A half-million Georgians face the reality of inadequate internet access, according to the state's broadband annual report.

The glaring digital divide drastically affects essential services in business, education and health care. Rural residents, in particular, encounter difficulties in getting telehealth service from medical professionals.

Natasha Taylor, senior director of policy and access for the group Georgia Watch, said as hospital closures escalate across the state due to mergers and acquisitions, it is critically important to bridge the gap.

"I think that telehealth can greatly improve health care access in rural parts of the state, because it prevents people from having to travel, you know, over an hour, hour-and-a-half, to the closest emergency room for a cold," Taylor pointed out.

Taylor highlighted areas like Cuthbert, where many residents have to seek primary care more than 40 miles away at Phoebe Putney hospital facilities.

Georgia ranks third-highest among states for uninsured residents. More than a million Georgians do not have health coverage, which Taylor emphasized is another reason to rethink health care equity in the region.

As the state works to improve its broadband infrastructure, Taylor said one focus should be on making sure telehealth is easily accessible to all. She suggested health care providers could offer training sessions for patients who are unfamiliar with the technology as a start to a more holistic strategy.

"I know that telemedicine can be one fix, but I don't think it's the only fix," Taylor explained. "I think it's kind of a multifaceted approach that needs to be considered when developing policies to address these health care gaps."

In addition to better broadband, Taylor added enhancing affordability and accessibility for immigrants and refugees must be woven into the conversation, to ensure health care reaches every individual, no matter where they are in the state.


get more stories like this via email

Rural advocates are supporting the Farmland for Farmers Act in Congress. It would restrict the amount of Iowa farmland large corporations can own, and it is in response to foreign and domestic corporations buying up land and then renting it out.

As farmers start to retire, more than 40% of U.S. farmland will change hands in the next decade, but it might not wind up with young Iowans who want to farm.

Hannah Breckbill, co-farmer at Decorah-based Humble Hands Harvest in northeast Iowa, said out-of-state corporations buy the land and rent it to the highest bidder, keeping it out of local hands and driving land prices sky-high.

"Land prices have been going up and up and up," Breckbill observed. "In my career as a farmer -- which is not very long, only about a decade -- I've seen land prices more than double. And we need farmers to be on the ground, owning land."

Breckbill pointed out more than 50% of Iowa's 30 million acres of farmed land is rented and not locally owned. The Farmland for Farmers Act would restrict corporate investment, and supporters hope it is adopted as part of the new Farm Bill, scheduled to be debated this month.

Breckbill also helps overwhelmed young farmers find land in Iowa, and being a young farmer herself, has firsthand experience with navigating the daunting land acquisition process. She believes Iowa's farmland should be making a natural transition into the hands of beginning local farmers.

"We've gotten jobs on farms. We know how to farm. We have the skills. We have the knowledge. We have the capacity. We have the energy," Breckbill emphasized. "We just don't have the capital to be able to access the land."

The National Family Farm Coalition, which supports the Farmland for Farmers Act, released a fact sheet showing the average price of an acre of farmland in the U.S. has climbed to $3,800, the highest it has been since the 1970s. The Act has not yet received official support from Iowa's members of Congress.

The Environmental Protection Agency has upheld Montana farmers' right to repair their own equipment, and says doing so does not violate the Clean Air Act.

Montana farmers and ranchers joined with the National Farmers Union in writing to the EPA to oppose equipment manufacturers and dealers, who claimed farmers shouldn't be working on the emission-control systems on their high-dollar machinery. The farmers union said the dealers cited the Clean Air Act as justification for limiting the right to repair their own gear.

The EPA has sided with the farmers.

Montana Farmers Union President Walter Schweitzer said the last thing a farmer or rancher wants to do is run afoul of the Clean Air Act.

"It's quite frankly the opposite," he said. "What EPA wants and requires is the equipment manufacturers to give the farmers and ranchers, and the equipment owners, the tools so that they can maintain their emissions."

The "right to repair" movement isn't limited to farm machinery. Many states have legislation pending or have taken action on a person's right to have access to the tools they'd need to repair anything from smartphones and wheelchairs to e-tablets and heavy equipment.

Schweitzer added that when it comes to farming in Montana, waiting for an authorized tractor dealer to come to his farm and fix a piece of equipment can mean the difference between harvesting a crop before bad weather hits and losing it.

"Well, that happened to me," he said. "I was haying, had a tractor hooked to my baler, and I had a fuel sensor that was failing, and so it was shutting my tractor down randomly. So, here I am - I've got hay in a windrow ready to bale, rain could wreck it, and I don't have a tractor to bale."

The ruling by the EPA requires dealers to provide necessary software to farmers, allowing them to diagnose and fix their own farm equipment emissions issues. In this case, Schweitzer said, being able to do that would have saved him a $5,000 fuel-sensor repair bill.




get more stories like this via email

North Dakota farmers and fellow producers from around the country are in Washington, D.C., this week, calling on Congress to prioritize the soon-to-expire Farm Bill.

The sweeping policy, which carves out funding for agriculture programs as well as SNAP benefits, is updated every five years, and parts of the current version expire at the end of the month. The looming deadline is overshadowed by another fiscal fight: Lawmakers must agree on a broader spending plan by Oct. 1 to avoid a government shutdown.

Christopher Lundeby, a fifth-generation farmer from northeastern North Dakota, is among those meeting with members of Congress, asking them to kick-start efforts on the Farm Bill.

"You hope that they are truly feeling the same way that you are and are taking it to heart," Lundeby explained. "But at the same time, in the end, do they really agree with you or are they just trying to make you feel better?"

Lundeby is also with the North Dakota Farmers Union, which wants provisions like a stronger farm safety net, better and permanent disaster programs, and farmer-friendly climate provisions. But some House Republicans, namely the Freedom Caucus, have said they want reductions. Policy experts have said with an agreement out of reach for now, the current Farm Bill could see a temporary extension.

Even if a temporary extension happens, Lundeby pointed out there is real concern some aspects of the Farm Bill will be cut. He stressed with market concentration still a problem within agriculture, now is not the time to lose sight of protecting smaller farmers from corporate influence.

"Corporations and packers and other entities find the loopholes," Lundeby emphasized. "It needs work. It's getting better but it's still a struggle when it comes to some of the issues."

Labor organizations representing farmers also want federal policymakers to enact a competition title. They say it would increase fairness in the marketplace and address corporate consolidation in food and ag markets. Those who traveled to Washington to demand action are expected to wrap up their meetings today.