Public Health in Oregon - Join The Conversation

Obama’s Choice for Agriculture Secretary: What’s the health impact?

By: CHP | Posted on: December 20th, 2008 | 2 comments | Share:
Categories: Economic Issues • Policies and Laws • Nutrition • Public Health

Hopes ran very high recently as healthy eating advocates anticipated President-elect Obama’s choice for Secretary of Agriculture. These hopes were fueled, in part, by the New York Times, which published Michael Pollan’s open letter to the next “farmer in chief,” as well as Nicholas Kristoff’s essay asserting that the position should be re-named “secretary of food.”

Kristoff pointed out that the Agriculture Department has “traditionally been handed over to industrial farming interests,” where the farm lobby “uses that perch to inflict unhealthy food on American children in school-lunch programs, exacerbating our national crisis with diabetes and obesity.”

Renaming the department would thus signal a transition from “a bankrupt structure of factory farming that squanders energy, exacerbates climate change and makes Americans unhealthy,” and would show a commitment to the 100 percent of Americans who eat, rather than the 2 percent who work in agriculture, many at large industrial facilities.

If well-orchestrated, the position also could be used to demonstrate support for small, ethical, and locally-focused farms.

On Wednesday, December 17, Obama announced that Tom Vilsack would be appointed as Secretary of Agriculture. Vilsack served two terms as governor of Iowa, sought the Democratic presidential nomination in 2008, originally endorsed Senator Clinton for president, and has been a strong advocate for renewable energy and alternative fuels.

Obama said “as governor of one of our most abundant farm states, he led with vision, promoting biotech to strengthen our farmers in fostering an agricultural economy of the future that not only grows the food we eat, but the energy that we use.”

However, the Organic Consumers Association opposes Vilsack’s appointment because, among other reasons, he has supported genetically engineered pharmaceutical corn, he was the founder and former chair of the Governor’s Biotechnology Partnership, he expressed support for cloning dairy cows, and he helped to create a seed pre-emption bill in 2005, which curtailed local government’s ability to regulate genetically modified seeds.

Corn and soy based biofuels are often cited a way out of fossil-fuel energy dependence, but right now, they still require fossil energy for their production, and also may contribute to increased world food prices and, consequently, a less healthy world population.

Does this nomination say something about the new administration’s commitment to health and the root causes of health in this country and the world?