The report I’ve been waiting for: The World Public Opinion Organization conducted a poll on public opinion of farm subisidies. Even in farm states, the report found, people are in favor of eliminating subsidies to large farming businesses.
Eighty percent of US subsidies go to large farming businesses, however only 36 percent of Americans favor such subsidies while 61 percent oppose them. Opposition to subsidies for large farms was not substantively or statistically different among Republicans (62%), Democrats (60%), and independents (59%).
Here again views in farm states are not significantly different from the rest of the country. Only minorities approve of providing subsidies on a regular annual basis to small farms (39%) or large farms (13%).
Seventy-seven percent of Americans do, however, favor providing subsidies to small farms (i.e. farms under 500 acres). Support is highest among Democrats (82%), followed by Republicans (73%) and then Independents (69%). Most small farms do not receive subsidies.
The public in farm states has views of farm subsidies that are little different than residents of non-farm states. In the 17 states that receive the largest amount of farm subsidies, just 35 percent of the public favors subsidies to large farming businesses, compared to 37 percent in non-farm states. There is support for subsidies for small farms in both farm states (79%) and non-farm states (75%).
Americans are also at odds with the way that farm subsidies are provided. Most subsidies are provided on a regular annual basis, independent of whether it was a good year or a bad year for the farmer. However only minorities of Americans think that subsidies should be provided on a regular annual basis, whether for small farms (37%) or large farms (15%).
There are two different realms of implication to consider. One is the alternative (local, organic, etc.) food market, the other being international food markets. Interestingly, many objectives on both sides of the political aisle align with public opinion.
On the one hand, the one-sided subsidies negatively impact small farmers, whose smaller scale is disfavored by traditional markets, policies, and infrastructures. In a system geared towards industrial, mass-scale production, smaller farmers need all the help they can get. And this isn’t just some specialty market to be left by the wayside. It is a thriving, growing sector to be taken seriously – and public opinion agrees.
And much to the contrast of local, small scale agriculture lies the international food arena. Many potential trading countries are opposed to trade agreements with the US on the grounds of inequitable agricultural systems. Best exemplified by Mexican corn markets post-NAFTA, it has become clear that the extent to which US agribusiness is bankrolled by the state is prohibitive in many sectors.
While I’m not one to champion something for it’s free trade agreement (FTA) potential, I always love situations in which seeming opposites agree on the idiocy of the status quo.
Obama has criticized existing subsidies, to the dismay of the strong farm lobby and it’s cornbelt funders. But this latest study does well to distinguish between monied interests and those of the general public.
