protect small farmers, has shifted its focus towards supporting large corporations, leading to corruption and financial harm for small farmers.
The USDA, which was created to protect and support small farmers, has shifted its focus towards representing and subjugating small farmers in favor of large corporations. Dustin Kittle, a lawyer and farmer's son, shares his personal experience of watching corporate agriculture encroach on family farms and how he turned to law to make a difference. He's dedicated his career to representing small farmers against Fortune 500 companies and even the USDA itself. The issue dates back to 2002 when business deals were made between politicians and corporate agriculture, and by 2014, the USDA had given billions of dollars to rural utility companies under the Connect America program, which Dustin discovered was riddled with corruption. Despite the challenges, Dustin continues to fight for small farmers and expose corruption in the agricultural industry.
Government corruption in rural programs: During the discussed time period, instances of corruption and lack of oversight led to misrepresentations in rural broadband program and manipulation in agricultural debt management at the USDA and Farm Credit Administration, respectively. Proper oversight and accountability are crucial to prevent such actions and protect individuals from being taken advantage of.
During the discussed time period, there were instances of corruption and lack of oversight in government programs, specifically at the USDA level and with the Farm Credit Administration. In the USDA's rural broadband program, service providers were misrepresenting their ability to provide high-speed internet to customers and continued to receive funding for these false claims. Additionally, during the Farm Credit Administration's management of agricultural debt, there were reports of manipulation and theft of farms from farmers who were making all their payments. The government hired large law firms to negotiate with these farmers, leading to potential coercion and the signing of release of claims and confidentiality agreements. These actions highlight the importance of proper oversight and accountability in government programs to prevent corruption and protect individuals and families from being taken advantage of.
Farm credit institutions business model shift: Farm credit institutions moved away from saving family farms, began providing large loans to agribusiness corporations, silenced farmers through confidentiality agreements, colluded with USDA to force farmers into defaulting, and consolidated power in the hands of large corporations, resulting in the loss of many family farms
Farm credit institutions have shifted their business model in the late 2000s, moving away from their original mission of saving family farms. Instead, they began providing large loans to agribusiness corporations, such as JBS, Tyson, and Smithfield. This change came with the implementation of confidentiality agreements, which silenced farmers and prevented them from speaking out against the practices. These corporations, which have historically put small farmers out of business, then colluded with USDA to force farmers into defaulting on their loans. Farmers, who were once the priority, have become commodities in this system, with their farms being taken over and new loans given out to replace them. Additionally, farm credit institutions hold a percentage of the growers' checks from corporations like Tyson as extra security through London assignment agreements. This complex web of relationships has resulted in the loss of many family farms and the consolidation of power in the hands of large agribusiness corporations.
Farm Credit System Failure: Farmers in Alabama lost their funds when Farm Credit institution came close to failing, leaving them to pay loans without the funds, and with no recourse or private right of action to hold the institution accountable.
Farmers in Alabama, who had their funds held by Alabama Farm Credit, have seen those funds disappear, leaving them to make their payments while the money is being applied to the end of their loans. This situation arose due to the Farm Credit institution coming close to failing, and being unable to return the funds to the farmers when they stopped accepting deposits. The Farm Credit Administration, which is supposed to oversee these institutions, has not ruled in favor of a borrower since 1987. The situation left farmers with no recourse, and no private right of action to hold the institution accountable. Tom Vilsack, who was on the Farm Credit Board and later became the USDA Secretary, started "Rural Americans for Obama" while in that position, and was later put in the USDA. This raises concerns about the potential for conflicts of interest and the appearance of favoritism within the Farm Credit system.
Appointment of Conflicted Chairman: During the Obama administration, a businessman with ties to USDA and Farm Credit Administration was appointed as the chairman of the Farm Credit Administration, which raised concerns due to potential conflicts of interest. Later, under the Trump administration, his company made a controversial carbon capture deal, which was criticized for being a 'boondoggle' and potentially collusive.
During the Obama administration, Tom Sager, who had business ties with the Farm Credit Administration and the USDA, was appointed as the chairman of the Farm Credit Administration, despite it being considered improper by the Congressional Research Service. Later, under the Trump administration, Sager's company, Redfield Energy, made a deal to use carbon capture technology in an ethanol plant, which was later criticized for being a "boondoggle" that does nothing for the environment and instead subsidizes bad behavior. Sager's company partnered with Summit to bury the carbon in pipelines, raising concerns of collusion due to Sager's previous roles. The pipelines, which are susceptible to leaks, are being built on thousands of acres of farmland and are intended to extend the lifetime of declining oil fields, resulting in more carbon emissions. The environmental impact of these projects is questionable, as the process of converting carbon into a liquid form is energy-intensive and the buried carbon has a history of leaking, causing harm to people and the environment.
US subsidies for harmful projects: The US government has provided approximately $179 billion in subsidies to large corporations and pipeline owners for environmentally harmful projects, including the Dakota Access Pipeline, which requires significant water resources and could worsen the climate crisis, and cobalt mines in Idaho that take water from farmers during the prime crop season, impacting food production.
The largest players in the US, including pipeline owners like Bruce Rattsetter and corporations like BlackRock, have received substantial subsidies, totaling approximately $179 billion, for projects that are environmentally harmful and contribute to the climate crisis. One such project is the Dakota Access Pipeline, which requires vast amounts of water for cooling and could potentially exacerbate the climate crisis. Furthermore, related issues include cobalt mines in Idaho, which have received federal funding and are taking water from farmers during the prime crop season, impacting food production. The ultimate conflict lies between family farms and corporate agriculture. The cobalt mine at the center of this issue, which received Department of Defense funding, should have closed due to financial struggles but instead received federal funding under the pretense of national security. These environmental and water issues highlight the potential for conflicts of interest and the need for greater transparency and accountability in government funding and corporate practices.
Agriculture policy, Small farmers: The USDA's focus on large agricultural producers and subsidization of their operations at the expense of small farmers has led to concerns over environmental issues, foreign influence, and the marginalization of quality food production. There's a need for a national voice advocating for small farmers and a reshaping of agricultural policy to prioritize sustainability and quality food production.
The agricultural industry, particularly in the United States, has undergone significant changes over the decades, with a shift towards corporate agriculture and the marginalization of small family farms. This trend has led to concerns over environmental issues, such as water contamination from mining operations, and the prioritization of commodity production over quality food. Moreover, foreign influence in American agriculture, particularly from China, is a growing concern. The USDA's focus on large agricultural producers and the subsidization of their operations at the expense of small farmers is a quiet sabotage of the family farming sector. The consequences of this trend extend beyond the farming community, impacting food supply and quality, and the environment. To address these issues, there is a need for a national voice advocating for small farmers and a reshaping of the agricultural policy to prioritize quality food production and environmental sustainability. The exact extent of foreign ownership of American farmland is difficult to determine, but recent reports suggest a significant increase in recent years, highlighting the need for increased transparency and regulation in this area.
Foreign influence on Farm Credit System: Despite President Trump's efforts and the speaker's attempts to address foreign influence in the Farm Credit System, the issue persisted due to political blockades and understaffing, leaving farmers without adequate support.
The Farm Credit System, an entity established to support American farmers, has been facing issues of foreign influence and political blockades, preventing it from providing adequate assistance to farmers. The speaker's investigation revealed a significant number of foreign interests on the system's stockholder list, with dealings dating back to 1997. Despite President Trump's promises to "drain the swamp," a nominee with expertise in compliance and private banking was blocked from confirmation for two years, leaving the foreign credit board understaffed. This situation forced the speaker to file a lawsuit against President Biden to make the necessary appointments. The speaker's career as a lawyer involved litigating against big agricultural interests, with the Farm Bureau generally supporting these corporations over farmers. The Farmers Union, however, has been an ally in these fights. Despite the National Farm Bureau's dominance and significant lobbying power, the Farmers Union holds some influence, particularly in the Midwest.
Family Farms: Family farms are crucial for food supply and environmental sustainability, but their voices are being silenced by corporate interests, putting their existence at risk.
The current agricultural system, with organizations like Farm Bureau representing corporate interests, is compromising the voice and needs of family farmers. This situation is detrimental to the farmers, the environment, and ultimately, the food supply and water resources for society. Dustin Kittle, a farmer and activist, is advocating for support to strengthen the independent voice of family farmers and save farmland. The Save Our Farms campaign is one way people can get involved. The loss of family farms could lead to vertical integration and monopolistic control over food prices and quality. The preservation of family farms is not only important for farmers but also for the long-term sustainability of the food supply and the environment.