TIFTON, Ga.— U.S. farm programs provide a benefit to all of America at a cost of only 4 cents per meal according to data from the U.S. Department of Agriculture. Farm programs also account for slightly less than one-half of 1 percent of the total U.S. budget. The remaining share of the federal budget includes national defense, national debt, social security/Medicare and other categories. The benefits of farm programs have remained the same through the years by helping to keep a stable supply of food and fiber, protecting the farming infrastructure in the U.S. and providing national security for Americans.

Farm programs are a small part of the U.S. farm policy which also includes food and nutrition programs, food safety, research, rural development, risk management, forest service and conservation programs.

Existing U.S. farm programs have their origins in the 1930s. Farms, farm households, and rural communities are vastly different today than in the 1930s. However, commodity-based support programs continue to play a central role in U.S. agricultural policy.

In 1930, over 2,300 counties, more than three-fourths of all rural counties depended on agriculture as their primary source of income. The rural farm population represented over half the rural population and a quarter of the total U.S. population. However, improvements in agricultural technology and productivity over time mean that in the early 21st century, far fewer farms produce an ever-increasing amount of farm goods. In fact, today the average U.S. farmer produces food and fiber for 144 people.

“Generally the farm programs or subsidies are targeted to keep farmers in business and remain competitive,” says Nathan Smith, University of Georgia peanut economist. “Farm programs help to sustain the viability of rural economies but don’t guarantee that they will grow.”

Policy changes introduced in the 1996 Farm Bill and continued in the 2002 Farm Bill marked a substantial change from previous legislation. The elimination of acreage reduction programs, the decoupling of some support from production decisions, and the introduction of nearly full planting flexibility considerably increased the market orientation of U.S. agriculture.

However, these changes came at a time in the farming environment when prices have decreased for commodities and inputs such as fertilizer and fuel have increased.

Agriculture is recognized as being risky and not only from the obvious production factors. Farmers are among one of the few segments of society that operate in a purely competitive market, yet have limited control over what they receive or what they pay.

“Farmers have little control over what they pay for inputs or what they receive for their crop,” says Don Koehler, executive director of the Georgia Peanut Commission. “Without farm programs providing stability, farmers would find it difficult to secure production loans, much less loans to buy land and equipment.”

Farm programs also help to keep food costs lower. Americans spend 10 percent of their disposable income on food while consumers in France spend 18 percent, Mexico spends 28 percent and India spends 51 percent.

“Farm programs today reduce the volatility of income and help to bring stability into the production of food in the U.S.,” Smith says. “Farm programs help to smooth out wide fluctuations in income that are brought on by weather and other adverse events not under the farmers’ control.”

Farm programs provide a price support loan that farmers have to repay. These loans provide the farmer with an opportunity to market their crop over time instead of dumping everything in the market at harvest time which would cause the prices to go down.

“The farm programs help to ensure that America will not have to rely on other countries for food like we have done with foreign oil,” says Bob Redding, Georgia Peanut Commission Washington representative. “Not just farmers are dependent on strong farm programs but also rural communities. Farmers spend valuable dollars in their home counties.”