Small farmers vs. profits
Radio listeners in north-central Iowa recently got a chance
to hear both sides of the debate on the future of the livestock
industry. On March 29 radio station KWMT, widely listened to across
that part of the state, featured an annual agricultural forum
broadcast live with some of the best known proponents and opponents
of large-scale livestock farms in the state.
Speakers supporting the increase of the "factory farms" included both the State Senate and House Agriculture Committee chairman, an official with the Iowa Pork Producers Association (IPPA), the deputy director of the state Department of Natural Resources (DNR), and a spokesman for the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation.
Opposing this trend were Larry Ginter, a small hog producer active in the Iowa Citizens for Community Improvement (ICCI), and Gary Hoske, who farms 600 acres of row crops and livestock and is vice president of the Iowa Farmers Union.
Russ Eddie of the Senate Agriculture Committee began the debate by gushing, "The future is unlimited profitability for our industry!" He pointed towards the untapped possibilities of exporting meat to Russia, China, and the Pacific Rim. The revolution in how pork is produced, said Eddie, was due to consumer demand and "simple economics."
Because of a good business climate in the state, he maintained, "it's a lot easier for a young person in Iowa who wants to produce pork - not raise pigs, but produce pork."
Brent Halling of the IPPA agreed, saying that the "future of livestock is very good. Iowa can either throw it out the window or we can prosper." Halling also supported the Animal Feeding Operation Act as "sound and logical."
This law was passed last year by the Iowa legislature. It sets new separation distances for confinement facili-ties and manure lagoons, requires manure - management plans, and provides "nuisance protection" for livestock producers who get sued by nearby residents. It also cements zoning and permit decisions for confinement facilities at the state level, instead of at the county or township level. This bill is supported by the IPPA, Murphy Family Farms, and Iowa Select Farms, among others.
Ginter lambasted this act as pro-factory farm: "The overwhelming majority of Iowa citizens want local control, and are repelled by the nuisance protection clause of this bill."
"The four biggest hog producers give the National Pork Producers Council $3 million a year in dues," Ginter explained. "We will hold our officials accountable for their role in this!" he said to applause from the studio audience.
When House Agriculture chair Eddie was asked during discussion why counties shouldn't have the ability to regulate hog megafarms on a local level, he gave three reasons: favoritism and corruption on the local level, the potential to make decisions detrimental to smaller operators, and that local decision-making would become "too political." He also indicated that he didn't have a definition for what a "family farm" was.
Ginter responded to this forcefully. "Most people in the countryside can understand what a factory farm is and what a family farm is. And we're sick and tired of politicians dictating to the people who work in the countryside."
Bill Kalman
Des Moines, Iowa
Disagrees on Taiwan
I have been reading the Militant for several months now and I
have consistently agreed with your positions. However, I was
disappointed by recent articles supporting China's right to annex
Taiwan.
The Taiwanese people have their own history, language, and culture, and they deserve to be free not only from the counterrevolutionary Chinese who invaded in 1949, but also from the government in Beijing.
The Taiwanese people have made it clear that they do not desire reunification with China. After you supported freedom for the Irish and Quebecois people, it is hypocritical to deny the same right of self-determination to Taiwan.
In fact, it seems that the only reason you support Beijing is that they call themselves communists. However, a look at China's recent history will show that they have not always represented the people. In the 1950s, China refused to support the Soviet de- Stalinization program and launched an anti-Soviet propaganda drive. Since 1951, China has oppressed the people of Tibet and closed Buddhist monasteries. China betrayed the workers state of Vietnam in 1979 and invaded it to support the brutal Cambodian regime that had massacred over one million people. In 1989, the Chinese rulers brutally attacked the students and workers demonstrating for democratic reforms in Beijing.
Since Chairman Mao's death, China's bureaucracy has cut education, reintroduced free enterprise, and done everything possible to bring capitalism back to China. The U.S. rulers, anxious to take advantage of China's gigantic consumer market, have bent over backward to meet China's demands. In fact, there is almost no difference today between China and the world's other imperialist powers. Please reexamine your position on Sino- Taiwanese relations
Loren Meyer
Helena, Montana
Critique the candidates
I think that a series of articles that analyzed and critiqued
the various left-wing candidates for presidential office would help
in the process of deciding which of these candidates will serve as
the best alternative to Clinton.
Robert Calkins
Portland, Oregon
The letters column is an open forum for all viewpoints on subjects of general interest to our readers. Please keep your letters brief. Where necessary they will be abridged. Please indicate if you prefer that your initials be used rather than your full name.