Rural vs. Urban? They're different, for sure.

[MineralMan]

I've lived in rural settings and in a major city. Generally, when people talk about rural populations, they're talking about people who grow stuff and the people who supply those farmers with the things they need.

We didn't do so well with rural America in the most recent election. Part of the reason is that we ignored that segment of the population during the campaign. Rural communities are sort of used to that. But, this year, that segment didn't vote for the Democratic candidate. I don't pretend to know why, really. But they didn't, and that made a huge difference in three states we had to win. It wasn't a large margin, but it was enough to turn the race.

My parents, who are now 92 years old, own a small (just 15 acres) orange and avocado farm just outside of a small town in Southern California. They should have sold it several years ago, but it was their dream and they just don't feel up to moving at this point, so they'll probably die there.

The farm hasn't made a profit for 10 years. Most of the citrus and avocado acreage has been converted to row crops in that area. There are many reasons for that, but the profitability of the citrus industry and avocado industry has plummeted. My father will probably pay to have all of the trees on his farm pulled out and burned next year. Why? Because it costs him more money to farm the place than the crop brings in. The price of citrus and avocados has dropped, due to imports from Mexico, Argentina and other places. The costs of irrigating, pest control and other things has risen faster than inflation. The result is losing money every year.

So, he can pull all the trees and burn them and do much better financially. It hurts him to do that. And then there are the other things that cost money. Here's one that makes absolutely no sense: The State of California now requires that he pay $1000 per year for someone to come into the orchard and look for feces on the ground. Oranges are picked from the trees. Fallen fruit is not collected for sale. There's no way for feces from rabbits, deer, coyotes and the occasional bear to contaminate the fruit. And yet, his farm must be inspected by someone who walks up and down the rows of trees looking for crap. It makes no sense at all, but there is no option. Now, $1000 doesn't sound like much, but its something being paid for no benefit to anyone. Some agency somewhere decided that all farms have to be inspected. However, imported fruit coming into the country has no such requirements. Add to that the fact that all oranges and avocados are washed before being sold in a multi-step process that leaves them free of all contamination.

That's just one expense among many that their farm incurs every year. Many of the others, too, make no practical sense, but are mandated by some agency somewhere. Of course, the farmers all think it's the Democrats who have instituted such regulations, and it pisses them off.

Does it make any sense as a reason Trump won in agricultural areas? Not to me. Not to most others who have no knowledge of farming practices and costs. But, my father is going to pull all of the trees, because he can't afford to farm any longer. Instead of making a small profit, he is guaranteed to lose money if he keeps them. Now, that doesn't make any sense, either.

Now, when you go into your supermarket or specialty grocer in the city and buy orange or avocados, you probably never give a thought to how they were grown, by whom, or even where, really. But, you're not likely to ever see any from my parents' farm again. It makes no sense for them to pay more to grow them than they get for their crop. BTW, my parents voted for Hillary, anyway. Lots of people in ag country didn't, though. Many identify Democrats and "Liberals" for much of the stuff that makes no sense to them. Sometimes, they're right, actually.

[yeoman6987]

1. Just awful. Sadly many farmers are in the same situation

I have a friend who owns 250 acres in Maryland and it has a stream running through it. The grief the county environmental agency gives is beyond unnecessary. She's 77 and is constantly going to court over the stream due to changing laws and other matters that the county doesn't release to these owners. She voted Hillary because she wanted a woman for president and that she was experienced. I just wish the county was more helpful instead of hoping these farmer fail.

[leftstreet]

2. Your parents are still working at 92 yrs old?

That's impressive!

[MineralMan]

4. Well, they hire some of the work to be done now,

but my father is still out on the tractor a lot. My mother has Alzheimers, though. I and my siblings have been trying to get them to sell the place and move into some sort of assisted living situation, but to no avail.

My wife and I are flying out there for Christmas. Could be the last one for both of them, really. Or not. Who knows?

[47of74]

24. My Grandpa worked up until he was 87.

At that point his health just would not allow him to continue working on the farm anymore. He was not happy when he had to move into assisted living. But it helped him live a bit longer than he would've staying at home.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

3. Farmers in the midwest are not doing well, either,

because commodity prices - corn in particular - have been so low for the last few years that they can barely break even after all their expenses are paid. Farmers do get financial help from the government in the form of subsidies and price supports, but even with that aid many are in poor financial shape. They almost always vote Republican even though the government programs that help them came from Democrats. They complain that they aren't getting enough help from the government. Go figure.

[JI7]

7. they see govt programs as giving free things to blacks and mexicans

[MineralMan]

8. Yes, there is that paradox, too.

Sadly, we're losing small farms at an alarming rate, and that's been going on for a long, long time. There are no subsidies or price supports for citrus or avocados. There is a crop insurance program, but the costs for that are going up. Water for irrigation is going up, and citrus and avocados absolutely require irrigation most of the year there. The price my parents are paid for oranges has gone down steadily from what it was in the 1960s. And that's in actual dollars, not dollars adjusted for inflation. That's due to cheap imports of fruit from Mexico, Argentina and other countries, where costs are lower to grow the stuff.

Sadly, a number of crop diseases have been imported along with the fruit, and now there are new exotic diseases attacking citrus in particular. One of them has the potential to completely destroy all citrus growing in the United States within the next 20 years. It has already been found in the area where my parent's far is located, and the cost of unproven preventive measures against it is horrendous, too.

I'm not sure there is a solution to all of this. It's just one more thing that is damaging the US economy at its most basic level - food production. Add climate change to the equation and profitable farming may become impossible in much of this country at some point. What happens after that is sort of frightening to consider.

One of the problems Democrats face is that we recognize the problems, but don't really have a way to ameliorate them. That feces inspection I mentioned was instituted after a couple of outbreaks of E. coli from ground crops that are nothing like citrus, and from some imported crops. The response was to require all agricultural operations to inspect their properties for feces, regardless of whether contamination was even possible. The farmers understand how stupid it is. That affects them in their political decisions, for sure.

Things are a mess in all sectors of society, I'm afraid. Sadly, the wrong people get blamed all too often, and common sense is not common at all in government. Uff da!

[unblock]

5. republicans have a great propaganda scam, that any and every bad regulation is the democrats' fault

yes, bad regulations exist. good regulation requires constant monitoring and updating, constant feedback from constituents, constant revision to cater to changes in the market and technology and so on.

much of it is not the fault of democrats or republicans anyway, it's just a matter of a few bureaucrats not getting it right, or some regulation that wasn't updated. for instance, perhaps the feces check regulation came first, then they decided to ban the selling of fallen fruit, but forgot to remove the feces check that not longer made sense.

or maybe it was a democrat, but that's no reason to punish the entire party, or vote for a different president based on what some state-level bureaucrat did.


but the republicans and the media (but i repeat myself) always spin it as if all bad regulations are our fault, and that all regulations are as bad as the one worst example they can find, and that somehow gutting large swaths of regulation wholesale with the help of industry lobbyists will remove all the bad ones and keep only the good ones.


democrats fundamentally are in favor not of regulation per se, but of good governance. it costs nothing to say "that sounds like a dumb regulation. i'll see what i can do about it."

[MineralMan]

10. But, see...I'm not blaming Democrats at all.

I'm describing some of the reasons others blame them. It's funny how one little stupid thing can change someone's mind, sometimes.

Maybe campaigning in those areas would be a good idea. You think? Maybe listening and understanding the complaints would help. I think so. We sort of focused on urban issues in 2016 as a part, especially in the Presidential race. That appears to have been a mistake, I think.

[unblock]

13. not blaming you at all, i'm thinking of the reasoning of others as well.

yeah, the real problem is that it has become very, very hard to convince anyone of anything these days, at least across the great political divide. that's pretty much all on the media, which is nearly content- and genuine debate-free. what they call content is at best gossip and speculation, usually pro-republican and anti-democratic, and what they call debate is just an argument or even just a shouting match.

so campaigns have become more and more about turnout than convincing. that said, i think the problem is in the timing -- by campaign season, the time for convincing has passed. we have to do the convincing for 2020 *now*.


as for it being a "mistake", i'm loathe to fault a campaign that won the popular vote by a comfortable margin and lost many battleground states by very small margins, given a media that gave 85% of the coverage to her opponent and what coverage they did give to hillary was nearly all about the fake scandals created by the republican propaganda machine.

it's as if trump was allowed to ride his bike around the inside lane with a 5-second headstart and hillary had to use the outside lane and people are critiquing her hurdling technique.

[Blanks]

16. Early in the Clinton administration...

There was the 'Gore Report on Reinventing Government'.

They (Gore's team) went around and talked to people about these things that the government does, and are not necessary, or not fair, or don't make sense.

They could have talked about that report in the campaign, suggested doing the same thing but Hillary was winning and by a large enough margin that it really didn't warrant working a lot harder.

You're right though, the democrats want more regulation, the republicans want less, and this kind of thing plays into their hands if we aren't out there on the ground fighting for it.

[NJCher]

26. agreed

Here's an example of good intentions gone awry.

http://www.cbsnews.com/news/60-minutes-americans-with-disabilities-act-lawsuits-anderson-cooper/

When opportunists like this guy swoop in and take advantage of small business owners, something has to give. This guy claims he's trying to help disabled people, but I don't believe him.

Regulations, as explained by someone knowledgeable about them, actually save money in the long run. There needs to be some common sense applied, though, and your last sentence might just be what is needed. Flexibility is the operative word. Common sense, too.

Reading about what your parents have gone through, MM, makes me sick. If somebody wants to work at that age, more power to them.


Cher

[libtodeath]

6. So for every occasional seeming over reach we scrap all safe guards?

I am not being unsympathetic but the overall good of those protections does matter.

[MineralMan]

9. No. We do tend to over-apply solutions to things beyond

what makes sense, though. The people who instituted that feces inspection probably knew nothing about how citrus and avocados are grown, harvested or processed. It's easy just to apply a broad brush to such things. In the meantime, the competing imported foodstuffs are not grown under those conditions, so it's one more cost they don't incur.

Of course we shouldn't scrap safeguards. That's the Republicans' solution. But, we can be a lot smarter about the ones we impose. The Republicans won't impose any. Democrats tend to broadly apply safeguards without really investigating processes thoroughly enough, as in this situation.

I'm just trying to give a little insight into some of the issues that affect rural areas more than urban ones. Those things do affect votes in those areas. They truly do.

[bettyellen]

12. Republicans have imposed uneeded regulations as a punitive measure - notably on abortion clinics

Forcing hallways to be a certain width, doctors to have certain admitting privileges and not allowing PP places to perform abortions at all.
In those cases some voters LIKE the shitty regulations.

[Jim__]

11. Do you know the history of that feces inspection rule?

If not, it's somewhat curious that you cite that rule in a post concerning why the Democrats lost the rural vote. My guess is that farmers in your parents' position tend to blame things like that on the Democratic Party, but is it actually due to the Democrats, and if it's a bad regulation imposed by the Democratic Party, has there been any action by the affected farmers to have the rule changed.

Republicans do publicly advocate for a largely regulation free society. Privately, some expensive regulations are passed by republicans at the request of agribusiness - in the case of farming. The Democratic Party may need a strong public relations effort to explain the existence of unpopular regulations - especially ones that have been implemented by Republicans but are blamed on Democrats.

I believe the Democratic Party does enact some unpopular and expensive regulations. They need to make clear the reasons for these regulations. They're going to lose some support due to some necessary but unpopular regulations, but if they are clear about what they are doing and why, they may be able to eliminate the image of the party that just mindlessly imposes bureaucratic barriers to people making money.

[MineralMan]

17. It's perceptions that make the difference, not the actual history.

As it happens, I do know the history of that regulation. And yes, the citrus and avocado farmers protested that silliness, but to no avail. Who's responsible for the regulation? Some agricultural and public health authorities. Who gets the blame for that regulation? Well, the Democrats do. Is that fair? Perhaps not, but that's who has gotten the blame by those affected by it.

It's not really a matter of facts. It's a matter of perceptions that influence voters.

I'm not arguing anything here. I'm just explaining why some rural voters vote against their best interests, or against what we think are their best interests. Sometimes, they have a different opinion of what their best interests are than we do.

It's something that needs to be addressed if we are going to get those votes, I think.

[Beartracks]

27. "It's not really a matter of facts. It's a matter of perceptions."

This.

Republicans, who often don't have facts on their side anyway, are masters of influencing perception, because they know that perception is more important in the long run.

=================

[Buckeye_Democrat]

28. Yep. Here's an example from talk radio a few years ago...

The conservative propagandist mentioned the millions of dollars of aid sent to Egypt by the USA. He even quoted the correct figure.

He then twisted it back on Democrats, saying that's what they do with YOUR tax dollars... send it overseas when there's many people in dire straits in the good ol' USA!.

He did NOT mention that all of the aid was provided to Egypt on the condition that it be used to buy weapons from our weapons makers, or that it was something that most Republican representatives favored! (Of course they did. It was just another form of corporate welfare, helping the contractors of the military-industrial complex!)

[cwydro]

14. Thanks for your post.

I see much of the same in my area.

K and r.

[Buckeye_Democrat]

15. Unfortunately, most regulations will automatically get attached to Democrats because...

... they're known to promote them more frequently than Republicans.

The ground feces check indeed seems out-of-touch!

Many rural people don't see the need for various gun regulations where they live.

At least there's been no national requirement that all pet feces be picked up and disposed of a particular way, which might be a useful law in a city, that would also get applied to farmers like this guy:

[KamaAina]

18. Overall demand for avocados is skyrocketing.

Folks east of the Sierras have discovered them.

Could they go organic? Those fetch more $$$.

[MineralMan]

19. Organic? Probably not.

They're a tough crop to raise, with very persnickety habits.

Most of the ones you see in the stores come from outside the US now. Especially east of the Rockies.

[Warpy]

20. A lot of that bullshit was backed by Agribusiness

as a way to get small farmers to sell out. However, to most people in rural areas, the bullshit regulations just come from "Washington" and Washington has been run by nanny state liberals for far too long and there is no way you can get any of them to understand that "nanny state liberals" went out of power in 1969 and the maze of expensive regulatory bullshit now belongs to Republicans and their favorite corporations. They just won't see it that way. They just won't own it, not while corporate radio is giving them the message that liberals are the reason they have to pay for inspections that haven't been necessary since the 1920s.

They have a lot of company among small business owners in towns and suburbs.

[hunter]

21. My parent's small farm, in the same county, got choked out by million dollar mini-ranches...

... and upscale housing developments.

Most of the wilder places that were my playground as a kid are simply gone now, bulldozed and built over.

All the lemon groves are gone, replaced by big houses with faux tropical landscapes, palm trees and all, concrete driveways with electric gates, BMW's and other expensive cars driving back and forth, their tinted windows never opened, between big box stores and jobs in the city, lonely horses owned as status symbols, etc.

My parents fled civilization leaving my youngest brother and his wife in charge. When my brother and his wife left for less oppressive lands, my parents sold the place and the new owners promptly ripped out and bulldozed everything that was interesting, painted over exterior murals another brother had painted, fenced the entire property, gated the driveway, tripled the size of the house, and added a swimming pool.

[MineralMan]

23. Yes, and after my parents are gone, their place

will be sold, too. None of us want it. I'm sure it will turn into one of those places, as well. It has river frontage and beautiful views in all directions.

[hunter]

31. It still upsets me that trees I planted to live decades were pulled up and burned as weeds.

As an amateur evolutionary biologist, by natural inclination and some formal training, I take perverse pleasure knowing the conventional affluent U.S. American lifestyle is entirely unsustainable. This too shall pass. A million years from now it's all just a peculiar layer of trash in the geologic record.

My dad probably bought his agricultural chemicals at the same place your dad did, the same place that was my source for rocket fuel ingredients and explosives. These days it's probably not so easy for a skinny squeaky kid driving his dad's pickup truck to buy heavy bags of potassium nitrate, no questions asked.

I have shrapnel scars on my ass and back from one of my experiments but my quick thinking brother told my mom, when she got home from work, that I'd fallen into a prickly pear patch.

[hollowdweller]

22. Should be difft regs for small guys

Around here you can kill, butcher and sell up to 1000 chickens or other poultry direct to the consumer w/o any regulations.

I'm not sure the amount but you ca also sell a lot of eggs to the consumer w/o inspections or regs.

Our legislature recently just passed regs that you can slaughter and sell up to 1000 rabbits w/o regulation.

The key I think is there should be exceptions for the little guy so he can stay in business.

[MineralMan]

25. What state?

[TheDormouse]

29. Those fecal inspections aren't entirely nonsensical

Your father may run his farm very well, but that doesn't necessarily apply to all the other farmers.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/news/nation/2014/01/28/sentencing-of-colorado-cantaloupe-farmers/4958671/

Some farm owners/managers historically have not provided adequate working conditions for farm laborers. So the workers have to crap in the fields, and then don't have access to soap and running water. Add in that they may not have access to good health care. The result is that they can get germs on their hands that get transferred to the food they are picking, even if the foods are not from ground crops.
https://www.sfgate.com/business/article/New-focus-on-field-sanitation-E-coli-2551035.php

http://www.wsj.com/articles/SB888948983807436500

https://news.vice.com/article/chicken-industry-workers-wear-diapers-because-bosses-allow-no-breaks-ngo-says

You're right, those competitor nations typically don't have comparable regulations. But that isn't a reason for us to get rid of the regulations for food grown here. We shouldn't be trying to get into a race to the bottom.

[TheDormouse]

30. It's tough to stay competitive at that age

Small family-owned farms have been going the way of the dodo for years now. To be able to compete, you need some kind of gimick, like "local and organic." I'm sure that's next to impossible to get into when you a nonagenarian responsible for the care of an ailing spouse.

If he were younger, might be worth trying to switch out part of the crops to those that you mentioned are subsidized. But with him being 92, no reason to expect he'd live long enough to see a positive return on the investment.

Members of Congress Collect At Least $9.5 Million in Farm Subsidies
By Rob Coleman, Government Affairs Analyst
Wednesday, June 8, 2016

Members of Congress collected at least $9.5 million in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2014, according to new data from EWG’s Farm Subsidy Database – including more than $1.1 million in subsidies over the last five years.

The 36 legislators and their spouses received millions in traditional farm subsidies since 1995. It’s likely that many also received crop insurance subsidies – but those are hidden from the public....

Of 36 legislators collecting farm subsidies, 34 grow corn, soybeans, sorghum, cotton, rice, barley and tobacco – crops that are eligible for both traditional farm subsidies and crop insurance subsidies....

Efforts to require greater disclosure of crop insurance subsidies, including which legislators receive subsidies, were defeated in 2014, when Congress last considered the farm bill.

http://www.ewg.org/agmag/2016/06/members-congress-collect-least-95-million-farm-subsidies

Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-TN) agitated against food aid for poor Americans included in the Farm Bill during last week’s House Agricultural Committee debate, accusing the government of stealing “other people’s money.” ...

Fincher invoked the Bible in his defense of the devastating cuts, quoting, “The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.” ...

While Fincher interprets food assistance for the needy as “stealing,” he has not similarly condemned the Farm Bill’s massive agricultural subsidies. In fact, he supported a proposal to expand crop insurance by $9 billion over the next 10 years. Fincher has a great personal stake in maintaining these particular government handouts, as the second most heavily subsidized farmer in Congress and one of the largest subsidy recipients in Tennessee history

https://thinkprogress.org/congressman-who-gets-millions-in-farm-subsidies-denounces-food-stamps-as-stealing-other-peoples-bb26216147#.bzr3sd9s5

[TheDormouse]

32. I think rural voters are just more receptive to "cultural" messages

of the sort Trump based his campaign on.

“What Trump did in rural areas was try to appeal to folks culturally," Davis said, contrasting that with Clinton's comments about "deplorables" and putting coal mines out of business.

Those two slip-ups were particularly problematic in economically depressed communities that already felt dismissed by Washington and urban elites, he said.

"A lot of us in rural areas, our ears are tuned to intonation,” said Davis, who lives in Whitesburg, Kentucky, a Trump stronghold. “We think people are talking down to us. What ends up happening is that we don't focus on the policy — we focus on the tones, the references, the culture."

http://www.politico.com/story/2016/11/hillary-clinton-rural-voters-trump-231266

That quote doesn't mention the racist, xenophobic insular stuff, but I think the latter especially applies, which is one of the reasons Republicans pretty much have total control of the so-called flyover states.

At least Obama came from Illinois, which, apart from Chicago, is a rural state, and had been campaignig to win over the farmers for years--which probably helped out a lot in 2008 in Iowa, Wisconsin, Michigan, Ohio, and Pennsylvania.