Connect with us
[the_ad id="89560"]

Agriculture

DC-based think tank warns US gov’t failing to prioritize food security while China ramps up efforts

Published

7 minute read

From LifeSiteNews

By J.M. Phelps

The Biden administration has incentivized many farmers to reprioritize the use of their land away from cultivating it for food production.

The United States government and the Chinese Communist Party see “national security” in two very different ways – and that includes food security.

Historically, the CCP has been known to weaponize its food supply, which it has done against millions of its own citizens, resulting in mass starvation and suffering. But today, it appears the communist government is stockpiling food, indeed, making it a major national security priority for its people. Why?

Tommy Waller, president and CEO of the Washington, D.C.-based think tank the Center for Security Policy, says most Americans do not understand that “food security is national security”. And that currently, the safety of American citizens is, indeed, being jeopardized by the U.S. government. The retired Marine Corps lieutenant colonel, in an interview with WND, explained that “at the federal level, our nation has catastrophically failed to prioritize food security while all of our adversaries, both hostile nations and globalists, have had their crosshairs on food for quite a while.”

For example, Waller said, in stark contrast to “having no problem starving its own people,” the Chinese government has an entire agency called the National Food and Strategic Reserves Administration. It is largely responsible for laws and regulations that oversee grain and material reserves of the East Asian country.

In statistics often touted by members of the Chinese regime, Waller said, “China’s grain inventories are so abundant that the stock-to-use ratio is well above the international grain security threshold.”

“The U. S. government has not put a major priority on food security or preparedness,” Waller warned. In contrast to the Chinese regime’s prioritizing strategic reserves of food, he told WND, “under the Biden administration, the USDA and FEMA have transitioned from a culture of preparedness to priorities of diversity, equity and inclusion – DEI – and climate change.”

“Less than two percent of our population produces food for everybody else in this country,” Waller noted. “The average American isn’t prepared to go without food for any duration, so you can see the importance of keeping our farmers farming.”

“Take away farming and you take away food,” he said starkly, while warning that the average person is extremely unprepared for shortages of food. “They just take it for granted, and it’s understandable because we’ve always had it very easy in this country,” Waller said, but warning about one scenario in which Americans could find themselves hungry right away: “That number one scenario is a loss of electricity caused by widespread electric grid blackouts.”

Waller’s interest in food security, he said, steadily grew due to his work to secure America’s electric grid. “All of the infrastructure we have is dependent upon electricity,” he said. “When considering the second and third order effects of electric grid outages, you can see how food becomes a very significant item of importance.”

“Most Americans don’t think twice about paying for home insurance, automobile insurance, life insurance, but for whatever reason, they don’t think about food insurance,” Waller told WND. “They don’t think about stocking up.”

While the federal government may be failing to stress the importance of preparedness, Waller attests that food security “is the one area where individual people and their communities could actually enhance national security,” adding that the lack of preparedness is “a fixable problem, if we are smart about our policies and more.”

In a 41-page report, the Center for Security Policy has published recommendations to bolster food security at the federal, state, local and individual level. With little action at the federal level, he said, it is important for Americans to do what they can at the state and local, as well as individual levels.

For example, the Center, which has a 20-year track record of helping state governments shape policies to bolster national security, is actively supporting numerous lawmakers seeking to outlaw agricultural land from being owned by foreign adversaries. The security-oriented nonprofit also promotes the concept of community-supported agriculture and the importance of citizens purchasing their food from local farmers. “By helping sustain their work,” Waller told WND, “it’s going to create more resilience at the community level.”

“Everything the Center for Security Policy does is for the public interest,” Waller said. “We exist to provide uncompromised analysis, unflinching leadership and unconventional solutions to keep Americans safer,” he explained, adding that “there are no corporations behind what we are doing.” He shared that CSP can also “provide threat briefings at the county level for emergency managers and law enforcement”.

Ultimately, as Waller explained, “food security is national security, and everyone – from citizens to lawmakers – can do their part to increase both.”

Reprinted with permission from WND News Center

Agriculture

Trump Floats Massive Tariffs On John Deere If Manufacturing Shifts To Mexico

Published on

From the Daily Caller News Foundation 

 

By Mariane Angela

 

Former President Donald Trump issued a warning Monday about imposing 200% tariffs on John Deere products if the company relocates its manufacturing operations to Mexico.

Trump engaged with local farmers and manufacturers during an event in Smithton, Pennsylvania, about the impact of China’s economic policies on the U.S. economy, according to the Associated Press. The former president highlighted his economic strategy against Vice President Kamala Harris by pointing out the potential benefits of tariffs and increased energy production, which he argued could help lower costs and protect local industries.

Trump highlighted John Deere’s recent decision to move some manufacturing to Mexico, and he threatened a 200% tariff on the company should it proceed with its plans under his potential administration, the AP reported.

“I just noticed behind me John Deere tractors, I know a lot about John Deere. I love the company, but as you know, they announced a few days ago that they’re gonna move a lot of their manufacturing business to Mexico,” Trump said, according to a video posted on X. “I’m just notifying John Deere right now. If you do that, we’re putting a 200% tariff on everything that you wanna sell into the United States. So that if I win, John Deere is gonna be paying 200%.”

John Deere previously announced that it will lay off roughly 610 employees across three of its plants in Illinois and Iowa. The company announced on May 31 that it will relocate skid steer and compact track loader production from Dubuque, Iowa, to Mexico by the end of 2026 as part of a broader strategy to enhance efficiency and manage rising manufacturing costs amidst changing business conditions.

Continue Reading

Agriculture

Farm for food not fear

Published on

From the Frontier Centre for Public Policy

By Lee Harding

Fall harvest is in the storehouse. Now, let’s put away all proposals to cap fertilizer inputs to save the earth. Canadian farmers are ensuring food security, not fueling the droughts, fires, or storms that critics unfairly attribute to them.

The Saskatoon-based Global Institute for Food Security (GIFS) did as fulsome an analysis as possible on carbon emissions in Saskatchewan, Western Canada, Canada, and international peers. Transportation, seed, fertilizer and manure, crop inputs, field activities, energy emissions, and post-harvest work were all in view.

The studies, published last year, had very reassuring results. Canadian crop production was less carbon intensive than other places, and Western Canada was a little better yet. This proved true crop by crop.

Carbon emissions per tonne of canola production were more than twice as high in France and Germany as in Canada. Australia was slightly less carbon intensive than Canada, but still trailed Western Canada.

For non-durum wheat, Canada blew Australia, France, Germany, and the U.S. away with roughly half the carbon intensity of those countries. For durum wheat, the U.S. had twice the carbon intensity of Canada, and Italy almost five times as much.

Canada was remarkably better with lentil production. Producers in Australia had 5.5 times the carbon emissions per tonne produced as Canada, while the U.S. had 8 times as much. In some parts of Canada, lentil production was a net carbon sink.

Canadian field peas have one-tenth the carbon emissions per tonne of production as is found in Germany, and one-sixth that of France or the United States.

According to GIFS, Canada succeeds by “regenerative agriculture, including minimal soil disturbance, robust crop rotation, covering the land, integrating livestock and the effective management of crop inputs.”

The implementation of zero-till farming is especially key. If the land isn’t worked up, most nutrients and gases stay in the soil–greenhouse gases included.

Western Canada has been especially keen to adopt the zero-till approach, in contrast to the United States, where only 30 percent of cropland is zero-till.

The adoption of optimal methods has already lowered Canadian carbon emissions substantially. Despite all of this, some net zero schemers aim to cut carbon emissions by fertilizer by 30 percent, just as it does in other sectors.

This target is undeserved for Canadian agriculture because the industry has already made drastic, near-maximum progress. Nitrates help crops grow, so the farmer is already vitally motivated to keep nitrates in the soil and out of the skies–alleged global warming or not. Fewer nutrients mean fewer yields and lower proteins.

The farmer’s personal and economic interests already motivate the best fertilizer use that is practically possible. Universal adoption of optimal techniques could lower emissions a bit more, but Canada is so far ahead in this game that a hard cap on fertilizer emissions could only be detrimental.

In 2021, Fertilizer Canada commissioned a study by MNP to estimate the costs of a 20 percent drop in fertilizer use to achieve a 30 percent reduction in emissions. The study suggested that by 2030, bushels of production per acre would drop significantly for canola (23.6), corn (67.9), and spring wheat (36.1). By 2030, the annual value of lost production for those crops alone would reach $10.4 billion.

If every animal and human in Canada died, leaving the country an unused wasteland, the drop in world greenhouse gas emissions would be only 1.4 percent. Any talk of reducing capping fertilizer inputs for the greater good is nonsense.

Lee Harding is a Research Fellow for the Frontier Centre for Public Policy.

Continue Reading

Trending

X