Making sense of the complex farm bill is the first step in bringing much-needed change to America’s badly broken food and farm system.

Advocates for good food get fed a Washington, DC diet of constant government austerity excuses when it comes to reforming the nation’s broken food and farm system. Apparently, it doesn’t matter that better policies – such as providing better quality food in school lunches – would pay long-term dividends in the form of healthier kids and lower health care costs. When pressed to address healthy food priorities, both parties’ standard response is the predictable, “There simply is no money.”

At the Environmental Working Group, we know that’s nonsense.

We follow the money, and we dig deeply into misguided agriculture policies to expose the real story. There’s plenty of money; it’s just going to the wrong places for the wrong reasons – such as the lavish payments that go to highly profitable mega farms whether they need it or not.

Gross inequities like this are on prominent display in EWG’s farm subsidy database, but pictures and graphics often speak much louder than words. With debate on the 2012 farm bill looking to begin in as little as a month’s time, EWG participated last week in our first-ever “Farm Bill Hackathon.” The competition was organized by Food Tech Connect to develop tools and visualizations to help convey to the public the complexities and relevance of the farm bill and America’s food system. Beth Hoffman of Food Tech Connect described it this way:

Over the weekend the Farm Bill Hackathon brought together (in person and virtually) 120 designers, data scientists, developers, marketing professionals, food policy experts and USDA employees to “hack” one of the most important pieces of legislation in the U.S. – the farm bill. Over the course of 12 hours, five graphics and four tools were produced, addressing issues as diverse as support to new farmers, the effect of subsidies on global hunger and how to crowd source Meatless Mondays.

Taking first prize was a piece titled Farm Bill of Health, which is based on new EWG data showing how little federal spending supports fruit and vegetable consumption. We’d like to thank the designers, GRACE and the Center for a Livable Future for all their hard work on the Farm Bill of Health. Food Tech Connect’s “infographic of the week,” titled Cotton vs. Carrots, was also based on EWG data and analysis.

We hope these infographics will help illuminate the absurd trajectory of federal agriculture policy. With the 2012 farm bill close at hand, making sense of the complex $400 billion legislation is the first step in bringing much needed change to the badly broken food and farm system.

Get your nominations in of your favorite living food hero. Comes with great cash and press rewards.

THE FOOD AND ENVIRONMENT REPORTING NETWORK LAUNCHES
Independent, Non-Profit, Investigative News Organization to Focus on Food, Agriculture, and Environmental Health
–
Premiere Story Profiles Successful Citizen Movement to Halt Pollution by New Mexico’s Powerful Mega-Dairies
New York, NY—The Food and Environment Reporting Network, Inc., an independent, non-profit, non-partisan news organization that produces investigative reporting on food, agriculture, and environmental health for distribution to major media outlets, today launched with its first story in the award-winning western magazine, High Country News. The report takes a hard look at pollution by the powerful dairy industry in New Mexico and how one man became the driving force behind a movement that brought the state’s mega-dairies to heel. The story can be found on www.thefern.org and hcn.org/milkandwater.

“Our stories will fall under the classic mandate of investigative reporting–to reveal corruption, abuse of power, and exploitation wherever it happens; to expose activities that the powerful work to keep hidden or to explore subjects that are just too complex for the breaking news cycle,” said Editor-in-Chief Sam Fromartz. “We’ve chosen to focus on food, agriculture, and environmental health specifically because we feel these are under-reported subjects that touch people’s lives every day.”

Several more investigative stories commissioned by the Food and Environment Reporting Network will break news in the weeks to come, appearing in mainstream publications, such as The American Prospect and The Nation magazines, as well as major daily newspapers. “Crucial to this work are the relationships we’re forging with regional and national media partners, who are clearly interested in our model and the work we’re producing,” Fromartz said.

“Over the past four decades, coverage of food and agriculture has waned in the mainstream press at the same time as the impact of a more industrialized food system on public health has become increasingly severe,” said Ruth Reichl, editorial board member of the Food and Environment Reporting Network, Editorial Advisor to Gilt Taste, Editor-at-Large at Random House, and former Editor-in-Chief of Gourmet magazine. “Without detailed investigations into food and agriculture, our understanding of humanity’s impacts on the environment is incomplete and related policy changes ineffective.”

The dairy industry is New Mexico’s largest agricultural sector and an influential lobbying force. The state’s dairies average 2,000 cows each, the largest mean herd size in the nation. In her piece, “Milk and Water Don’t Mix,” Stephanie Paige Ogburn reports for High Country News: “Although the state Environment Department has long worked with dairies to reduce pollution, change has been slow: Almost 60 percent of the state’s dairies have polluted groundwater with manure runoff, yet not one has begun the required cleanup.” Detailing how a self-described hermit named Jerry Nivens, his allies, and one Environment Department employee helped to pass some of the most progressive dairy-related water regulations in the West, Ogburn describes how New Mexico may now inspire other states to take the responsibility for limiting industrial farm pollution into their own hands.

About the Food and Environment Reporting Network

The Food and Environment Reporting Network experience in writing and publishing is represented by its Board of Directors, which includes Editor-in-Chief Samuel Fromartz, author, freelance journalist and a former Reuters business editor; Allison Arieff, a contributing columnist for The New York Times, contributing columnist for The Atlantic Cities, and editor of the Urbanist magazine for SPUR (San Francisco Planning & Urban Research Association); and Ralph Loglisci, a leading food policy media strategist. Former board members Katrina Heron and Naomi Starkman were involved in the organization’s founding and development. Tom Laskawy is the Executive Director and manages the organization; Paula Crossfield serves as the Managing Editor.

The Food and Environment Reporting Network’s editorial board includes Brian Halweil, editor of Edible East End and co-publisher of Edible Brooklyn and Edible Manhattan magazines; Katrina Heron, Editor-at-Large at Newsweek/The Daily Beast and previously Editor-in-Chief of WIRED and a senior editor at The New Yorker, Vanity Fair, and The New York Times magazines; Ruth Reichl, Editorial Advisor to Gilt Taste, Editor-at-Large at Random House, and former Editor-in-Chief of Gourmet magazine; Elizabeth Royte, author of the critically acclaimed books, Garbage Land and Bottlemania; and Charles Wilson, co-author with Eric Schlosser of the number one New York Times children’s bestseller Chew On This: Everything You Don’t Want to Know About Fast Food.

A registered 501(c)3 non-profit corporation based in New York, the Food and Environment Reporting Network was founded in October 2009 and began operations in January 2011. It is funded by the generous support of the The 11th Hour Project, McKnight Foundation, Clarence Heller Foundation, Columbia Foundation and the David and Lucile Packard Foundation.

Dear friends,

Amazing news: thanks to the recent surge of grassroots pressure, the vote to allow “fracking” of the Delaware River Basin has been cancelled! The drinking water for 16-million people has been protected, and a major win has been scored for the climate.

It was thrilling to watch the movement rise up to save the Delaware River. With the support of a powerful coalition, thousands of you put some serious pressure on your governors and signed up to join the massive rally on the day of the scheduled vote. We think it was the largest coordinated campaign against fracking in history.

And here’s the thing: your action did not go unnoticed. People power worked as it should. After receiving thousands of calls and emails, Gov­er­nor Jack Markell of Delaware has definitively said he will vote no on fracking the Delaware — tipping the balance of votes on the 5-person commission and likely leading to the meeting’s cancellation.

News this good deserves to be shared — let’s spread it. Click to share it on Twitter, on Facebook, or just forward this email on.

To dive deeper on what this all means, check out what our friend Josh Fox (the director of Gasland) had to say:

“You stopped fracking in the Delaware River Basin for now. You won this round. It is not a complete victory but it is a huge victory. You brought us back from the brink of total devastation.

What cancellation means: The DRBC doesn’t hold a meeting to vote down their regulations. I’ve only ever seen them vote to approve things. Which means they cancel the meeting if they no longer have 3 out of 5 commissioners voting in favor of fracking. Which is exactly what they have done. They don’t cancel meetings often, let alone votes…

This is not a complete victory by any means. We still do not know when the DRBC will reschedule their meeting. Could be ten days, could be a month, could be a year. So stay tuned and stay ready. We will let you know. We will have many more battles before we stop fracking completely in the Delaware River Basin and throughout the nation and the world.”

The movement is on a roll now. Last week, we helped stop the Keystone XL pipeline in its tracks, and now we’ve put a solid pause (which might well lead to a full stop!) on fracking of the Delaware River. Just weeks ago, pretty much all of the “experts” thought the Keystone pipeline was a done deal, and the “conventional wisdom” is that there’s no stopping the fracking rush. We’re proving the experts wrong and turning conventional wisdom on it’s head — and we have no intention of stopping any time soon.

So the trainings on Sunday and the action on Monday are both still on. Here’s how Josh Fox explained this morning: “We have just had a major victory, that is true. But there is immense suffering happening and irreparable damage being done across Pennsylvania, across the US and across the world from fracking…we must push ahead.”

If you were planning to join the trainings or the rally, we hope you’ll still take the journey. And if you were on the fence or if this is all news to you: we hope you’ll find a way to get to Trenton and celebrate with us.

To get more info on Monday’s celebration/action in Trenton NJ, stay tuned to the Save the Delaware coalition website.

To get more info on Sunday’s action training sessions in New York City and New Jersey, check the page from our friends at Delaware River Keeper.

Make no mistake: we need to ramp up our collective skills and strengthen our connections now more than ever. I can’t wait to see what we’ll win next.

More soon,

Phil Aroneanu for the 350.org Team

We all have a need to feel at ease and in harmony with ourselves and the environment we live within. Many of us discover that it isn’t material things that provide this. In my own life, I have observed that well-being and satisfaction are achieved through compassion, the giving of oneself, serving others, and sharing. We aren’t material beings; we are filled with spirit. . . . Kikuyus used a gourd, in which they carried porridge or beer, as an offering or gift. Whoever received the gourd would polish it with oil before returning it. Over time, the gourd would become beautifully
varnished by this repeated polishing. The deeper the color of the gourd, the more generous you had been—and the more connected you remained to the world around you. . . .

These gestures of giving capture both the spiritual and the practical elements of gratitude and respect for resources. Our connections to the planet and each other are reinforced simultaneously. The spirit of not wasting, because we assign value to something, is found in many traditions, but not often expressed. We could benefit from spending more time polishing our gourds for each other.

The Story of Broke
The United States isn’t broke; we’re the richest country on the planet and a country in which the richest among us are doing exceptionally well. But the truth is, our economy is broken, producing more pollution, greenhouse gasses and garbage than any other country. In these and so many other ways, it just isn’t working. But rather than invest in something better, we continue to keep this ‘dinosaur economy’ on life support with hundreds of billions of dollars of our tax money. The Story of Broke calls for a shift in government spending toward investments in clean, green solutions—renewable energy, safer chemicals and materials, zero waste and more—that can deliver jobs AND a healthier environment. It’s time to rebuild the American Dream; but this time, let’s build it better.

Follow them on Twitter: @occupybigfood

Concerned about the Secret Farm Bill being drafted behind closed doors and the billions of dollars that may be cut to conservation and nutrition programs by the Super Committee? I am!

Take a break TODAY and make some phone calls and let the four people who are pushing this forward know how you feel. Food Democracy Now! has pulled together these numbers for you, some background on the issues, and an idea of what to say.

Pick up the phone and make your calls now. I always find it so nerve-wracking to make these calls, but trust me: you’ll feel GREAT once you hang up knowing you may have helped to change the course of history.

In all cases, except Stabenow’s, I talked to real people. Hopefully their lines are getting flooded today. Will you join me?
Senate Ag Committee Leadership:
Senator Debbie Stabenow (D-MI) – Chair of Senate Agricultural Committee – call: (202) 224-4822

Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS) Ranking Member Senate Agriculture Committee – call: (202) 224-4774

House Ag Committee Leadership:
Congressman Frank Lucas (R-OK) Chair House Committee on Agriculture – call: 202-225-5565

Congressman Collin Peterson (D-MN) Former Chair House Committee on Agriculture – call: (202) 225-2165

CLICK here to sign the petition!

Last weekend, I joined more than 30 people who braved blizzard-like conditions to assemble in a square across from Occupy Wall Street’s encampment at Zucotti Park to speak up about connections between big food and the Occupy movement. There was a food activist from Iowa, a farmer from upstate New York, students and professors from NYU, a union electrician, a nutritionist (who said she was there because “if the food system isn’t working, I can’t do my job”) and more.

Many carried plastic-covered signs with slogans like “Beat the System” and, my favorite, a line from Tom Philpott’s excellent article: “Our Food System is a Big Fat Monopoly.” As the rally ended—cut short by 30-degree temperatures, blinding snow, and 30-mile-an-hour wind gusts—I shared my commitment to do one, easy thing this week in support of the 99 percent: To move my money out of the hands of Citibank.

This week, tens of thousands of people are pledging to move their money out of the pockets of the financial institutions that got us into this mess and into the hands of credit unions and banks we can believe in.

When I first heard about this campaign, spearheaded by grassroots activists along with national groups ranging from the Rainforest Action Network (where I’m on the board of directors) to MoveOn.org, I thought—and I admit this with a good dose of embarrassment—“Good idea, but what a pain. I mean, I’d have to change all my automatic bill payments and open new accounts.”

But, of course, it’s probably a bit more than a pain to spend cold, wet nights—like last Saturday—sleeping on the hard cement of outdoor parks. If hundreds of people can make that sacrifice—all day, all week, for weeks—I think I can handle doing some busywork to move my money. And so I am. On Saturday, November 5, the national day of action to move your money, I’m closing my Citibank account, the one I opened 15 years ago on the same block as my first Brooklyn sublet. And I’m joining tens thousands of others when I do.

And it’s going to feel good. See, I’ve had twinges of regret for years, every time I heard about some new act of egregious Big Bank behavior. I just got used to turning a blind eye. But then the financial meltdown, the Big Bank bailout, and now this collective call to action and my attitude started to change and my eyes started opening.

Consider, for instance, that Citibank just agreed to pay $285 million to settle a lawsuit, essentially admitting to misleading investors about toxic mortgage-backed securities, although the bank officially neither admitted nor denied that it had done anything wrong. How convenient. Meanwhile, ProPublica, which has been digging into the machinations of Citi and other Big Banks, argues that the bank is on the line for much more and much worse.

But also keep in mind what Citibank has been doing with my, and our, money all these years and what it has to do with the food movement that turned out at Occupy Wall Street this past weekend. Turns out, Citibank has been busy. Here’s a taste. The bank has been:

– Investing in major agricultural projects in developing countries, what many critics call a modern-day land grab;

– Financing the leading Chinese agribusiness company and development of China’s chemical industry;

– Underwriting $300 million to finance expansion of “land grabs” in Argentina, Uruguay, Paraguay, and Bolivia for agricultural commodities and livestock production.

Bank of America customer? Keep in mind the bank is one of the lead underwriters of the coal industry. Rainforest Action Network is encouraging people to close their accounts and let BofA know that the bank should be moving its investment dollars away from dirty coal and toward clean, green renewable energy. Says RAN:

The bank routinely underwrites hundreds of millions of dollars in loans to…two of the biggest coal mining companies in the Powder River Basin that are desperately trying to secure a… facility to ship coal overseas…

As if all this weren’t enough to push us over the edge, I got a letter from Citibank several weeks ago—maybe you got a similar one from your Big Bank?—in which the bank informed me that clients who keep less than a $6,000 account balance—that’s me—would start seeing a monthly $15 fee on their statements. In other words, if you’re not rich enough to keep a big balance, you have to pay Citibank to keep your money while they spend it in their bailout-resulting, environment-destroying financial decisions.

I haven’t even been giving $15 a month to my favorite social action organization, yet I was sitting quietly while Citibank informed me they were going to take it from me and my captive bank account? (If you think Citibank’s policy was egregious, Bank of America announced it would start charging $60 a year to use its ATMs, a policy, which, thanks to public outcry, the bank just reversed).

Enough. I am done. Done with Citibank, done with feeling guilty when I get my monthly statements in the mail; done with feeling bad when I see my ATM card in my wallet. So on November 5, I plan to join with others across the country as I walk into my local Citi branch and close my account. I’ll tell them why, add my voice to the pledges here, and cut up my card. Then, I’ll head home to check out my new bank accounts online at Amalgamated Bank, the bank of the labor union movement. (You can find community-oriented banks and credit unions near you here and tips about how to move your money and not mess up your finances here.)

Finally, I’ll commit to giving that $15 a month (which, mind you, Citibank was going to take from me) to one of my favorite groups working on behalf of the 99 percent. All this will take a little paperwork and a little time, but nothing I can’t handle. And then, I’ll be free—and it’ll feel great. I hope you’ll join me.

The Food Movement Must Occupy Wall Street
If you are paying attention to Occupy Wall Street–and by now most people are–the anti-corporate message is coming through loud and clear. Most participants at the events now spreading across the country say they are no longer willing to let powerful corporate interests determine the course of their lives. These Americans realize that a participatory democracy is essential.

As it stands today, 75 percent of the population are obese or overweight and many are chronically ill with diet-related diseases. They are also largely dependent on an increasingly unhealthful and contaminated food supply that is heavily controlled by corporate interests. It’s obvious that this is our moment to drive a very important point home: Upending corporate control of the food supply is a fundamental change that must occur if the “99 percent” are to be healthy participants in a true democracy.

This could be a catalyzing moment for the food movement with a real chance for average Americans to see and hear the connection between corporate control of the food supply and our nation’s health crisis. Indeed, the declaration of Occupy Wall Street addresses issues the food movement has been working on for years. The declaration states, “They have poisoned the food supply through negligence, and undermined the farming system through monopolization.”

Author and activist Naomi Klein has been an outspoken advocate and participant in Occupy Wall Street. When asked how it connects to the food movement she said, “The protest is about the corporate takeover of democracy of our lives in every way. The food movement is inherently anti-corporate and it is inherently about rebuilding a real economy.” She continued, “The food movement is where a lot of the leadership is. Occupy Wall Street is not just about banking legislation. The food movement is paving the way for what needs to happen in manufacturing and I think it’s all connected.”

Marion Nestle, Paulette Goddard Professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health at New York University agrees. “Of course Occupy Wall Street connects to the food movement,” she said. “If we had a healthier financial system, we might be able to fund better food assistance, universal school meals, a rational and effective food safety system, and production agriculture that promotes sustainability and affordable food that is healthier for people and the planet. The food movement needs to be there and its voices heard.”

While powerful players like Goldman Sachs and Fannie Mae were on the lips of nearly every American after the 2008 financial crisis, the names of industrial agriculture corporations remain largely unknown. But consider how much power they wield. Take Monsanto as an example. When Monsanto began selling its genetically modified Roundup Ready soybeans in 1996 only two percent of soybeans in the U.S. contained their patented gene. By 2008, over 90 percent of soybeans in the U.S. contained Monsanto’s gene. This is especially alarming given that soybeans account for the largest source of protein feed and the second largest source of vegetable oil in the world. According to the USDA, in 2008-09, the farm value of soybean production was $29.6 billion, the second highest among U.S. produced crops — and soy is ubiquitous in processed foods. It ends up in the meat, milk, eggs, and farmed fish many Americans consume (as a result of it being in animal feed) as well as thousands upon thousands of packaged foods usually in the form of soy protein isolate, soy isoflavones, textured vegetable protein, and soy oils. Soy accounts for a fifth of the calories in the American diet.

Monsanto has also produced genetically modified seeds for corn, canola, and cotton with many more products being developed including seeds for sugar beets and alfalfa. (To see how ferociously Monsanto protects its patented seeds watch the Oscar-nominated documentary Food, Inc.) As for corn, the highest valued U.S. produced crop, 93 percent of it is genetically engineered. Physicist and internationally renowned activist Dr. Vandana Shiva points out that the notion that genetically engineered food will improve the food supply and improve nutrition is a myth. “These are illusions that are being marketed in order for people to hand over the power to decide what to eat to a handful of corporations,” she said in an interview on her Website.

Another corporation with broad reach and control over the foods we eat is Cargill, which rivals Monsanto in its control of the food supply. It is the largest privately held corporation in the nation, owning Cargill Pork and Cargill Beef, the second largest beef producer in North America. According to Anna Lappe’s book Diet for a Hot Planet, Cargill also owns dozens of subsidiary businesses, is one of the largest commercial cattle feeders in the U.S., the world’s biggest processor, marketer, and distributor of grains, oilseeds, and other agricultural commodities, and controls 80 percent of the European market for soybean crushing with a similar share for animal feed manufacturing.

If you eat any processed or packaged food, or anything from a typical restaurant or café, you can guarantee that Monsanto or Cargill played a role in those foods somewhere along the line. As Dr. Shiva points out in much of her work, these companies contribute to the toxification of our food supply. It’s not only the lack of nutritional value in many of these highly processed foods, but also the actual toxins that are added to genetically engineered foods. Bees, butterflies, cattle and other animals have been dying as a result of these crops, so how are they affecting humans? (You can listen to Dr. Shiva discuss this here).

If America’s health crisis is any indication, corporate control of the food supply is taking the ultimate toll. American children born in 2000 are the first generation not expected to outlive their parents as one in three is likely to develop diabetes in their lifetime, with those rates even higher for black and Latino children. The corporate monopolies over the food supply and the government’s role in facilitating corporate control translates into control over the health of the American population.

Occupy Wall Street illustrates a basic tenet of democracy; we must participate for it to function properly. We must also participate in our food system to develop local food economies that function with our interests in mind. Our first steps must be learning and teaching others about where our food comes from and how to access healthy food. We must also boycott companies like Monsanto and Cargill whose sole interest is profit, not our health or protecting the environment.

Writer, activist, and academic Raj Patel said that while Wall Street is certainly behind many problems with the food system, there is an even deeper connection between the two. “At its best, the food movement is about learning to see the politics in our everyday lives and then to take a stand against injustice,” he said. “That’s what Occupy Wall Street is doing–creating a space to learn, demand, exchange and organize.”

Occupy Wall Street understands that the corporations cannot be allowed to control our political systems. Similarly, when corporations control the food supply we are left with an unsafe and unregulated food supply and a population in the midst of a dire health crisis as a result of corporate carelessness and greed.

This post originally appeared on Civil Eats

WHO:
Marion Nestle, New York University professor in the Department of Nutrition, Food Studies, and Public Health, and author of many influential books, including Safe Food: The Politics of Food Safety.
William Neuman, New York Times reporter on food safety, politics, and industry.
Bill Marler, prominent attorney for food safety cases and founder of FoodSafetyNews.com.
Urvashi Rangan, Ph.D., Director, Technical Policy and Safety, Consumer Reports, a nationally recognized expert and a frequent contributor to mainstream media news on food safety. She will moderate the panel.

WHAT:
How safe is the food supply in the United States? Salmonella in chicken, Bisphenol-A (BPA) in canned food, bacteria in bagged salad; over Consumer Reports’ 75 years, our lab tests and critical reporting has informed the public of these and other dangers lurking in our food supply.
As a part of its 75th Anniversary celebration and Exhibit at Grand Central Terminal, Consumer Reports will host “Eat Their Words,” a panel discussion which will include nationally known food-safety experts and journalists who have helped propel marketplace and regulatory changes to make our food supply safer.
The exhibit will include demonstrations and an exclusive look at how Consumer Reports tests thousands of products each year.
The panel, as well as the rest of the exhibit, will be completely free and open to the public.

WHEN:
Friday, October 28, 12 p.m.–1 p.m.

WHERE:
Grand Central Terminal’s Vanderbilt Hall; 87 E 42nd Street, New York, NY 10017

An interactive exhibit of Consumer Reports’ history and future will be on display at Vanderbilt Hall in Grand Central Terminal on October 28–29, 2011.
For more information, visit the Web site here.

Not just 20% real food by 2020. At least 20% real food by 2020.

The Get Real campaign, for instance, is off and running. It’s aimed at getting college presidents to sign our new Real Food Campus Commitment–and we’ve just had out first victory: the President of St. Mary’s College in Indiana signed this week! http://www.wndu.com/localnews/headlines/Saint_Marys_first_school_to_sign_real_good_commitment_132568798.html

http://video.alabamas13.com/v/47561100/real-food-challenge.htm?q=real+food

CONTACT: EWG public affairs 202.667.6982; ssciammacco@ewg.org

Oakland, Calif. — More than 60 public health, nutrition, food, farm and environmental groups representing hundreds of thousands of California citizens are urging Gov. Jerry Brown and the state’s congressional delegation to support healthy food reforms as the Congressional super committee crafts a new five-year farm bill.

Environmental Working Group is a leading sponsor of the advocates letter and petition, along with Center for Science in the Public Interest, Roots of Change, Prevention Institute, California Center for Public Health Advocacy, Pesticide Action Network North America and Food and Water Watch.

“In this difficult budget environment, we must invest our money where it will generate the greatest good,” Kari Hamerschlag, a senior analyst at Environmental Working Group, said. “That means investing in conservation, research, nutrition, local and organic food and fruit and vegetable production and promotion. These programs will save us billions in health care costs, while creating jobs, supporting family farmers and protecting our valuable water and soil resources for future generations of farming.”

“We can find billions of dollars in tax payer savings by limiting support to the largest most profitable farming operations that do not need our help,” Hamerschlag said.

The letter and petition, delivered on National Food Day, Monday October 24, demonstrate a broad consensus in California, the largest grower of vegetables, fruits, and nuts, that top priority for federal funding should go to local food production, nutrition, research and conservation programs.

The petition has been signed by more than 16,000 California citizens. It urges the California delegation in Washington to stand up for healthy and sustainable food and farming policies. Advocates plan to descend on Congressional offices over the next few weeks to press their case.

The advocates’ letter and petition highlight the importance of protecting healthy food programs and promoting diets rich in fruit and vegetables and healthy beverages as a way to save billions in costly medical care. They assert that “poor diet and inactivity cost California more than $20 billion a year and the nation at least $150 billion annually in medical cost.”

“This petition should clarify for our political leaders that food and farming must move back to the center of our national agenda, ” said Michael Dimock, President of Roots of Change. “Our health, economy and ecosystem demand it. If we don’t ensure healthy food, farms, ecosystems to support our nation’s people in the next farm bill, Occupy Wall Street could become Occupy Walmart, Cargill and every other “big food” entity.”

“Small investments in conservation and rural development leverage additional private dollars that together deliver huge benefits for farmers, rural communities and consumers,” said Pesticide Action Network senior scientist Margaret Reeves. “These programs help farmers keep our air and water clean, and they also help farmers protect pollinator and soil resources that are essential for the continued production and sale of abundant, healthy food.”

“California is the country’s number-one agricultural producer-we need to get those fresh fruits and vegetables onto the plates of every man, woman and child in California,” said Juliet Sims, a Program Coordinator at the Prevention Institute. “The farm bill delivers nutrition assistance for low-income people who are really in desperate need, and it will help increase access to healthy foods across the state.”

by Tom Laskawy
24 Oct 2011 8:09 AM

A two-week Food Bill rewrite stacks the deck against good-food advocates. Last month, I wrote that prospects for reforming the Farm Bill were dim. My prior assessment is turning out to be outrageously optimistic.

Typically, passage of the Farm Bill occurs every five years and involves a lengthy process of hearings, constituent meetings, and (sad but true) many a high-priced meal on the tab of some lobbyist or other—followed by detailed negotiations between the House and Senate Agriculture Committees. It has also often been seen as an opportunity to—as one recent action alert put it—change the food system by supporting small farms, investing in rural economies, and “supporting more diversified farming and livestock systems, healthy food access, conservation, and research.”

The next reauthorization was not expected until late in 2012—if not 2013—but through an unexpected turn of events, it may be decided much faster, and with even less input from the good food movement than the last one.

And when I say faster, I mean at warp speed. Earlier this week, according to the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, the House and Senate Ag Committees suddenly announced that they would write the entire 2012 Farm Bill in the next two weeks.

This new Farm Bill will also be smaller, thanks to the deal cut to avoid a government default over the summer. In the wake of that agreement, Congress convened a “super committee” of House and Senate negotiators that’s required to come up with a plan by this Thanksgiving to cut $1.2 trillion from the deficit over the next decade. Of that total, $23 billion must come from the USDA budget—a number recently recommended by House and Senate Agriculture Committee leaders. There is panic in the fields of Big Ag at such a drastic reduction in farm and food spending.

As well there should be: The prospect of a small group of negotiators who are not beholden to traditional farm interests working behind closed doors to slash farm spending might strike some as a sign that our long national industrial agriculture subsidy nightmare is over. But as Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group (EWG) and an advocate for farm subsidy reform, told me, it’s likely that we will get a “secret farm bill” with “no accountability” for those involved.

No one knows exactly how it will turn out. As one source close to the process told Grist, “there are people betting on all” possible scenarios. But one thing is certain; negotiators are desperately trying to maintain the annual flow of $18 billion in subsidies to the largest farmers who produce commodity crops like corn, soy, and cotton. And while there will certainly be losers, you can count on the fact that there will also be winners.

This is reflected in the proposals currently circulating in Congress, specifically over a set of subsidies known as “direct payments.” Originally designed as a temporary means to get around World Trade Organization restrictions on government support of private industry, direct payments go to large farmers based on past farm yields and acreage. It’s the classic “cash the check whether you grow something or not” kind of subsidy that drives food reformers crazy. Direct payments have particularly benefited large-scale soy and cotton farmers from the South, and were thought to be facing the ax.

But as The New York Times reported, rather than pocketing the savings, farm state reps have proposed a new subsidy in its place—and it may not be much different from the old one. It’s known as a “shallow loss” subsidy, and it would protect commodity farmers from small drops in prices. You know, just to take the edge off.

And while direct payments cost $5 billion per year, if crop prices drop from current levels, the new “shallow loss” program could cost around $4 billion per year. No wonder ag economist (and admitted subsidies critic) Vincent Smith of Montana State University described the proposal as a “bait and switch” on NPR recently.

EWG’s Cook is concerned about another potential problem with the proposed new subsidy. With the current set of farm payments, groups can track exactly how much government support individual farmers receive (as EWG does with its Farm Subsidy Database). But with the “shallow loss” plan, says Cook, “the subsidy lobby” is creating a new “income-guarantee entitlement aimed at the biggest commercial operations” that will likely be “totally opaque to the public.” Which means no more tracking who gets how much.

In sum, the super committee process has caused what is often (by congressional standards) an orderly process to devolve into a legislative free-for-all. Whatever happens, the outcome is likely to be hidden by a fog of backroom deals and—this being Congress we’re talking about—bitter recrimination.

Adding to the uncertainty, there’s the very real possibility that the super committee will fail to come up with a deal. In that case, a set of cuts will be automatically triggered, which might leave agriculture subsides more or less intact (though the same may not be true of the USDA’s food safety system).

We already know that land and watershed conservation programs will face the worst cuts. And the House GOP wants to kill the small-farmer friendly “Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food” initiative as well. It seems clear that Big Ag is embracing former Obama Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel’s advice not to let a good crisis go to waste by aiming a body blow at reform in general and sustainable agriculture in particular.

It’s hard not to be cynical about a process whereby powerful corporate interests divvy up taxpayer dollars like so much pirate’s booty. To switch (and mix) metaphors, Big Ag is circling the limos around its giant pile of cash and hoping for the best. If nothing else, the current farm subsidy “debate” is Exhibit A of the need for Americans to Occupy the Food System—though perhaps this big-time money grab can be read as a sign that Big Ag actually fears the growing Occupy Wall Street movement.

Meanwhile, the EWG, along with the NSAC, are asking people to call their representatives to try to head off the worst kind of deal. And while there’s no telling how this particularly nasty bit of sausage making will turn out, it’s a fair bet that only agribusiness will like the taste.

A 17-year veteran of both traditional and online media, Tom is a Contributing Writer at Grist covering food and agricultural policy. Tom’s long and winding road to food politics writing passed through New York, Boston, the San Francisco Bay Area, Florence, Italy and Philadelphia (which has a vibrant progressive food politics and sustainable agriculture scene, thank you very much). In addition to Grist, his writing has appeared online in the American Prospect, Slate, the New York Times and The New Republic. He is on record as believing that wrecking the planet is a bad idea. Follow him on Twitter.

by Chris Bohner

24 Oct 2011 3:26 PM

Northwest UNorthwestern University dining hall workers celebrating new contract as part of the students’ living wage campaign.”They took our knives and gave us scissors to open bags of frozen food. I want my knives back so I can cook again.” That’s what a kitchen worker at a prominent university told me recently at one of a dozen of gatherings around the country convened by our union, Unite Here. The idea was to bring food service workers and college students together to discuss the intersection of food and work in anticipation of Food Day, a national day designed to “bring together Americans from all walks of life to push for healthy, affordable food produced in a sustainable, humane way.”

Unite Here, where I work as director of the Sustainable Food Project, is the largest organization in the country representing food service workers. And we’re heartened to see campus dining workers who want to cook again — to make food from scratch using real ingredients. Instead of being tasked with heating and serving processed and pre-prepared meals, they want to use their skills in the kitchen to cook food they’re truly proud to serve.

“Food is love,” said one cook at a university in Chicago. “Bringing in packaged food … is sort of an insult. We actually want to chop, we want to make sauces and make our own stocks, we want to make food with our hands.”

But this widely felt sentiment is only one reason we’re drawing attention to food service workers on Food Day. After spending so much time in campus kitchens, we know that workers are important allies in transforming our food system and we want to bring that to the foreground of this important national event. They’re allies in part because they have so much at stake: Food workers are among those most affected by the food crisis. They are frequently underpaid and they suffer from food insecurity and diet-related illnesses at alarming rates:

– The annual median wage for food workers on college campuses in 2010 was $17,176, which is substantially below the federal poverty level of $22,050 for a family of four.

– Nearly one out of four food service workers live in food insecure households, and 31 percent are at risk for diet-related illnesses like diabetes, stroke, and heart disease — the highest rate of all occupations in the United States.

– Because they’re paid poverty wages, 13 percent of food service workers lived in households that utilized food stamps at some point during the last year, nearly double the national average.

To make the food system work for food service workers — and all workers in the food chain — we must address one of the root causes of the crisis itself: the growing levels of poverty and economic inequality in the United States. In higher education, where Unite Here represents food workers at over 100 college campuses, an alliance of students, workers, and food activists is stepping up to take on this challenge.

Harvard students and workersHarvard dining workers and students gathering for planning of Food Day.At Northwestern University, students and workers built relationships that formed the basis of a vibrant and ongoing living wage campaign. The result was not only substantially increased wages and benefits in the dining halls in 2011, but also a new student culture that recognizes food workers as central to campus life. At Georgetown University, students and faculty played a crucial role in helping food workers organize their first union in 2011.

Food service workers represented by unions earn 26 percent more in pay than food workers without a union, or $5,512 a year. That may not seem like big money for some, but for workers below the poverty line, it’s can go toward fresh and healthy food for their families.

Food service workers bring tremendous assets to the movement for real food. In addition to diversity and energy, they bring a unique vantage point from which to monitor the safety and quality of food. When we’ve asked workers about food quality in campus kitchens, we’ve heard stories from people instructed to place “Organic” labels on conventional produce, falsify food expiration dates, keep food at dangerous temperatures, and serve lots of food that’s simply bad.

But without protection from retaliation from their employers, workers fear speaking out about these practices. Union contracts help provide such protections, underscoring the point that strengthening the rights of food workers can also help address concerns about food safety.

We know that a national day of action, like Food Day, won’t change our food system overnight. But we also know that it has helped move forward a dialogue between food workers, students, and university faculty about how to change our food system. This open dialogue has helped to break down many barriers and to connect diverse communities — benefits that will be felt long after Food Day is over. And as we see it, that’s a recipe for long-term change.

Chris Bohner is the director of Unite Here’s Sustainable Food Project. For more information on their Food Day events, and to follow the dialogue about sustainable food and worker justice, click here.

Will you celebrate Food Day by “>Submit a photo petition and show McDonald’s that you stand with health professionals in calling for real change.

CAI will deliver your photos and your concerns directly to McDonald’s executives and franchise owners in the weeks ahead.

Don’t have a camera? Don’t worry!http://www.takeabite.cc/?p=3252 After months of organizing by countless people, there will be more than 2,000 events from coast to coast—ranging from small house parties to massive festivals — for Food Day. Local governments are seizing the opportunity to announce new food policy initiatives. The National Archives will be hosting a Food Day Open House just feet from our country’s most important founding documents. There will be an “Eat In” in Times Square, with guests like Morgan Spurlock, Mario Batali, and Marion Nestle, and with a meal prepared by Ellie Krieger of the Food Network.

But more important, Food Day is poised to inspire hundreds of thousands if not millions of Americans to change their diets for the better, and to push for improved food policies.

If you are already planning to participate in a Food Day event, this is what I ask you to do: Please take still photos of your event, tag them with “Food Day” on Flickr and join our Flickr group. And, if you can take a short video of your Food Day event, please upload them to YouTube and tag them with the words “Food Day.” The Food Day staff will favorite these videos so they show up on the Food Day YouTube Channel. You can also collect signatures for the Food Day petition asking Congress for better food policies.

If you haven’t found a Food Day event near you, visit FoodDay.org use the map or type in your zip code. (Be patient as events take time to load in the map—a lot of people are visiting right now!) And of course you can keep up with Food Day by liking it on Facebook, following CSPI on Twitter, or by using the #FoodDay hashtag to participate in the national conversation.

Food Day continues to get great publicity, such as these articles in The Washington Post, the Boston Globe, the Minneapolis Tribune, and the Portland Oregonian or in the Atlantic. You may have also seen this TV spot-featuring Morgan Spurlock-from our friends at the Cooking Channel, or this one from our friends at the wellness cable channel Veria Living.

National Sustainable Agriculture
Only once every 5 years do you have the opportunity to truly transform our food and farm system through the federal farm bill.

On Monday the Agriculture Committee leadership proposed to rewrite the food and farm bill in 2 weeks from today – yes you heard that right, 2 weeks – this is usually a year plus process and they want to do it in 2 weeks?! This would be the fastest food and farm bill decision-making process in history.

Please act today for a chance you have only once every 5 years to reform our food and farming system and protect our natural resources.

If you care about the health of America’s soil, water, and land; promoting organic practices and conservation; helping a new generation of struggling small and mid-sized farmers get their start; rebuilding local and regional food systems; or developing new markets and healthy food access – now is the time to speak up. If you want to see a healthier, more secure, environmentally sustainable, and prosperous America – now is the time to speak up.

This proposal would wipe out over 40 percent of the funding increases for conservation and environmental initiatives achieved in the 2002 and 2008 food and farm bills, setting the clock back and “un-greening” the farm bill. Moreover, it is unclear what the proposal would do to the fair and healthy farm and food system programs won in 2008 with your help, but in need of being renewed in the new farm bill. It could potentially wipe out all of those gains as well.

It just takes a minute to call:
• First check if your Senator and/or Representative sits on the Senate Agriculture or House Agriculture Committee
• If your Senator or Representative sits on either of these three committees: call the Capitol Switchboard and ask to be directly connected to your Senators’ and Member of Congress’s office: 202-224-3121. Or go to Congress.org and type in your zip code, then click on your Senators and Member of Congress’s name and the contact tab for their phone number.
• If the line is busy, please leave a brief message on the voicemail.

The Message: I am a constituent, calling Senator/Representative _____ to deliver this message (use one or more of these talking points):

• The proposed farm conservation cuts are too big and should be reduced. In particular, the Conservation Stewardship Program funding should be retained and Wetlands Reserve Program funding should be restored.
• Farm commodity program reform should include caps on the amount of subsidy any one farm can receive. Loopholes allowing multiple subsidy payments to single farms should be closed. Conservation requirements should be attached to all forms of revenue and crop insurance subsidies.
• The farm bill must reinvest at least $1 billion a year in innovative, job-creating programs for rural economic development, local and regional food systems, renewable energy, organic farming, and young and beginning farmers.

*According to published accounts, the leaders of the Agriculture Committees are proposing cuts of $6.5 billion to conservation programs, $5 billion to nutrition programs, and $15 billion to commodity subsidy programs. The conservation cuts would be on top of the $2 billion already made by Congress in the appropriations process.

——————–

From Hunger Action Network

Call you Congress member today (202 224-3121) and tell them:

No deficit reduction plan can work if it does not rebuild our economy by protecting Medicaid, food stamps, unemployment insurance and other basic safety net programs. And it must create jobs. Such a plan must have increased revenues from upper-income households and profitable corporations, and savings from cutting unneeded military spending.

The Senate is about to take up a Agriculture Appropriations bill, in which the Republicans will seek to make cuts to the food stamp / SNAP program. Senator Gillibrand, whom we talked to last week, is leading the fight nationally to protect SNAP, so all she needs is a call to thank her (202 224-4451). Sen. Schumer, whose staff we met with this week, says he is also opposed, but a call to him would help convince him to take more of a leadership role. He is not signing onto a letter that Gillibrand is circulating to protect SNAP(202 224-6542)

The tougher fight is expected in the House, where the House leadership supports steep cuts in food stamps and other low-income programs.

You could also include in your message support for a Farm Bill that invests in healthy food, strong conservation programs and family farms, not corporate agribusiness.

———————–

The Farm Bill Is a Food Bill

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/rajiv-narayan/the-farm-bill-is-a-food-b_b_1020469.html

Where the farm bill allocates resources to funding food stamps on one hand, it also incentivizes the purchase of unhealthy foods. In the most recent farm bill updates, it appears as though the back-room appropriations are moving in the favor of subsidies. While both direct payment programs and nutrition programs are looking at cuts, a mechanism for replacing subsidy cuts with a new funding regime has already surfaced. Unfortunately for the food side of the farm bill, it’s become increasingly difficult to advocate for change. In the past, the farm bill has been traditionally held to industry interests. Now, the super committee process may shut out democratic input altogether if the bill is written in the coming weeks by a handful of legislators for the purpose of bypassing floor debate.

Because the farm bill is so rarely written, it becomes important to reclaim its status as a food bill. Even if parts of the package are at odds with the part of the bill that works to create a healthy food system, the latter still comprises 70 percent of the legislation. It remains to be seen whether the super committee process will allow some food for thought.

——————————————————–

Farm Bill Battle Heats Up

http://www.kfgo.com/agri-business-news.php?ID=9424

WASHINGTON (DTN) – Fights began breaking out Tuesday among agriculture interests over what the super committee might do with the farm bill, even though no one knows how the leaders of the House and Senate agriculture committees are planning to move ahead with the proposal that they sent to the super committee on Monday.

One of the fights over super committee ag cuts and farm bill plans is whether to cut spending on food programs such as the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., Senate Agriculture ranking member Pat Roberts, R-Kans., House Agriculture Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and House Agriculture ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., sent the super committee a letter Monday saying they would agree to up to $23 billion in farm program cuts over 10 years, and that they will send the super committee a more detailed proposal by Nov. 1 on what they are seeking.

———————–

Key farm groups back revenue plan

DANIEL LOOKER 10/19/2011 @ 4:58pm Business Editor

http://www.agriculture.com/news/policy/key-farm-groups-back-revenue-pl_4-ar20037

Three influential farm groups Wednesday urged the House and Senate agriculture committees to replace the main existing commodity programs with a revenue-based risk management plan that would pay for some losses not covered by crop insurance.

Today’s letter to the chairs and ranking minority members of the ag committees was signed by the American Soybean Association, National Corn Growers Association and National Farmers Union.

All three have their own farm bill proposals but they’ve united behind the idea of replacing existing farm programs, including the often criticized direct payments, with a program helps farmers only when they have losses in revenue.

The groups said that federal budget realities “make it imperative to find a viable risk management approach that can replace several existing programs, including Direct Payments, Countercyclical Payments, SURE, and the ACRE program.”

“…under a revenue-based program, compensation for losses that exceed a certain threshold would only be made as they are incurred, on all production, and only on a portion of the loss,” the groups point out. “This stands in contrast with the current Direct Payment program under which farmers receive payments regardless of whether they produce a crop or incur a loss. Also, many producers participate in the crop insurance program at levels that require losses of 30 percent or more before they are compensated. With the elimination of other elements of the farm safety net, a program is needed to offset part of these losses should they occur.”

They also voiced “strong support” for keeping the existing crop insurance program. Any revenue program “should be designed to complement rather than overlap or replace this key part of the farm program safety net,” they said.

This blog post is written by Margaret Riche, our Hunter College Public Service Scholar.

On the evening of September 22nd, an eager audience filled the historic Great Hall of Cooper Union, where the stage was dotted with blooming flowers and potted plants. Addressing the crowd where Abraham Lincoln, the suffragettes and the founders of the NAACP had spoken before her, Francis Moore Lappé quoted Cezanne and told us: “The day will come when a single carrot, freshly observed, will set off a revolution.”

We were gathered to celebrate “four decades of the food movement” and among the foliage were good food legends Frances Moore Lappé and Dr. Vandana Shiva. The event, “Feeding Hope: Living Democracy,” marked the 40 year anniversary of the release of Lappé’s book, Diet for a Small Planet. This revolutionary work was the first of its kind to highlight the connection between human practices and worldwide hunger. Her startling statistics, which demonstrated the wasteful, unsustainable nature of current livestock production, often serve as my talking points in the “why are you vegan” conversations I seem to always be having. Lappé’s insights have proven critical to the movement for food justice and 40 years later, I was curious about what she suggested moving forward.
Vandana Shiva told us that “the agricultural tools of industry come from the mindset of war, where diversity is seen as the enemy” and she railed against the “false promises of GMO (genetically modified organisms).” She warned us that “if we don’t make change, there’s only one future. No future.”

The dynamic Lappé did not disappoint and offered up to the crowd a contagious optimism. Author of 18 books, co-founder of Food First, the Small Planet Institute and Small Planet Fund, Lappé is an eloquent, tireless advocate for the planet and its inhabitants. Standing before a crowd of supporters, she drew battle lines in the war for sustainability and equity, telling us “we can chose life or we can chose death.” As if reading my mind, she reflected on the recently executed death row inmate Troy Davis. She told us that “the dominant mental math of the day is fundamentally life-denying.” Her words rang true for several head-nodders throughout the crowd.

The concept of living beings as dispensable objects (where cows are referred to as “protein disposal units”) is just one example of the filter through which humans understand (or misunderstand) concepts of biodiversity and interconnectedness. Lappé refers to this lens as the “scarcity mind,” where relationships built on fear and distrust support a system of inequitable power distribution. It is exactly these power relationships which inform access (or lackthereof) to abundance. Lappé called on us to cultivate an “eco-mind,” where we constantly strive to understand the interconnected nature of social, environmental and ecological issues. She spoke of food’s ability to forge these connections and of the movement’s goals of equitably dispersing power through acts of creating and sharing. Lappé advocates for what she calls a “living democracy,” which includes a “culture of engagement, aligned with nature.” This living democracy requires that those in the movement “work on our backbone” in taking on influential institutions that monopolize power. According to Lappé, “nature abhors a monopoly.”

It is this nuanced understanding of power relationships that make Lappé and Dr. Shiva such vital leaders in shifting the dominant paradigms of consumption. A true legend and orator, Dr. Vandana Shiva‘s perspective is one of a philosopher, physicist and feminist. She is the founder of the Research Foundation for Science, Technology and Ecology in India. Born in the city of Dehran Dun, located in a valley at the bottom of the Himalayas, Shiva has advocated brilliantly for women throughout the Global South and for the thousands of Indian farmers disenfranchised at the hands of corporate agri-business. Dr. Shiva recalled organizing seed banks throughout India through a famers’ network she founded, known as Navdanya. She told us of her work preserving the much needed biodiversity of native Indian seeds, as well as reclaiming traditional agroecological practices.

Addressing the underlying issues surrounding food production, Shiva drew a similar parallel to Lappé’s between dominant psychology and perceived scarcity. Shiva warns against the “monocultures of the mind” that come from the “systemic flaws” that favor corporate control of resources. She told us that “the agricultural tools of industry come from the mindset of war, where diversity is seen as the enemy” and she railed against the “false promises of GMO (genetically modified organisms).” She warned us that “if we don’t make change, there’s only one future. No future.” As a researcher, author and pioneer, Vandana Shiva could say from experience that “food is the site of new freedom” but she warned that it is “also the site of new dictators.” In looking to the future, she reminded us of the power of the commons, where shared resources of food and knowledge could mutually benefit everyone. Even in the face of the current unbalanced concentrations of power, she assured us that life always triumphs over death.

In the question and answer portion of the evening, Lappé and Shiva addressed some issues of strategy. According to Francis’s daughter Anna, who moderated the panel, sifting through questions passed to the stage on notecards, many people asked if there are too many distinct groups and whether the movement needs a larger organization. Lappé took the mic and repeated one of the themes of the evening- the need for diversity. She warned us that a large organization would depend on outside support, as opposed to self-organizing power. This self-organizing power is emblematic of Lappé’s vision of democracy. She likened all of the different efforts to beads on a necklace, and said that all we really need is a string. What is the string, she asked? “The string is life. The string is freedom. It is the connection between the farmer, the chef, the butterfly and the earth worm.” When asked how she maintained her optimism, Lappé smiled and cryptically replied, “if we really are living consciously as an ecosystem, it’s not possible to know what’s possible.” I found myself smiling too as the evening began to wrap up, with Lappé making one last call for courage. Surrounded by flowers and illuminated by stage lights, she called on us each to be that “small flame in the dark room, where one lamp lights the next.”

Here’s to forty more years of wisdom and to a freer future of sustainable food.