Newton’s Third Law of Motion, “For every action there is an equal and opposite reaction,” has direct application to the physics of farm bills.
If you believe the 2007 U.S. Farm Bill process is complicated – 2 million farmers, 435 representatives, 100 senators, innumerable ideas – it’s a simple souffl
When University of Wisconsin law professor Peter Carstensen read the U.S. Department of Justice May 4 press release announcing its blessing on pork giant Smithfield, Inc.
During a pork roast dinner with my parents on the farm 15 or so years ago, my father issued one of only two edicts I recall him ever uttering.
If you could save, say, $1,000 on the purchase of a new car or truck because it did not have a shatterproof windshield and side glass, would you cut the deal? Of course not; the safety of you and your family is priceless.
Farm bill fights usually center on the legislation’s commodity title, the section that explains who, when and how farmers can tap the federal treasury should crop prices fall.
In the upside down world of the U.S. Department of Agriculture’s current leaders, sound science is what they say it is and food safety seems to be what is best for agribusiness.
Be it mere coincidence or clear symbolism, the delightfully early and deliciously warm spring enjoyed by farmers and ranchers came to a stone-cold halt just days after the U.
The signs and sounds of another Illinois spring are everywhere and each one sends me daydreaming to another time, another place.
The U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission filed a civil complaint in the U.S. District Court in Washington, D.