Skip to content

Marc F. Bellemare Posts

The Future of Farm Bills

Historically, farm bill politics relied on an urban-rural logroll in which farm state lawmakers voted for food stamps in exchange for urban votes on agricultural subsidies. This year’s debate shows how much this has changed. Republican efforts to cut nutrition programs, including passage of an amendment adding strict work requirements as a condition of eligibility, all but assured Democratic opposition. When ultra-conservative Republicans split ranks because they felt these cuts did not go far enough, they effectively killed the bill. …

Splitting off farm subsidies from nutrition programs would be enormously consequential. In political terms, it would formally tear apart the urban-rural coalition that has been in place since the 1960s. In policy terms it would expose SNAP funding to deep cuts so long as Republicans hold a majority in the House. However, breaking the coalition would also expose farm subsidies to cuts as rural lawmakers could no longer lean on urban members for support. Interestingly, neither side wants to see less money going to its constituents yet this may be what happens as polarized policymaking makes cross-partisan coalitions less stable.

From a fascinating post last week by Johns Hopkins political scientist Adam Sheingate over at The Monkey Cage.

Adam is also the author of the 2003 book The Rise of the Agricultural Welfare State, in which he looked at agricultural protection from a comparative perspective and concluded that agricultural lobbies are not as powerful as one commonly hears.

On Plagiarism

On May 24, I published a post titled “Can Urban Agriculture Help with Food Security?,” in which I discussed the conclusions of a new working paper I had discovered through RepEc’s mailing list for new working papers in agricultural economics.

Last week Alberto Zezza, with whom I had corresponded about other things in the past, wrote to me to let me know that the paper I had linked to on May 24 appeared to have plagiarized one of his own published articles. Here is the abstract of Alberto and his coauthor’s article, which was published in Food Policy in 2010:

The Political Economy of Agricultural Policy

Hot on the heels of Monday’s post, in which I discussed my latest working paper “Why Do Members of Congress Support Agricultural Protection?,” here is the abstract of a very nice new article (a link to an ungated working paper version can be found here) by Kym Anderson, Gordon Rausser, and Jo Swinnen in the latest issue of the Journal of Economic Literature:

The agricultural and food sector is an ideal case for investigating the political economy of public policies. Many of the policy developments in this sector since the 1950s have been sudden and transformational, while others have been gradual but persistent. This article reviews and synthesizes the literature on trends and fluctuations in market distortions and the political-economy explanations that have been advanced. Based on a rich global data set covering a half-century of evidence on commodities, countries, and policy instruments, we identify hypotheses that have been explored in the literature on the extent of market distortions and the conditions under which reform may be feasible.