SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
Those senators who claim to support rural America must reject Tom Vilsack as Agriculture secretary. (Photo: Drew Angerer/Getty Images)
Tom Vilsack's Cozy Relationship With Big Ag Makes Him A Non-Starter at USDA
The Biden administration will fail rural America right out of the gate with a choice like Tom Vilsack for Secretary of Agriculture.
Dec 21, 2020
Tom Vilsack wasn't the right choice for Secretary of Agriculture in 2008 when President Obama nominated him to serve in that role. He isn't the right choice now, either. With Vilsack, we're guaranteed years more of corporate agribusinesses running roughshod over family farms and rural communities, and years more of the USDA prioritizing corporate farm policy at the expense of the rest of the agency's mandate. Years more of declining rural communities, increasing food insecurity and dangerous working conditions for food and farmworkers. Bad policy that allowed for the takeover of corporate agribusiness got us into this mess. It's unlikely Tom Vilsack will get us out.
Iowa's Family Farms and Workers Already Lost Big Under Vilsack's Leadership
Many people associate USDA solely with rural communities and farm policy. That might make Tom Vilsack--former Iowa governor who later headed the USDA under the Obama administration--seem like the logical choice. But his track record shows a cozy relationship with corporate agriculture. He was governor of Iowa during the state's rapid factory farm expansion; under his tenure, Iowa lost two-thirds of its family-scale hog farms and shed tens of thousands of farm jobs.
As Secretary of Agriculture, Vilsack failed to hold up his promise of addressing antitrust issues in the agricultural industry. A series of public meetings on the issue held jointly with the Department of Justice never resulted in regulatory action, and USDA policy continued to favor large-scale, corporate farming at the expense of family farms. Vilsack went on to become a lobbyist for the Dairy Export Industry, raking in more than $1 million in his first year, at a time when prospects for dairy farmers were so bleak that some received a suicide prevention hotline number along with their dairy checks. The prospect of Vilsack returning to head the USDA is an egregious example of a revolving door between industry and government.
The Question Of Serving Rural or Urban Communities Is A False One
Choosing Vilsack instead of other potential nominees like Congresswoman Marcia Fudge ensures the agency will continue to prioritize one small part of its mission -- agricultural policy -- at the expense of many other very important issues. Many people don't realize that USDA also oversees food safety, animal health, nutrition assistance programs and nutrition services, the Forest Service, rural housing and rural development -- a vast mandate critical to the health and well-being of everyone.
Unfortunately, the debate between status-quo candidates like Vilsack and Heidi Keitkamp and progressive leaders like Marcia Fudge is sometimes framed as a choice between serving farmers' interests or focusing on hunger and food insecurity. This is a false choice grossly mischaracterized as a rural vs. urban dynamic. For instance, hunger is often seen as primarily an urban issue, but in reality, rural counties consistently receive federal food assistance at higher rates than those living in urban counties. A 2018 Daily Yonder analysis ranked the share of county population participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (administered by USDA) and found that 85 of the top 100 counties were rural. The 2018 American Community Survey found that the non-metro poverty rate was 16.1% compared to 12.6% in metro areas.
We Urge Senators To Reject Tom Vilsack For Secretary Of Agriculture
Four more years of Vilsack means four more years of corporate-friendly policies that drain rural wealth and increase food insecurity. It will be a seamless transition from Trump's USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue to Vilsack: he will continue the business as usual approach of working on behalf of Big Ag at the expense of struggling people across the country.
This isn't another tired rural vs. urban debate. It is a choice between everyday people -- rural and urban -- versus corporate profits. The Biden Administration, in nominating Vilsack, has already failed rural America -- over a month before Biden's inauguration. Those senators who claim to support rural America must reject Tom Vilsack as Agriculture secretary.
An Urgent Message From Our Co-Founder
Dear Common Dreams reader, It’s been nearly 30 years since I co-founded Common Dreams with my late wife, Lina Newhouser. We had the radical notion that journalism should serve the public good, not corporate profits. It was clear to us from the outset what it would take to build such a project. No paid advertisements. No corporate sponsors. No millionaire publisher telling us what to think or do. Many people said we wouldn't last a year, but we proved those doubters wrong. Together with a tremendous team of journalists and dedicated staff, we built an independent media outlet free from the constraints of profits and corporate control. Our mission has always been simple: To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. Building Common Dreams was not easy. Our survival was never guaranteed. When you take on the most powerful forces—Wall Street greed, fossil fuel industry destruction, Big Tech lobbyists, and uber-rich oligarchs who have spent billions upon billions rigging the economy and democracy in their favor—the only bulwark you have is supporters who believe in your work. But here’s the urgent message from me today. It's never been this bad out there. And it's never been this hard to keep us going. At the very moment Common Dreams is most needed, the threats we face are intensifying. We need your support now more than ever. We don't accept corporate advertising and never will. We don't have a paywall because we don't think people should be blocked from critical news based on their ability to pay. Everything we do is funded by the donations of readers like you. When everyone does the little they can afford, we are strong. But if that support retreats or dries up, so do we. Will you donate now to make sure Common Dreams not only survives but thrives? —Craig Brown, Co-founder |
© 2021 Food & Water Watch
Krissy Kasserman
Krissy Kasserman is the National Factory Farm Campaigner at Food and Water Watch. She works to take our national fight against factory farms to the next level as we battle corporate agriculture and work towards a more sustainable, safer, and equitable food system.
Amanda Claire Starbuck
Amanda Claire Starbuck is the Senior Food Researcher and Policy Analyst on the Food Team at Food & Water Watch. She previously worked as a Policy Analyst for Citizen Health & Safety at the Center for Effective Government, where she focused on chemical hazards and fracking. Amanda holds a bachelor's degree in English and Philosophy & Religion from the University of North Dakota, and a master's in Global Environmental Policy from American University.
Tom Vilsack wasn't the right choice for Secretary of Agriculture in 2008 when President Obama nominated him to serve in that role. He isn't the right choice now, either. With Vilsack, we're guaranteed years more of corporate agribusinesses running roughshod over family farms and rural communities, and years more of the USDA prioritizing corporate farm policy at the expense of the rest of the agency's mandate. Years more of declining rural communities, increasing food insecurity and dangerous working conditions for food and farmworkers. Bad policy that allowed for the takeover of corporate agribusiness got us into this mess. It's unlikely Tom Vilsack will get us out.
Iowa's Family Farms and Workers Already Lost Big Under Vilsack's Leadership
Many people associate USDA solely with rural communities and farm policy. That might make Tom Vilsack--former Iowa governor who later headed the USDA under the Obama administration--seem like the logical choice. But his track record shows a cozy relationship with corporate agriculture. He was governor of Iowa during the state's rapid factory farm expansion; under his tenure, Iowa lost two-thirds of its family-scale hog farms and shed tens of thousands of farm jobs.
As Secretary of Agriculture, Vilsack failed to hold up his promise of addressing antitrust issues in the agricultural industry. A series of public meetings on the issue held jointly with the Department of Justice never resulted in regulatory action, and USDA policy continued to favor large-scale, corporate farming at the expense of family farms. Vilsack went on to become a lobbyist for the Dairy Export Industry, raking in more than $1 million in his first year, at a time when prospects for dairy farmers were so bleak that some received a suicide prevention hotline number along with their dairy checks. The prospect of Vilsack returning to head the USDA is an egregious example of a revolving door between industry and government.
The Question Of Serving Rural or Urban Communities Is A False One
Choosing Vilsack instead of other potential nominees like Congresswoman Marcia Fudge ensures the agency will continue to prioritize one small part of its mission -- agricultural policy -- at the expense of many other very important issues. Many people don't realize that USDA also oversees food safety, animal health, nutrition assistance programs and nutrition services, the Forest Service, rural housing and rural development -- a vast mandate critical to the health and well-being of everyone.
Unfortunately, the debate between status-quo candidates like Vilsack and Heidi Keitkamp and progressive leaders like Marcia Fudge is sometimes framed as a choice between serving farmers' interests or focusing on hunger and food insecurity. This is a false choice grossly mischaracterized as a rural vs. urban dynamic. For instance, hunger is often seen as primarily an urban issue, but in reality, rural counties consistently receive federal food assistance at higher rates than those living in urban counties. A 2018 Daily Yonder analysis ranked the share of county population participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (administered by USDA) and found that 85 of the top 100 counties were rural. The 2018 American Community Survey found that the non-metro poverty rate was 16.1% compared to 12.6% in metro areas.
We Urge Senators To Reject Tom Vilsack For Secretary Of Agriculture
Four more years of Vilsack means four more years of corporate-friendly policies that drain rural wealth and increase food insecurity. It will be a seamless transition from Trump's USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue to Vilsack: he will continue the business as usual approach of working on behalf of Big Ag at the expense of struggling people across the country.
This isn't another tired rural vs. urban debate. It is a choice between everyday people -- rural and urban -- versus corporate profits. The Biden Administration, in nominating Vilsack, has already failed rural America -- over a month before Biden's inauguration. Those senators who claim to support rural America must reject Tom Vilsack as Agriculture secretary.
Krissy Kasserman
Krissy Kasserman is the National Factory Farm Campaigner at Food and Water Watch. She works to take our national fight against factory farms to the next level as we battle corporate agriculture and work towards a more sustainable, safer, and equitable food system.
Amanda Claire Starbuck
Amanda Claire Starbuck is the Senior Food Researcher and Policy Analyst on the Food Team at Food & Water Watch. She previously worked as a Policy Analyst for Citizen Health & Safety at the Center for Effective Government, where she focused on chemical hazards and fracking. Amanda holds a bachelor's degree in English and Philosophy & Religion from the University of North Dakota, and a master's in Global Environmental Policy from American University.
Tom Vilsack wasn't the right choice for Secretary of Agriculture in 2008 when President Obama nominated him to serve in that role. He isn't the right choice now, either. With Vilsack, we're guaranteed years more of corporate agribusinesses running roughshod over family farms and rural communities, and years more of the USDA prioritizing corporate farm policy at the expense of the rest of the agency's mandate. Years more of declining rural communities, increasing food insecurity and dangerous working conditions for food and farmworkers. Bad policy that allowed for the takeover of corporate agribusiness got us into this mess. It's unlikely Tom Vilsack will get us out.
Iowa's Family Farms and Workers Already Lost Big Under Vilsack's Leadership
Many people associate USDA solely with rural communities and farm policy. That might make Tom Vilsack--former Iowa governor who later headed the USDA under the Obama administration--seem like the logical choice. But his track record shows a cozy relationship with corporate agriculture. He was governor of Iowa during the state's rapid factory farm expansion; under his tenure, Iowa lost two-thirds of its family-scale hog farms and shed tens of thousands of farm jobs.
As Secretary of Agriculture, Vilsack failed to hold up his promise of addressing antitrust issues in the agricultural industry. A series of public meetings on the issue held jointly with the Department of Justice never resulted in regulatory action, and USDA policy continued to favor large-scale, corporate farming at the expense of family farms. Vilsack went on to become a lobbyist for the Dairy Export Industry, raking in more than $1 million in his first year, at a time when prospects for dairy farmers were so bleak that some received a suicide prevention hotline number along with their dairy checks. The prospect of Vilsack returning to head the USDA is an egregious example of a revolving door between industry and government.
The Question Of Serving Rural or Urban Communities Is A False One
Choosing Vilsack instead of other potential nominees like Congresswoman Marcia Fudge ensures the agency will continue to prioritize one small part of its mission -- agricultural policy -- at the expense of many other very important issues. Many people don't realize that USDA also oversees food safety, animal health, nutrition assistance programs and nutrition services, the Forest Service, rural housing and rural development -- a vast mandate critical to the health and well-being of everyone.
Unfortunately, the debate between status-quo candidates like Vilsack and Heidi Keitkamp and progressive leaders like Marcia Fudge is sometimes framed as a choice between serving farmers' interests or focusing on hunger and food insecurity. This is a false choice grossly mischaracterized as a rural vs. urban dynamic. For instance, hunger is often seen as primarily an urban issue, but in reality, rural counties consistently receive federal food assistance at higher rates than those living in urban counties. A 2018 Daily Yonder analysis ranked the share of county population participating in the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (administered by USDA) and found that 85 of the top 100 counties were rural. The 2018 American Community Survey found that the non-metro poverty rate was 16.1% compared to 12.6% in metro areas.
We Urge Senators To Reject Tom Vilsack For Secretary Of Agriculture
Four more years of Vilsack means four more years of corporate-friendly policies that drain rural wealth and increase food insecurity. It will be a seamless transition from Trump's USDA Secretary Sonny Perdue to Vilsack: he will continue the business as usual approach of working on behalf of Big Ag at the expense of struggling people across the country.
This isn't another tired rural vs. urban debate. It is a choice between everyday people -- rural and urban -- versus corporate profits. The Biden Administration, in nominating Vilsack, has already failed rural America -- over a month before Biden's inauguration. Those senators who claim to support rural America must reject Tom Vilsack as Agriculture secretary.
We've had enough. The 1% own and operate the corporate media. They are doing everything they can to defend the status quo, squash dissent and protect the wealthy and the powerful. The Common Dreams media model is different. We cover the news that matters to the 99%. Our mission? To inform. To inspire. To ignite change for the common good. How? Nonprofit. Independent. Reader-supported. Free to read. Free to republish. Free to share. With no advertising. No paywalls. No selling of your data. Thousands of small donations fund our newsroom and allow us to continue publishing. Can you chip in? We can't do it without you. Thank you.