A Progressive at an Iowa Farm Bureau Annual Meeting

“So
often progressives are up against the significant resources of the Farm
Bureau when advocating for causes related to the environment and
industrial food production. There is a tendency to demonize the Farm
Bureau, but at the end of the day they are just another powerful
interest group.”

The Iowa Farm Bureau is conducting annual meetings with members around the state and this progressive author attended one of them in North Liberty this week. Regardless of one's opinion about Farm Bureau, they provide needed services to members, the most significant of which may be access to health insurance for farmers, retirees and small scale entrepreneurs. They have a culture of listening to and supporting members, which is part of what the annual meeting is about.

Each year Farm Bureau canvasses members with their “opinionnaire.” At the annual meeting the results of the survey are shared and members get a chance to raise issues. Member concerns are written down on a flip chart for consideration by the board and eventually are incorporated into Farm Bureau policy. There is a concerted effort to give members a chance to provide feedback. Policy is used to lobby the legislature both in Des Moines and in Washington, DC.

Like most surveys, the way the questions are written influences the results and it was clear that the interests of the board members influenced the opinionnaire and the resulting policy as much as member feedback did. Of the eleven items noted on our flip chart, five of them were introduced by board members, including opposition to a county justice center, abolition of estate taxes, reducing income taxes, opposition to the Department of Natural Resources Environmental Protection Commission and the idea of closing loopholes in current regulations before introducing new regulations. In short, less government spending, lower taxes and less regulation on farms. Pretty much what one would expect from the organization.

So often progressives are up against the significant resources of the Farm Bureau when advocating for causes related to the environment and industrial food production. There is a tendency to demonize the Farm Bureau, but at the end of the day they are just another powerful interest group. Serving the interests of citizens is what our democracy and our government is about, so we have to get past demonizing people who disagree with us.

If we look at the policy statements produced in this year's opinionnaire, some are straightforward and easy to understand. For example, “the Environmental Protection Commission should be eliminated and its rule making authority returned to elected officials,” or “we are not in favor of construction of a new county jail facility.” These are understandable whether we agree or not.

At the same time, some of the policy statements are mired in the corporate media's ideas of the day. For example, “current science does not give clear direction for any policy option regarding the reduction of greenhouse gas emissions,” or “science doesn't support the assumption that a man-made Greenhouse Gas emission affects climate changes.” This type of anthropomorphism of “science” is flawed and unlikely to serve Farm Bureau members well. If anything, it creates a legitimate opening for progressives to discredit Farm Bureau policy regarding the environment. If progressive environmentalists don't step into the weeds of Farm Bureau policy to some degree, it will be more difficult to combat it in venues that matter, like the statehouse and in congress.

Part of the annual meeting is a dinner meal and while going through the buffet line a couple of things came to mind. The food we were being served looked good, reminding me of what our family served at Sunday dinner back in the 1950s: a steak, escalloped potatoes, green bean casserole with real onion rings on top, fruit salad made with marshmallow fluff and coleslaw. While I passed on the steak, the rest was delicious even if it was the product of industrial agricultural and food preparation techniques. It was full of tradition. Most of us have respect for traditions.

We need to make new traditions with regard to the environment. It was clear from the meeting that the Iowa Farm Bureau is opposed to the energy bill passed by the U.S. House of Representatives. One member advised, “don't even sit down at the table to discuss” certain environmental issues. Reconciling our concern for the environment with the views of farmers, (most of whom consider themselves to be environmentalists), and their lobbying groups is a process that can only begin with tolerance. We should discuss the outlandish assertions made in policy statements with the people who are their source.

Even if it is only one night a year, progressives should sit at a table and converse with farmers of every stripe about issues that matter. Reconciling our differences regarding the environment matters too much to avoid that conversation.

~Paul
Deaton is a native Iowan living in rural Johnson County and weekend
editor of Blog for Iowa. E-mail Paul
Deaton