What does Obama's choice for Agriculture Secretary mean for U.S. food policy? While the NY Times and others essentially endorse the choice of former Iowa governor, Tom Vilsack, as Ag #1, I have my doubts. He was certainly not on the shortlist that Michael Pollan and other reform advocates drew up a few weeks back. Last Wednesday, Nicholas Kristoff eloquently wrote on the issue and the need to steer away from a secretary who is closely tied to big business agriculture. Yet choosing an Iowan governor is a pretty clear sign that King Corn won't be in danger anytime some.
As Ezra Klein points out over at the American Prospect, "appointing him to head the agency is like appointing the governor of a petrostate to head the Department of Energy."
Apparently, Vilsack is a strong advocate of combating global warming and developing alternative energy sources. That's great, but according to the Times, "One of the first major decisions Mr. Obama and Mr. Vilsack may have to make is whether to grant the ethanol industry’s requests for billions in federal aid in the stimulus bill." Let's face it, Corn rules Iowa ergo Corn brought Vilsack to power ergo he isn't going to bite the hand that feeds him....unless he is the coolest dude ever. I hope he surprises everyone and gets rid of ethanol subsidies. Then farmers, not Monsanto win. Then food is about the consumers not the producers. Argh!!!! I guess we shouldn't give up Hope just yet.
No comments:
Post a Comment