LINCOLN, Neb. – Agriculture is the fourth largest producer of climate pollution, and farmers and ranchers from across the U.S. have launched a campaign urging Congress to pass the Green New Deal, which supports regenerative family farm and ranching practices over industrial scale agribusiness.

Graham Christensen, who runs an independent farm in northeastern Nebraska, says farmers across the political spectrum are seeing the proposal as an opportunity to level the playing field.

"Farmers have a chance to be able to lead in reduction of greenhouse gases, as well as clean up the water, and at the same time develop a more nutritional food system that probably benefits their bottom line as well," he states.

Christensen says 85% of the nation's $25 billion farm subsidies go to the biggest 15% of businesses, which rely on factory farming, synthetic fertilizers, chemical pesticides and other practices linked to increased air and water pollution.

Christensen says supporting cleaner practices will produce healthier food and enrich soil by capturing more carbon.

Critics of the Green New Deal say it's too expensive and argue that a better way to address climate change would be to encourage innovation in the private sector.

Katherine Paul, communications director for the group Regeneration International, says the Green New Deal is an opportunity to reinvest money already being spent in innovative private family scale farms.

But she admits change won't come easily, noting that agribusiness currently spends more than the defense industry lobbying Congress.

"And what they want is rarely good for small, independent farmers and ranchers who are interested in farming in a way that benefits everyone," she stresses.

So far, more than 10,000 farmers and ranchers have joined the campaign.

The coalition's next steps include creating alliances with conservation and business groups, and inviting lawmakers to come out and see the benefits of clean land use, along with the economic challenges facing a growing number of the nation's family farms.


get more stories like this via email

Many economists believe inflation will further ease this year, which cannot come soon enough for overburdened rural Americans, including those in New Mexico.

The Consumer Price Index -- the main indicator of inflation -- looks at the prices urban Americans pay for a set basket of goods.

Stephan Weiler, professor of economics at Colorado State University and co-director of the Regional Economic Development Institute, said people in rural America are not surveyed, leaving out relevant data on 14% of the U.S. population, or around 46 million people.

"It's also the segment of the population that is likely to be economically disadvantaged," Weiler pointed out. "Just because you're in a place that has disadvantages, shouldn't mean that you're also disadvantaged by the system as a whole."

By necessity, rural Americans tend to drive more because they have longer commutes to work, grocery stores and essential services, like education and health care. When transportation costs rise, rural residents especially end up with less discretionary income, according to an Iowa State University report. About 30% of New Mexico's population lives in rural areas.

Net farm income was forecast to decline 4.5% in 2022, which is still 26% higher than the 10-year average, according to AgAmerica.

Weiler noted even when agriculture has a good year, it does not mean "rural" residents have a good year.

"Rural is a lot of different things, and it's not ag," Weiler asserted. "I think a lot of people basically equate rural with ag, but 90% of rural income comes from non-ag sources. There are a few family farms out there, but they're relatively few and far between."

Weiler believes higher prices may be chipping away at paychecks of rural Americans at a higher rate than is being tracked by the federal government, which he believes should change the way it collects data.

"Having worked in various rural parts of the country -- rural California, rural Appalachia -- it's gotten to the point where even those people are saying, 'We actually need place-based policies.' It's not enough to focus on the people -- that places really, actually matter," Weiler concluded.

Many of Ohio's urban farmers and farmers of color are locked out of USDA programs because they are not registered with their local Farm Service Agency, according to local advocates.

Chad Anderson, Columbus' Urban Farmers Coalition Executive Director said most Black farmers are unaware that an FSA number unlocks the doors to funding, tools and opportunities needed to run a successful agriculture business. The coalition has helped two farmers register, with six more in the process, he said.

"The two farmers that we have that are registered have been able to get access to grant opportunities, they've been able to get access to loans that have low interest rates. And then they've also been able to tap into a network of resources," Anderson said.

Without an FSA number, Black farmers are excluded from the state's Agricultural census, which is used to allocate resources, Anderson added. Federal farm aid programs have historically discriminated against farmers of color. According to a 2019 report from the Center for American Progress, Black farmers lost 80% of their land from 1910 to 2007, because of USDA and other agency lending and aid practices the center calls racist.

August Taylor, farm resource access specialist with Ohio Ecological Food and Farm Association, explained FSAs can help farms grow and be profitable, and added advocacy groups are available to help farmers navigate the process, offering agents who can talk to farmers directly about their crop goals, business practices and land operations.

"It's really important that you contact your local FSA office," Taylor said. "There are USDA Service Centers in almost every county in Ohio. So the first thing you have to do is call and set up an appointment with them."

Black-operated farms account for about 4-million acres of farmland, just one-half of 1% of the U.S. total, according to 2019 data from the USDA.

Progressive agricultural growers returning this week from the Food not Feed Summit in Washington, D.C., are asking their fellow farmers to consider a big transition.

The summit focused on shifting federal farm policies away from huge, corporate mega-farms and raising animal feed, to adopting more environmentally-friendly practices for growing food.

In Iowa, at least 5,000 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations dot the landscape.

Tanner Faaborg, president of Des Moines-based Urban Ambassadors, said many families started large-scale operations on their land as a way to make extra income, and the trend has been growing.

"The tide has been shifting in the wrong way," Faaborg contended. "There's been a proliferation of CAFOs where everyone seems to be putting up CAFOs, with chickens and turkeys and hogs. So, it seems to be going against the grain."

Faaborg advocated moving away from what he calls the "industrial agricultural treadmill" and toward smaller forms of food production with a greater emphasis on the environment. Recent polling shows 55% of Americans favor a moratorium on factory farms.

Faaborg noted many families who put livestock confinements on their land, some as far back as 30 years ago, did so with the intention of making a second income, or to produce their own food. He said now, some of those producers are becoming more environmentally sensitive and want to change their operations, though he admitted the choice presents its own challenges.

"OK, so we're transitioning from hogs to specialty mushrooms," Faaborg suggested. "Let's say the design works and all of this is going great. Where do we sell our produce?"

Sen. Cory Booker, D-N.J., has introduced legislation to limit large-scale ag confinements, with the hope the bill is adopted as part of the 2023 Farm Bill, scheduled to be debated in September.