Read without ads and support Scribd by becoming a Scribd Premium Reader.
See Premium Plans
 
1AC – Farm Subsidy OverhaulPage| 1
The Silver Bullet – The Case for Farm Subsidy Overhaul
- Jennifer Hoffpauir, writing for the Fordham Environmental Law Review, said in 2009 that:
“Environmental considerations may or may not influence American farmers, but government subsidies certainly do.
Since the GreatDepression, the federal government has been subsidizing key agricultural commodities, and virtually all farmersgrowing these commodities have been affected by government programs, either directly or indirectly. Thesegovernment subsidies stimulate crop production, ‘and to the extent that such increases in output impose unintendedand unaccounted for environmental costs on society, those environmental costs can be seen as a form of government“policy failure.”’
The full ramification of that policy failure with regard to environmental costs has never been fully realized by the federalgovernment.”
 Jennifer Hoffpauir [Juris Doctorate Candidate at the Georgetown University Law Center (2009)], “The Environmental Impact of CommoditySubsidies: NEPA and the Farm Bill,” Article Published in the Fordham Environmental Law Review, Spring 2009, (20 Fordham Envtl. Law Rev.233) [Ethos]
- Because my partner and I believe that there is a solution to this policy failure, we are strongly resolved: That theUnited States Federal Government should significantly reform its environmental policy.- First, we would like to clarify the boundaries of the round by offering key
Definitions
…
A) Environmental policy. Professors Natalia Mirovitskaya and William Ascher explained that:
“Environmental policy includes
regulations to prohibit or limit pollution and resource depletion;
incentives policies
(including taxmeasures)
to encourage environmental improvements and to discourage pollution and depletion
 
, and direct environmentalefforts to clean up, protect, or restore ecosystems.”
 Dr. Natalia Mirovitskaya [Ph.D. in Economics from the Russian Academy of Sciences; Visiting Professor of Environmental Policy at DukeUniversity] & Dr. William L. Ascher [Ph.D. in Political Science from Yale University; Professor of Government and Economics at Claremont McKenna College], “The guide to Environmental Policy and Sustainable Development,” Book Published by the Duke University Press, 2001, p. 186 [Accessed via Google Books]
B) The Conservation Stewardship Program. The National Resources Conservation Service notes that:
“The Conservation Stewardship Program (CSP) is a voluntary conservation program that encourages [agricultural] producers to address resource concerns in a comprehensive manner by:
•
Undertaking additional conservation activities; and
•
Improving, maintaining, and managing existing conservation activities. 
CSP is available on Tribal and private agricultural lands and non-industrial private forest land in all 50 States and the Caribbean and PacificIslands Areas. The program provides equitable access to all producers, regardless of operation size, crops produced, or geographic location. TheSecretary of Agriculture has delegated the authority for CSP to the NRCS Chief.”
The U.S. Department of Agriculture’s National Resources Conservation Service, “Conservation Stewardship Program,” Page last updated on January 27, 2010,http://www.nrcs.usda.gov/new_csp/csp.html [PB] [brackets added for clarity]
C) Sustainable agriculture.(1) The U.S. Department of State defines it as:
“Farming methods that conserve the environment by minimizing damage to soil, water sources, species habitat andother natural resources.
Examples include no-till farming, crop rotation, and prevention of runoff or leaching of fertilizers and pesticides.”
The U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of International Information Programs [engages international audiences on issues of foreign policy, society and values to help create an environment receptive to U.S. national interests; communicates with foreign opinion makers and other  publics through a wide range of print and electronic outreach materials published in English, Arabic, Chinese, French, Persian, Russian, and Spanish; also provides information outreach support to U.S. embassies and consulates in more than 140 countries worldwide], “Glossary of  Environmental Terms,” June 26, 2009,http://www.america.gov/st/env-english/2008/July/20080725134616mlenuhret2.274722e-02.html [PB]
Black/Byrd/CottonPSDC
 
1AC – Farm Subsidy OverhaulPage| 2
(2) Professor Mary Jane Angelo said in 2010 that:
“The Union of Concerned Scientists identifies five key techniques of sustainable agriculture as: crop rotation; cover crops; soil enrichment; natural pest predators; and bio-intensive integrated pest management.”
 Professor Mary Jane Angelo [Associate Professor of Law at the University of Florida Fredric G. Levin College of Law], “Corn, Carbon and Conservation: Rethinking U.S. Agricultural Policy in a Changing Global Environment,” Article Published by the University of Florida LevinCollege of Law, January 18, 2010, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1537178[PB]
- Now that we have defined the relevant terms of this round, let us take a look at the
Current System
…
Point #1: Currently, the vast majority of agricultural subsidies go to just a few commodity crops
- William S. Eubanks, Environmental Law Expert, stated in 2009 that:“The Farm Bill originated as a temporary fix to protect small farmers
during the farm crisis of the early 1930s. Although it metits primary goal of bringing the nation back to stability,
[but] the tide gradually turned as profit-seeking corporations co-optedthe Farm Bill
and excluded the small farmer that the bill initially sought to protect.
For nearly the past half-century, agriculturalsubsidies for a select few commodity crops have wreaked havoc on every facet of our nation’s natural environmentas industrial farming has taken hold.”
William S. Eubanks II [an Environmental Law Attorney (Associate Attorney at the Washington D.C. public interest environmental law firm of Meyer Glitzenstein & Crystal); Master’s of Law Degree in Environmental Law, summa cum laude (withhighest  praise – an honor added to diplomasand degrees for work that is considered to be of the highest quality) from the Vermond Law School (2008); Juris Doctorate, magna cum laude (withgreat  praise – an honor added to adiplomaor degree for work considered greatly above average), from the North Carolina Central University School of Law (2007)], “The Sustainable Farm Bill: A Proposal for Permanent Environmental Change,” Article Published inthe Stanford Environmental Law Journal, (28 Stan. Envtl. L.J.) [Ethos]
Point # 2: U.S. past attempts to conserve farm land have failed to provide necessary funding andcomprehensive programs
- Professor Mary Jane Angelo noted in 2010 that:
“Although these
[conservation] programs
encourage certain conservation practices, they
do not address the overarchingenvironmental concerns associated with industrial commodity production
– i.e.,
[such as]
the unsustainability due to highenergy (i.e., fossil fuel) inputs, the widespread environmental harms caused by chemical outputs (i.e., fertilizer and pesticides) and
the loss of  biodiversity and ecological integrity due to large-scale monoculture production.
The largest program, the CRP and WRP, areland set aside program and thus do not address in any way the manner in which farming is carried out. Moreover, all of the programs arevoluntary with strict limits on the types and amounts of lands that can be enrolled and on the types of practices that qualify for the subsidies.
Moreover, the amount of money devoted to these conservation programs pales in comparison
to the money expended oncommodity subsidy programs described above. For example, approximately 1.5 billion dollars per year is spent on the CRP as compared
to the20 billion dollars per year spent on the commodity subsidy programs.”
 Professor Mary Jane Angelo [Associate Professor of Law at the University of Florida Fredric G. Levin College of Law], “Corn, Carbon and Conservation: Rethinking U.S. Agricultural Policy in a Changing Global Environment,” Article Published by the University of Florida LevinCollege of Law, January 18, 2010, http://papers.ssrn.com/sol3/papers.cfm?abstract_id=1537178[PB] [brackets added for clarity]
Black/Byrd/CottonPSDC
 
1AC – Farm Subsidy OverhaulPage| 3
- In order to remedy the U.S. policy failures of the past decades, we present to you the following
Plan
…
Agency:
Congress and the President.
Mandates:(1) Reform the Conservation Stewardship Program.
CSP payments will be redefined to givesubsidies specifically to farmers who use sustainable agricultural methods as defined above.Payments shall mirror Cost-Share payments, which have complied with World Trade OrganizationStandards.
(2) Expand the CSP into the commodity subsidy program.
Congress shall replace Title Icommodity subsidies (with the exclusion of dairy subsidies) with CSP sustainable agriculturesubsidies; so that all of the subsidies formerly offered to farmers growing commodity crops willinstead be given to farmers using sustainable agriculture methods.
Enforcement:
The U.S. Department of Agriculture, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and the USDA’sConservation Stewardship Program.
Funding:
Shall come from the funding currently used for the distribution and enforcement of commodity subsidiesand CSP payments.- My partner and I reserve the right to clarify this plan in future speeches.Finally, we would like to offer the
Justifications
for our plan…
Justification #1: Market Distortion
A. Commodity subsidy requirements result in a surplus of commodity crops, driving down the price of unhealthy foods made from these crops
- Senator Richard G. Lugar said in 2007 that:
“If the only thing wrong with the farm bill were that it took from the poor to give to the rich, it would rank high among our nation’s most perverse public policies. But there’s more. Not only does
our policy
unfairly subsidize wealthy farmers, it particularly
subsidizes a fewcommodity crops at the expense of other agricultural products.
The
five big crops
– wheat, cotton, corn, soybeans and rice – 
rake in 90% of the subsidies. Thus we subsidize the manufacture of such things as high-fructose corn syrup andhydrogenated vegetable oils, in the process lowering the price of all
those
[of the] ‘junk food’
snacks
[that] parents aresupposed to discourage their kids from eating. Meanwhile, healthy [food]
snacks such as fresh fruits and vegetables, beingunsubsidized, are
[is] made relatively more expensive.”
Senator Richard G. Lugar [the longest serving U.S. Senator in Indiana history; graduated first in his class at Denison University in Granville,Ohio; attended Pembroke College at Oxford University as a Rhodes Scholar, studying politics, philosophy and economics; has 40 honorarydegrees from colleges and universities in 14 states and the District of Columbia; was the fourth person ever named Outstanding Legislator by the American Political Science Association], “Agricultural subsidies take from poor, give to rich,” Article Published in the Kennebec Journal, November 9, 2007, http://lugar.senate.gov/farmbill/oped/75.cfm [PB] [brackets added]
Black/Byrd/CottonPSDC
Search
Search History:
Searching...
Result 00 of 00
00 results for result for
  • p.
    • Notes
    Load more