USDA chief: Rural America becoming less relevant

WASHINGTON (AP) - Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack has some harsh words for rural America: It's "becoming less and less relevant," he says.
A month after an election that Democrats won even as rural parts of the country voted overwhelmingly Republican, the former Democratic governor of Iowa told farm belt leaders this past week that he's frustrated with their internecine squabbles and says they need to be more strategic in picking their political fights.
"It's time for us to have an adult conversation with folks in rural America," Vilsack said in a speech at a forum sponsored by the Farm Journal. "It's time for a different thought process here, in my view."
He said rural America's biggest assets - the food supply, recreational areas and energy, for example - can be overlooked by people elsewhere as the U.S. population shifts more to cities, their suburbs and exurbs.
"Why is it that we don't have a farm bill?" said Vilsack. "It isn't just the differences of policy. It's the fact that rural America with a shrinking population is becoming less and less relevant to the politics of this country, and we had better recognize that and we better begin to reverse it."
For the first time in recent memory, farm-state lawmakers were not able to push a farm bill through Congress in an election year, evidence of lost clout in farm states.
The Agriculture Department says about 50 percent of rural counties have lost population in the past four years and poverty rates are higher there than in metropolitan areas, despite the booming agricultural economy.
Exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and television networks found that rural voters accounted for just 14 percent of the turnout in last month's election, with 61 percent of them supporting Republican Mitt Romney and 37 percent backing President Barack Obama. Two-thirds of those rural voters said the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals.
Vilsack criticized farmers who have embraced wedge issues such as regulation, citing the uproar over the idea that the Environmental Protection Agency was going to start regulating farm dust after the Obama administration said repeatedly it had no so such intention.
In his Washington speech, he also cited criticism of a proposed Labor Department regulation, later dropped, that was intended to keep younger children away from the most dangerous farm jobs, and criticism of egg producers for dealing with the Humane Society on increasing the space that hens have in their coops. Livestock producers fearing they will be the next target of animal rights advocates have tried to undo that agreement.
"We need a proactive message, not a reactive message," Vilsack said. "How are you going to encourage young people to want to be involved in rural America or farming if you don't have a proactive message? Because you are competing against the world now."
John Weber, a pork producer in Dysart, Iowa, said Friday that farmers have to defend their industries against policies they see as unfair. He said there is great concern among pork producers that animal welfare groups are using unfair tactics and may hurt their business.
"Our role is to defend our producers and our industry in what we feel are issues important to us," he said.
Weber agreed, though, that rural America is declining in influence. He said he is concerned that there are not enough lawmakers from rural areas and complained that Congress doesn't understand farm issues. He added that the farm industry needs to communicate better with consumers.
"There's a huge communication gap" between farmers and the food-eating public, he said.
Vilsack, who has made the revitalization of rural America a priority, encouraged farmers to embrace new kinds of markets, work to promote global exports and replace a "preservation mindset with a growth mindset." He said they also need to embrace diversity because it is an issue important to young people who are leaving rural areas.
"We've got something to market here," he said. "We've got something to be proactive about. Let's spend our time and our resources and our energy doing that and I think if we do we're going to have a lot of young people who want to be part of that future."
A month after an election that Democrats won even as rural parts of the country voted overwhelmingly Republican, the former Democratic governor of Iowa told farm belt leaders this past week that he's frustrated with their internecine squabbles and says they need to be more strategic in picking their political fights.
"It's time for us to have an adult conversation with folks in rural America," Vilsack said in a speech at a forum sponsored by the Farm Journal. "It's time for a different thought process here, in my view."
He said rural America's biggest assets - the food supply, recreational areas and energy, for example - can be overlooked by people elsewhere as the U.S. population shifts more to cities, their suburbs and exurbs.
"Why is it that we don't have a farm bill?" said Vilsack. "It isn't just the differences of policy. It's the fact that rural America with a shrinking population is becoming less and less relevant to the politics of this country, and we had better recognize that and we better begin to reverse it."
For the first time in recent memory, farm-state lawmakers were not able to push a farm bill through Congress in an election year, evidence of lost clout in farm states.
The Agriculture Department says about 50 percent of rural counties have lost population in the past four years and poverty rates are higher there than in metropolitan areas, despite the booming agricultural economy.
Exit polls conducted for The Associated Press and television networks found that rural voters accounted for just 14 percent of the turnout in last month's election, with 61 percent of them supporting Republican Mitt Romney and 37 percent backing President Barack Obama. Two-thirds of those rural voters said the government is doing too many things better left to businesses and individuals.
Vilsack criticized farmers who have embraced wedge issues such as regulation, citing the uproar over the idea that the Environmental Protection Agency was going to start regulating farm dust after the Obama administration said repeatedly it had no so such intention.
In his Washington speech, he also cited criticism of a proposed Labor Department regulation, later dropped, that was intended to keep younger children away from the most dangerous farm jobs, and criticism of egg producers for dealing with the Humane Society on increasing the space that hens have in their coops. Livestock producers fearing they will be the next target of animal rights advocates have tried to undo that agreement.
"We need a proactive message, not a reactive message," Vilsack said. "How are you going to encourage young people to want to be involved in rural America or farming if you don't have a proactive message? Because you are competing against the world now."
John Weber, a pork producer in Dysart, Iowa, said Friday that farmers have to defend their industries against policies they see as unfair. He said there is great concern among pork producers that animal welfare groups are using unfair tactics and may hurt their business.
"Our role is to defend our producers and our industry in what we feel are issues important to us," he said.
Weber agreed, though, that rural America is declining in influence. He said he is concerned that there are not enough lawmakers from rural areas and complained that Congress doesn't understand farm issues. He added that the farm industry needs to communicate better with consumers.
"There's a huge communication gap" between farmers and the food-eating public, he said.
Vilsack, who has made the revitalization of rural America a priority, encouraged farmers to embrace new kinds of markets, work to promote global exports and replace a "preservation mindset with a growth mindset." He said they also need to embrace diversity because it is an issue important to young people who are leaving rural areas.
"We've got something to market here," he said. "We've got something to be proactive about. Let's spend our time and our resources and our energy doing that and I think if we do we're going to have a lot of young people who want to be part of that future."
This situation has only been made worse by the takeovers of many family farms by the huge corporate farms that have removed much of the economic base of these areas. Jobs done by machines are jobs lost to the people in the area, and the few surviving towns can't support their own populations, especially the young people who want more in life than just getting by in a closed economy that no longer sees the money from the crops it used to grow and support.
But never fear, the Corporate Citizen mega farms have enough of a vote to cover those lost.
What an odd and seemingly out-of-place sentence:
Â
"He said they also need to embrace diversity because it is an issue important to young people who are leaving rural areas."
Â
????
I was raised on a family ranch and farming operation in NE Wyoming and it was the best life one could have. Tragic that way of life is ending for several reasons. But perhaps Democrats no longer care since few in the rural areas vote Democrat and Republicans don't care because Republicans have their vote regardless. When I grew up during the 1950s and 1960s most were Democrat because of remembrance from the Great Depression and the New Deal that brought the incentive payments (Subsidies) and rural electrification to these areas such as the REA that came after. I remember those changing days well when the lights finally came on, it was unreal to a child of ten. Now the rural states vote Republican in part because they are so against subsidies but then cry out when the money in the form of subsidies no longer is flowing. Go figure.
Those of us in rural America made this country what it is today. We need to stop sending food to the cityâs for a few months and shot those that come to our places to try and get it. You think we are now relevant?? When the city folk all start starving you all might just think different!!
This comment has been deleted
@bustedupredneck Yes... starving the people of the United States... I'm sure the grange will get right on that <eye roll>
Let this country fall. Let the corrupt leadership continue to suck our paychecks dry while protecting special interests. LET them. When it all goes to hell because of their idiotic, childish greed and behavior......there will be a NEW sheriff in town. Our VOTES haven't seemed to have counted for years now. They keep raising their own pay while cutting their bosses own salaries. (yea......THEY work for US......remember?) Wake the hell up people, unless you WANT a socialist/communist what USE to be America. I'm sick of this crap. Tired of arguing with the "gimme more and more" crowd. Let this sucker crash and burn, and we'll see who survives it. I'm "all in."
every once in awhile I actually get an audible snort out of a post... "I'm all in" was going to do it by itself, but when you put quotes on "all in"... that was the capper. Wolfen... I sure hope this Sunday finds you well my well intentioned, but utterly crazy friend.
:lol:Â Baggers owned.
Vilsack is an idiot. Just wait, when the currency collapses, and commerce STOPS, people will wish they lived on a farm and had a means to feed themselves. And it will be the fault of morons like Tom Vilsack.
@Dredd57 - recognizing the truth and saying that we need to reverse the current trend of the rural areas becoming less and less politically important / politically relevant is a good thing, not something to villify someone for.
Â
Â
 @FormerMarineSgt  @Dredd57 Well... if you aren't very smart it's something to vilify someone for
 @Dredd57 I'm wondering if you actually read the article. Vilsack's on the side of the farmers!
Just my opinion, but coming from a history of family farmers, we need to return to that and get away from factory farming. I think maybe a lot of people think farming is just those big stinky ill-gotten gains type of places. Anybody ever been to a true family farm will see a whole different perspective. Hopefully, we will move away from that as a country and the farmers (if they are true family farms) will see that the humane socieites are not trying to put them out of business but bring them into the business of the future.
@Elaine2 Farming should be part of the fabric of any place that can sustain it, every bit as much as professional sports, the arts, and all the other things that put a region on those "best places to live" lists. It makes me cringe when family farms in areas like Snohomish, Carnation and Woodinville become housing developments. We shouldn't have to get most of our food from factory farms in the midwest.
So, food is an "asset" that can be "overlooked" Â as populations become more urbanized? Â Wow, I learned something. Â City dwellers don't need to eat. Â
@belsnickles Well as he stated in this sentence: ["There's a huge communication gap" between farmers and the food-eating public]. I guess as opposed to the non food-eating public. Maybe there truly are zombies after all. I.e. public-eating zombies.
 @flyskiwindsurf I caught that too.Â
Yeah, maybe we should hear what the non-food-eating public has to say about all this...
Rural America would be relevant if the corporate farms, with the cheap labor from illegal workers, hadn't run many of the family farms out of business. Federal subsidies should be capped for huge farms, allowing smaller family farms to continue to exist.
 @rockguy Agree that farm subsidies should be reined in - that whole system is a total joke, a very, very expensive, joke.
Farmers can't communicate, they are dumb peasants
 @Larry*X*K I do think other readers are having trouble recognizing sarcasm!
 @Larry*X*K Yeah, you definitely come across as Socrates around here. Do you ever listen to yourself? I'm guessing not, because you'd probably punch yourself in the face and stop talking if you ever did.
 @Dredd57 Chill dredd57, down boy down
 @Larry*X*K  @Dredd57 I always get a chuckle over how the guy with cross icon likes violent posts
 @Larry*X*K Maybe you should boycott food in protest.
 @belsnickles  @Larry*X*K Even tho I think Larry wrote in sarcasm, your comment was quite funny!
 @Commenter87643  @Larry*X*K You're probably right.  He loves jerking those chains.
the department of agriculture should be totally eliminated. they don't grow anything. also the federal department of education should be eliminated. they don't educate anybody.
 @randbo Tell us more Mr Politicalscience LOL