OPINION: Farm Bill: Principled Protectionism?

By Henry J. Waters III, Columbia Daily Tribune, Mo.

Aug. 4–The U.S. House of Representatives recently passed a new “compromise” farm bill, the main thrust of which is to continue subsidies and protection for American producers. It is a compromise in the sense it could have provided even more money to the largest agricultural businesses, but its political momentum continues unabated: It satisfies powerful farm interests who provide strong support for farm-state politicians, and it is intended to protect certain farm segments, such as cotton and sugar, otherwise unable to compete with foreign producers.

Subsidies are provided even to producers who can compete, allowing a certain number of marginal producers to stay in business and tending to lower the costs of domestically produced commodities, but for free-market promoters the tradeoff is negative.

The most persuasive economic studies I see find overall benefit from free trade. Obviously, it helps all consumers who enjoy lower prices from international competition. Certain uncompetitive segments in certain countries will suffer, but so it is every time a better, cheaper product or service is available in the marketplace.

To argue free trade would make us vulnerable to foreign suppliers of cotton and sugar is to assume those producers, if unrestrained by U.S. protectionist policies, would not sell to the American market. The only way to make domestic sugar competitive is for government to extract money from U.S. taxpayers to subsidize and protect domestic growers. This is fine for domestic growers, but who else benefits?

Most American farmers are competent enough to survive and thrive in a less regulated market that, harnessing the world’s best producers, would produce plenty of food and fiber at the best prices.

Under the current system, perpetuated in the current farm bill, no producer, no matter how able, can survive without government subsidies. All are dependent on politicians, and I daresay the politicians like it that way. They’re able to pose as saviors of American agriculture and reap the support of their economic vassals, who in their bones would rather not have to come begging.

Farm subsidies keep domestic production artificially high, maintaining a class of marginal producers who otherwise could not compete, draining the profits out of agriculture, turning all producers into a class perpetually dependent on government and robbing consumers of the benefits of lower-cost competition.

Perfect.

Henry J. Waters III, Publisher, Columbia Daily Tribune

Change your thoughts, and you change the world.

— Harold E. McAlindon, writer

—–

To see more of the Columbia Daily Tribune, or to subscribe to the newspaper, go to http://www.columbiatribune.com/.

Copyright (c) 2007, Columbia Daily Tribune, Mo.

Distributed by McClatchy-Tribune Information Services.

For reprints, email tmsreprints@permissionsgroup.com, call 800-374-7985 or 847-635-6550, send a fax to 847-635-6968, or write to The Permissions Group Inc., 1247 Milwaukee Ave., Suite 303, Glenview, IL 60025, USA.