Top

news

Stories

 

Farming for Federal Dollars

Meet the Minnesotans who receive subsidies for not growing anything

There are no corn, soybean, or wheat fields within biking distance of Royalton Heating and Cooling. The shop's headquarters, located in the decidedly un-rustic suburb of Brooklyn Center, isn't even within a stone's throw of a garden.

Yet the USDA sent checks totaling $6,522—made out to Stewart Brothers Partnership—to this address in 2008 for corn, soybean, and wheat, with an additional $2,600 coming in last year.

That's about all we know, because when we got Brady Stewart, Royalton's registered owner, on the phone, he had no interest in discussing the taxpayer subsidies he receives.

Asked whether he was involved in farming, Stewart sounded almost incredulous.

"We're not interested in anything like that," he said. "This is just a heating company."

Click.

No other facet of Midwestern policy elicits more controversy than farm subsidies. Implemented during the Dust Bowl as a safety net for struggling farmers—who then comprised 25 percent of the nation's population—the federal handouts have long since mutated into something else entirely. The vast majority of the public largesse is doled out not to family farms, but Big Agribusiness. About 10 percent of recipients account for 75 percent of the $10 to $30 billion the U.S. Department of Agriculture shells out each year.

Efforts to rein in farm subsidies have been stymied for years. Chalk it up to Big Ag's lobbying efforts, the disproportionate political clout enjoyed by rural states, and the romanticized notion of life on the farm, but few meaningful reforms have gotten out of the starting gate.

At $1 billion, Minnesota is the fourth biggest recipient of federal farm subsidies. In order to shed some light on who is receiving this money, City Pages filed a Freedom of Information Act request with the USDA. The resulting database contains tens of thousands of the farm subsidy recipients in each of the last three years—hundreds of whom reside in the metro and rarely, if ever, set foot on a farm.

"When absentee owners reap commodity program benefits, we consider that to be an abuse of farm programs," says Adam Warthesen, policy organizer with the Land Stewardship Project, a Minnesota-based non-profit. "There have been ample opportunities in Congress to cinch up some of these loopholes. They have utterly failed. And that gives all the other programs a bad name."

Noel Rahn

Venture capitalist/CEO, Rahn Group

SUBSIDIES RECEIVED IN 2009: $25,848 (MINNESOTA ONLY)

One would be hard pressed to invent a starker antithesis of the small family farmer than Noel Rahn.

Prior to forming California venture capital firm the Rahn Group in 1998, Rahn presided over Investment Advisers, Inc., a money-management firm headquartered in Minneapolis. During his 25 years at Investment Advisers, he helped grow the company from $50 million to $16 billion.

Along the way, the University of Southern California alum got heavily involved with agriculture, buying up thousands of acres of cropland and renting it out to farmers.

The land also provides a nice windfall from the federal government. Between 1995 and 2006, Rahn reaped $1,171,595 in corn and soybean subsidies, according to data collected by the Environmental Working Group, a watchdog organization that keeps a database on national farm subsidies. Last year, he collected $25,848 from his Minnesota land alone.

Rahn didn't return messages seeking comment. Perhaps he was out plowing?

David Alme

CEO, ABC Wire Sales

Subsidies received in 2009: $15,732

By his own admission, David Alme isn't your typical farmer. He's first and foremost a businessman—and a financially successful one at that.

Alme, 65, is co-founder of ABC Wire Sales, a company that manufacturers the steel string that recycling centers use to wrap bundles of salvaged waste. The affable resident of tony East Isles projects that ABC's profits this year will approach $6 million. He puts his yearly salary between $700,000 and $800,000, depending on annual sales.

Hardly the kind of person who requires government handouts to make ends meet. No matter. Alme collects more than $15,000 a year in farm subsidies.

"The checks used to total $40,000," he says matter-of-factly. "They've shrunk in recent years, but I think it's nice that they're shrinking. I don't need subsidies."

The bulk of Alme's subsidies—$14,910 of last year's total $15,732—come from direct payments, a particularly controversial sub-category of farm subsidies, since they're tied not to production but base acreage.

"Direct payments are the most egregious form of subsidy," says Don Carr, press secretary for the Environmental Working Group. "These are checks that are mailed out no matter what. You might not even grow anything a particular year and still get a check."

Alme says he grows corn and soybeans every year, planting and harvesting the crops himself. He homesteads on his 900-acre farm in Goondue County—about an hour and a half west of the metro—a move that grants him an additional tax break.

"I shouldn't get paid for putting in trees that I would have put in anyway," he says. "It's unnecessary. I feel sorry for anyone who has to represent us in Washington."

Pat Mulroy

Body shop owner

Subsidies received in 2009: $14,175

If Mulroy's Body Shop on Nicollet Avenue in downtown Minneapolis seems like an unlikely destination for tens of thousands of farm subsidy dollars, that's because it is.

1 | 2 | 3 | Next Page >>
 
  • JB 03/23/2010 5:37:00 AM

    Well, Citypages, you've really exposed yourselves as imbeciles, here. On one hand it's great that you've brought much-needed attention to outrageous farm subsidies, which absolutely need to stop. But as a small organic farmer I couldn't believe your stupidity in attacking the CRP program. "When you get down to it, you're renting your property to the USDA," he says. "The best part about CRP is that it protects wildlife. It really protects wildlife." For that reason, the USDA prohibits the use of snowmobiles, four-wheelers, or any motorized vehicle on CRP grounds. Recreational hunting, however, is allowed. I use the word "stupidity" because it's hard to call a college-educated writer "ignorant." You ought to have enough education to understand the complexities of ecology and the need for hunting as the only viable form of wildlife management available to us. I have never received a government subsidy for anything. I raise sheep, cattle, and produce. Mainly I sell at farmers markets. Most of the farmers in my area (western MN) leave no habitat for wildlife. If they can till it, hay it, or run cattle on it, they will. The precious conservation-minded few who are willing to restore native prairie and wetlands deserve the money they get from the government. Without CRP there would be no ducks nesting in western Minnesota. So many wetlands are being tiled and filled in for agricultural uses that the ducks and geese are actually altering their migration routes, which had previously been in place for tens of thousands of years. The DNR can't handle everything. Private landowners who help out are doing the natural world a big favor. Again, it boggles my mind, and I just have to ask...how can you be so stupid with regard to hunting? Do you not understand that hunting is a natural part of being human? Why do you think we're here? Our ape ancestors didn't evolve brains that allowed them to make tools by eating salads all day. We evolved into what we are by hunting, cooking, and eating red meat. That's what gave us an advantage over the vegetarian apes, with whom we competed. That's what put us at the top of the food chain. Now that we're at the top of the food chain, it is our responsibility to manage the land and its ecosystems at a naturally sustainable level. If deer were not hunted, they would reproduce like rats and strip the land of all new growth vegetation. In the old days hunting wasn't necessary because there were wolves everywhere to keep the deer in check. Then we came along and exterminated the wolves. It was a crime, yes, so we can either level accusations upon our long-dead ancestors or BECOME THE NEW WOLVES by taking control and setting nature back into its rightful balance. At the most fundamental level, that's what hunting is about. Personally, I hunt because I like to be self-sufficient. I like the taste of wild game. I don't like factory farming. I don't like genetically modified, chemical-saturated food. So I harvest deer, pheasants, geese, and rabbits from the prairie. You idiots in the city may think that's barbaric. Maybe it is. But if you want to see true savagery, go buy some flavorless hormone-infused "turkey" from a corporate grocery store.

  • James W Loghry 03/22/2010 7:50:00 PM

    Where is the main graphic in this picture from? I see no citation.

  • Becky 03/20/2010 10:37:00 PM

    I do not doubt that there are abuses to the system and that the laws have morphed over time. I do, however, disagree that it was set up, as a result of the depression, to help poor farmers. That may be partially true. It was more in response to the "dust bowl" which occurred during and worsened the depression. The dust bowl was caused by a combination of dry conditions along with over use of land. There were no root structures to hold down the dirt and it was blown away. It also brought attention to the fact that topsoil was being "worn out" by several years of growing crops that did not replenish the soil as well as erosion (i.e. this is how deltas are formed). Topsoil is formed from the growth and death and decay of (mostly) plants and animals. It was at that time that people realized that America's rich land was finite and must be managed. When these programs were first set up the land set aside was said to be in "soil bank". This was done as an incentive to get farmers to let some land sit idle. Since farmers depend on their crops to make a living and could not afford or perhaps would not do this on their own. I would not need to know more about the specific programs referred to in the article to make my own judgment about their value. Land that is used to grow crops depletes the topsoil. Land is covered with concrete or is densely populated does not deplete it, however it does not grow it either. Land that is densely covered with vegetation can grow inches of topsoil in a decade.(that is where dirt comes from, a backyard gardener does this by composting.) It is better for future generations to keep this land "idle" so even if these people are wealthy they are still adding to topsoil, even if that is not their motive. We, as Americans take this valuable resource for granted. Lack of topsoil has more to do with a country's wealth or poverty that it's gold.(Africa for example)

  • Edward Clark 03/18/2010 8:29:00 PM

    A relatively easy and painless fix is there for farm payments: simply target them to the working farmers of modest means who, by and large, are struggling to survive. That could be accomplished by first by putting a cap on payments of, for the sake perhaps $100,000 per farm, thus multi-billion-dollar payments to large agribusinesses would no longer take place, which would reduce the billions spent each year by the government dramatically. Then Congress could place a needs test to determine eligibility. If you lose your job but own a $2 million home, there is no way you can qualify for welfare. The same should be in place for farmers. On average, farmers' wealth exceeds that of non-farmers. If farmers have millions or billions in net worth, it would not seem appropriate to shower them with billions in subsidies while the citizenry in cities are losing their homes, with no public help whatsoever. What are the odds of putting caps on payments and targeting farm payments to those that truly need them? Virtually none. Farm policy is written by the House and Senate Agriculture Committees, and they are heavily influenced by organizations representing large farmers and agribusinesses. And the public, by and large, has little interest in farm policy, because it is so incredibly difficult to understand, and for some reason, farmers still can prey upon pastoral images many have for them, images that go back 50 years ago.

 

Most Popular Stories

Browse Voice Nation
  • Voice Places

    Voice Places

    Discover restaurants, nightlife, travel, shopping...

  • VOICE Daily Deals

    VOICE Daily Deals

    Get 50 to 90% off every day on restaurants, movies, massages...

  • Best Of

    Best Of...

    More than 10,000 of the BEST things to eat, drink, and experience

  • My Voice Nation

    My Voice Nation

    Join the Village Voice community and get exclusive deals and info

  • Happy Hour

    Happy Hour

    Your local Happy Hour guide at your fingertips

or

Log in or Sign up

Social Connect:

Use your favorite account to access My Voice Nation.


Use your My Voice Nation account to log in:





Forgot password?
or

Sign Up or Log in

Social Connect:

Sign up for My Voice Nation with your preferred network.


Sign up for a My Voice Nation account:



Privacy policy