Farmers and ranchers from Colorado and across the U.S. are headed to Washington, D.C., this week in hopes of transforming the 2023 Farm Bill.

Mike Callicrate, owner of Ranch Foods Direct in Colorado Springs, said previous farm bills have been at odds with the U.S. Department of Agriculture's own dietary recommendations. He pointed out the lion's share of farm subsidies do not help grow food people eat. They help grow commodities that can be used to create more profitable but less healthy processed foods.

"And so at the same time as USDA is promoting more fruits and vegetables and healthier food going into our diets, we support something entirely different," Callicrate contended.

The USDA recommends a diet of 50% fruits and vegetables, but only 4% of farm subsidies support their production. Big agribusiness has long had Congress' ear when it comes to structuring the Farm Bill, and the Food Not Feed Summit, set for Tuesday, hopes to amplify concerns of family farmers, workers, health and nutrition experts and faith-based and animal welfare groups.

Callicrate argued part of the farm bill should support local and regional food systems paying farmers a fair price for bringing healthy foods directly to consumers, which can strengthen rural economies. He believes the Farm Bill should benefit the people on the land who take the risk, and do the work of producing food.

"The whole attitude of USDA has been for a long time, 'Get big, or get out,' " Callicrate emphasized. "All of that is to the benefit of the biggest corporations who have financialized and industrialized our food system to capture the wealth that's created by that farmer and rancher."

Nearly eight in 10 Americans said the production of healthy, sustainable food for people should be prioritized over producing feed for livestock, according to a recent survey.

But Callicrate explained the USDA continues to direct farm subsidies to commodities used to produce things like high fructose corn syrup and feed for livestock, using tax dollars to keep costs artificially low for Big Ag.

"Much of it goes to the livestock," Callicrate stressed. "But the thing is, whether it goes to livestock or goes into commodity value-added further production, we're still feeding the corporation. We're feeding corporations, we're not feeding family farmers and people."

The U.S. Farm Bill is up for reauthorization, and Congress faces calls to avoid any delays so certain programs can keep helping farmers and consumers without losing momentum.

The bill, which is passed every five years, covers several areas tied to the nation's food system, including crop insurance, SNAP benefits and conservation efforts. In the past, some programs ground to a halt because lawmakers failed to meet the deadline.

Chuck Anderas, associate policy director at the Michael Fields Agricultural Institute, said in such situations, temporary spending keeps larger elements of the plan operating, but programs of less than $50 million are not as lucky.

"A lot of the programs that support our community are funded at under $50 million a year," Anderas pointed out. "A lot of those are research-focused things on sustainable ag."

Possible delays come as farmers face pressure to reduce their carbon footprint. SNAP benefits, formerly known as food stamps, are often a main point of Farm Bill debate, with GOP lawmakers sometimes calling for cuts or reforms. They are doing so again this time, although it is unclear how much it will impact negotiations. Other policy fights surrounding the bill are expected, too.

Anderas argued pausing research and outreach programs would be devastating for farmers and nonprofits as they try to make gains in addressing climate issues facing agriculture.

"There's a lot of big challenges on the horizon for agriculture," Anderas emphasized. "Climate change is making extremes of weather more difficult to deal with."

He added farmers and the groups they work with are trying to scale up solutions to make their land more resilient to prolonged droughts or flooding.

Groups such as Michael Fields also are trying to help producers take on more crop and livestock diversity, meaning consumers might not feel the pinch as much when there's a major catastrophe or market disruption.

The current Farm Bill is due to expire at the end of September.

In rural Georgia, hardworking farmers grapple with staying competitive in the global market, and some said they are hindered by limited broadband access.

The website BroadbandNow.com ranks Georgia 21st among states for affordable high-speed internet access, but wide swaths of the state are still without broadband service.

Susannah Cox Maddux, steering committee chair for the group Rural Voices Georgia, emphasized the need for enhanced connectivity. She said many in the ag industry still rely on satellite internet, because it is their only option.

"It's essential for farmers to follow commodity markets, to communicate with their customers, and to gain access to new markets around the world. I think often, people don't think about just how high-tech farming is. It is crucial."

In February, Gov. Brian Kemp unveiled a grant package of $455 million to help entice service providers to expand high-speed internet availability in 28 counties. Major providers have often said expansion into rural areas is not profitable enough.

At the end of 2021, the Georgia Tech Research Institute estimated 1.6 million people in the state still lacked high-speed internet access. Cox Maddux stressed the digital divide is one of the most pressing issues for rural communities, as they struggle to keep up with increasingly tech-driven business practices and maintain efficient operations.

"And we also know that without the continued effort to raise the profile around this issue -- and to raise our voices, and to raise awareness around this -- people can get left out, even though there are efforts being pushed," Cox Maddux explained.

She added the Rural Voices Georgia steering committee has made broadband access one of its top three public-policy priorities.


get more stories like this via email

With the cost of farmland up by more than 8% percent in North Carolina, the state's Black farmers are struggling to purchase additional acreage or jumpstart their farming dreams.

Demi Tucker, owner of Uyoga Farms and a fifth-generation Black farmer, grows mushrooms on her family's land in Steadman. She said most farmers she knows are leasing and looking to expand, but finding themselves competing with investors and corporations swooping up large tracts.

"If somebody has 23 acres to sell, they're going to sell it to the person who can buy out 23 acres and that half of an acre or an acre, which is what most people can afford starting off, " Tucker said.

According to Global AgInvesting, an estimated 26 to 35 billion dollars of farmland nationwide is owned by institutions or corporations.

Tucker pointed out after purchasing land, farmers also face additional costs to clear it, buy heavy machinery, and do soil and water testing. She said all of these obstacles add up for Black and Indigenous farmers who historically have faced discrimination qualifying for federal funding.

"There's a lot happening right now with the farm bill that's going to pass this year, a lot of advocacy going around as far as certain demands that we would like met so that more people of color can qualify for loans," Tucker added.

Over the past century nationwide, an estimated 98% of Black farmers were dispossessed through the denial of loans and credit, and through acts of violence and intimidation, according to Data for Progress.


get more stories like this via email