Although there are some new caps, the 2008 program is basically unchanged since the one in 2002. Taxpayers are funding a host of unnecessary research and marketing programs. by Bob Nightingale
(libertarian)
Friday, May 16, 2008
A tear came to my eye when I read the big print in Title VI of the $290 Billion Farm Bill. It sounds nice. When you read the excerpt, your heart goes out to all those disadvantaged farmers, barely scraping by.
Expands opportunities for locally grown, organic and small producers
Provides $15 million for the Value-Added Agricultural Product Market Development Grant program, which offers planning and working capital for marketing value-added products
Creates a 10% set-aside for beginning and socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers
Creates a 10% set-aside for strategic marketing alliances between small to mid-sized farms and ranches and other supply chain partners
Ok, it's only $15 million. It's a drop in the bucket. But it's a piece of a larger chunk of rotten fruit. It's too early to tell who is going to get the money for what over the next five years. But I can safely predict that it will all be spent.
I took a look back at how this grant money was spent in 2002. I wanted to see who was getting all this payola.
One needy grower was the Diamond Walnut Company of Stockton, CA. It received $345,000 to put their product into snack foods for domestic retail outlets. I buy Diamond brand walnuts all the time. I don't consider them "socially disadvantaged". It's a freaking walnut.
Perhaps the country needs more Georgia-branded pecans? Georgia Agricultural Commodity Commission for Pecans in Atlanta got $25,000 to "conduct marketing research to determine feasibility of establishing a branded 'Georgia Grown' pecan." When I eat a pecan pie, I really don't care where the cook got the nuts.
It gets more nuts. Arizona Pistachio Association of Tucson, Arizona received $64,500 to " Conduct feasibility study and prepare business plan in order to develop a processing facility and direct marketing strategy for Arizona's Pistachio production."
Midwest Nut Producers Council, Owosso, Michigan got $74,605 "to assess the feasibility of marketing products produced from small and broken peeled chestnuts." I guess they were too small to roast over an open fire.
A peanut is technically a pea and not a nut. But that doesn't stop Concordia, LLC of Ashburn, Georgia from spending $15,000 to "determine feasibility of collectively marketing peanuts by cleaning, grading, and segregating the peanuts according to variety and grade." Thank you, U.S. Taxpayer!
Along with these nuts, there are some fruits, who can't do proper marketing without help from you and me:
Pacific Coast Producers of Lodi, California got a $450,000 grant for working capital for production and marketing of private label fruit bowls to U.S. retailers.
Sunsweet Growers, Inc. of Yuba City, California got $500,000 "to conduct feasibility studies and analyze market potential for prune plum-based juice formulations." How about put some in the store and see if anyone buys it? Geesh.
At half a million dollars, how "small" or "disadvanted" are these guys?
And then, you have the programs that don't really say what they're for, except for "marketing":
Mountain View Harvest Cooperative of Longmont, Colorado got $342,310 to develop a marketing program for new products recently developed.
United Salmon Association of Kodiak, Alaska got $18,896 to conduct feasibility study and create business and marketing plan. I guess it was for fish.
Burton H. Griffin of West Suffield, Connecticut got a $12,500 check to "conduct a feasibility study, business plan and market research to determine the viability of an agri-tourism venture at Beaver Brook Farm." Burton, buddy, I want to party with you!
Quality Organic Producers Cooperative of Decorah, Iowa got $500,000 for working capital to market four unique soy beverages. Were they chocolate, vanilla, strawberry and spinach? No thanks.
It doesn't end with the above. There are grants to pay the salaries for biodiesel and ethanol plant employees. With fuel prices this high, I don't want to give a dime that says anything with "energy" in it.
Maybe I should go easy on the bison beefy jerky marketing plan? Nah. Squeeze it, salt it, toast it, and I'll eat it. Research done.
One item that hurts close to home is the $349,000 grant to someone in Kentucky to start a wholesale nursery business. My grandparents were in the tree nursery business for 30 years, and never took a dime that wasn't owed them. They also didn't take credit cards. Now that's nuts.
Did you like this article? If you did, Thumb It! 4
thumbs so far
The views expressed
in this article are those of Bob Nightingale only and
do not represent the views of Nolan Chart, LLC or its affiliates.
Bob Nightingale is solely responsible for the contents
of this article and is not an employee or otherwise affiliated
with Nolan Chart, LLC in his/her role as a columnist.
Want to comment on
this article? Leave your comment
here. Your email address is required to track your
comment. However, we will neither publish your email
address nor distribute it to other organizations or
persons. The only reason we might use it would be if
we needed to contact you regarding your comment. All
comments are subject to our
terms of use policy.
