Advocates for Missouri's small family farms have taken to the U.S. Capitol today, to talk with lawmakers about what could be done in the next Farm Bill to better protect the nation's food resources and family farmers.

Nearly 200 groups have signed a letter to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack, urging him to reconsider including conservation practices supporting factory farms, which often add to local pollution problems.

Tim Gibbons, communications director for the Missouri Rural Crisis Center, said the USDA's decision to allow mega-farms to qualify for "climate smart" conservation payments is controversial.

"Here in Missouri and throughout our entire country, quite literally, the corporate industrial takeover of the livestock industry is, and has been, done with use of taxpayer dollars at the expense of farmers, consumers, our environment, our economy," Gibbons contended. "And our democratic process in general."

Gibbons added there is a need to ensure taxpayer dollars fund family farmers and ensure consumers have access to meats and other farm products grown and harvested locally. The Farm Bill officially expired in September, but Congress has not taken the necessary steps to pass a new one.

Gibbons believes the Inflation Reduction Act should have specific safeguards in place to protect small farmers and to prevent factory farms from taking advantage of tax breaks.

"Factory farm corporations have been one of the main contributors to environmental damage and climate change," Gibbons asserted. "So, Missouri and U.S. taxpayers, we shouldn't be paying for them to clean up their act. They should clean themselves up."

The letter to Secretary Vilsack claimed industrial farming practices exacerbate climate change, waste taxpayer dollars and harm Indigenous and underserved communities, all of which run counter to the intent of the Inflation Reduction Act.


get more stories like this via email

Arizona's primary election will take place in July, and a new Rural Democracy Initiative poll shows that likely voters from rural areas of the state are up for grabs.

Researcher Patrick Toomey, a partner with Breakthrough Campaigns, said the poll data show rural voters are what he calls "economic populists," and don't want the government calling the shots on certain issues, such as abortion.

"Rural voters do feel like things are getting worse for them and in their communities economically, but again, the vast majority of rural voters -- they are economic populists and their policy preferences align with many progressive goals," he said. "It is very clear that rural voters are not a cultural monolith either."

Toomey added that while rural America tends to be more conservative than its urban and suburban counterparts, certain conventionally progressive policy items -- such as focusing on retirement security and making taxes more fair -- aren't being associated with President Joe Biden or Democrats. He contended that the Democratic Party will need to "rebuild their brand."

The poll found 15% of rural voters in swing states are unsure for whom they will vote, or if they'll vote at all in the upcoming election, something Toomey contended could directly impact the outcome.

Toomey said half of rural voters consider Republicans to be more dedicated to prioritizing the needs of working families, compared with just 32% who shared those sentiments for the Democratic Party. While the increasing costs of housing, health care and child care are all important issues to rural voters, the data show that reproductive freedoms are also a top priority.

Toomey claimed Democrats can use that to their favor.

"Rural voters are opposed to abortion bans," he said. "They have nuanced views around abortion itself, but three-quarters either support it or don't want the government interfering in something that should be left up to women and their doctors."

More than 1,700 voters in 10 states participated in the poll, which found nearly half of rural voters would choose a "culturally aligned" rural Democrat over a Republican businessperson from a big city on the East Coast.


get more stories like this via email

Petitions are being circulated to get a marijuana legalization question on North Dakota's fall ballot.

Some local officials said marijuana laws could affect their small cities and towns in unique ways. A North Dakota group called New Economic Frontier is behind the ballot initiative. If put before voters, it would be the third time they'd consider the idea. Similar questions failed in 2018 and 2022.

Scott Decker, mayor of Dickinson, said if it wins this time, the state has to honor the will of the voters. Whether his area would see economic benefits or new residents, he pointed out energy jobs have a big presence and there is a potential conflict.

"Even if recreational marijuana is passed, individuals working in the energy sector are still gonna have to pass drug tests," Decker explained. "That's just a standard in the industry. Safety is paramount. "

He also wondered about local police having enough resources to secure technology for field sobriety tests, especially if revenues do not trickle down to his city of nearly 25,000 people. But Decker acknowledged other criminal justice aspects of legalization, noting there are too many people with low-level marijuana offenses who are incarcerated.

Tom Erdmann, mayor of Carrington, said his constituents are fairly conservative on the issue. He doubts his town would ever be a hotbed for marijuana retail sales but no matter the dynamics, he said any possible revenue would be a bonus.

"You know, any tax revenue that we get, whether it's from tobacco sales or highway use tax or any of those things that are not necessarily listed every year in our budget, we don't send it, that's for sure," Erdmann emphasized. "We keep it and use it in places where we need the funds to go."

He added Carrington has a solid economic base but his revenue sentiments illustrate the pros and cons communities have to wrestle with as legalization debates resurface. Petition organizers tout a range of economic boosts, while also stating their proposed policy is pretty restrictive compared to other states.


get more stories like this via email

Work is being done in rural areas across Texas to make sure students are prepared for the workforce even if they intend to stay put after graduation.

One new study showed only 31% of adults in non-metro areas have a degree from a junior college or university. The nonprofit Jobs for the Future creates opportunities for the education system and local businesses to work together in hopes of increasing the number.

Sarah Jenness, senior manager of the group, said there are three key changes leaders in rural areas could make to improve training for students.

"Strategy number one, build on your local strengths and contacts," Jenness outlined. "Strategy number two is thinking about how to prioritize inclusive economic development. And then finally, the third strategy was around embedding remote opportunities."

Jenness argued schools, local economic development agencies and businesses need to collaborate to create opportunities. A couple of options are dual enrollment, where high school students also earn college credits, and work-based learning, so they can hone their skills on the job.

The study found in the U.S., the benefits of economic systems are unevenly distributed and certain groups and communities suffer the most, particularly rural areas. Disparities are also seen across lines of race, ethnicity and gender.

Jenness stressed gaps can be closed if rural students receive training for the types of jobs available in their communities.

"What are the industries that employ the most rural workers? And the top three that we think tend to be -- you know, have good quality jobs -- are industries like government, manufacturing and health care," Jenness explained.

She added remote work is also a key strategy to ensure rural students have access to a variety of well-paid jobs.


get more stories like this via email