Panelists voiced sharply divergent views at "The Future of Kansas Farming and the 2007 Farm Bill" on Nov. 5 at a public forum held at Sacred Heart Cathedral Parish hall in Salina.

The Salina diocesan rural life commission and the Kansas Catholic Conference sponsored the forum, which drew farmers, state legislators, clergy and religious, among others.

The forum took place against a backdrop of anxiety, no little frustration about the state of American agriculture, and little agreement on solutions.

Panelists included Jim French, representing Oxfam America and the Kansas Rural Center; Harry Watts, from the Kansas Farm Bureau; Tom Giessel, a farmer from Larned, representing the Kansas Farmers Union; and Dr. Terry Kastens, an agricultural economist from Kansas State University.

Bishop Paul S. Coakley of the Diocese of Salina gave the welcome and offered the church’s contribution to the debate: Catholic social teaching and concern about the just ordering of society.

"Our policies, our structures, must serve the person," said the bishop. "That is the measure — the human person — for all the policies that must be made."

French said current agricultural policies hurt farmers and rural communities in the United States and in poor nations.

"In 2002, a farm bill was passed that created a framework that fuels overproduction, commodity specialization, and farm consolidation in the U.S.," said French. "In short, commodity farmers have no incentive to limit production based on market signals. As prices go lower, farmers must produce more in order to take advantage of the guaranteed price posted by the government and paid by the U. S. taxpayer."

Surpluses caused by subsidized production are dumped on the world market, undercutting poor farmers overseas and leading to increasing poverty and hunger, he said.

While French called for shifting support from commodities to conservation, Harry Watts, a member of St. Thomas More Parish in Manhattan, said there was very little interest in conservation programs among KFB membership. Members find them "cumbersome, difficult to understand, and difficult to implement."

"What our farmers and ranchers want, I’m not sure they’ll actually see in the next farm bill," said Watts, director of governmental relations for KFB. "Many of our farmers across the state like the 2002 Farm Bill, believe it or not. They think it’s been good for them, for the most part, and they’d like the 2007 Farm Bill to be similar.

"Again, this is what our members are telling us. They like the traditional commodity payments, and [think] they should remain the same. They also want a very strong safety net. That’s critical."

The only way KFB members would support lowering subsidies is if the World Trade Organization allows complete market access to all countries, something he’s somewhat optimistic will happen.

Terry Kastens, also a farmer, said the one-family farm is at great risk and farmers are increasingly faced with decisions that balance happiness with costs.

"The family farms aren’t going away," said Kastens. "The big farms we have are family farms, they’re multiple families — cousins, relatives, sons, multiple generational. The big dairies in Kansas are family. So don’t have this vision of Cargills and Monsantos tearing ‘Ag’ by getting involved. That’s not what’s going on here; we’re talking about families — about families getting big.

"Now, what’s going to go away is the one-family family farm. They’re going to be dead. They’re going to be dead. And the quicker we realize that, the quicker we can move on."

Farming, he said, is no different from other U.S. industrial sectors. The trend is toward large farms, and this will continue with or without government payments. Nevertheless, the need for people in agriculture will not go away. In the future, most farmers will be managers and employees.

"We’ve got to get over this idea that you’ve got to be your own boss," he said. "The whole world runs on people who aren’t their own boss. Who cares? You don’t have to be your own boss. . . . What counts is that you have enough responsibility and control over your actions that you feel good about what you do. We’ve got farmers starving to death all over this state and country who happen to be their own boss, and they’re totally miserable."

Tom Giessel, a Catholic from the Diocese of Dodge City, called for more — not less — government involvement in agriculture policy.

"I think it started with the 1996 Freedom to Farm Bill," he said. "That was a giant leap away from what is necessary to maintain farmers around the world. This isn’t just about U.S. farmers. We’re starting to reap that hollow harvest."

Current farm policy has brought us historic low commodity prices, broken food systems, and hunger and poverty in nations that used to be self-sufficient.

"It’s difficult to explain, but it’s there and it’s real. And that’s what makes that system so special," said Giessel, defending the traditional owner-operator model of farming. "It may not make economic sense, but it darn sure makes social sense. It makes moral sense."

Giessel called for commodity price supports; the elimination of marketing loans in favor of non-recourse loans; selling commodities to the federal government instead of large commodity firms; production restrictions; farmer-owned grain reserves; conservation funding; antitrust enforcement; and continuation of the inheritance or "death" tax.

Ultimately, the hope of the traditional family farm might be found with America’s non-farmers.

"We keep talking about the farmers at risk, but what about the other 280 million people who depend on them?" said Giessel. "They have a lot more at risk. When you go talk to those people, they’re interested. But someone has got to get it on their radar screen.

"I think that’s where our hope and our future lies. And I might be all wet on this, but I’m going to fight for the family farmer. I think it’s the right system, and I’ll stand up and do it to the day I die, and I’ll not give up on it."