|
Rethink Rural
Development Steve
Baccus, President, Kansas Farm Bureau
For those of us who grew up
in small, rural Kansas communities, our way
of life is innate. The life lessons of hard
work, honesty, accountability and helping
your neighbor when they’re in need are
second nature to us.
We’re all familiar with the
population and demographic trends in Kansas.
You can bend, shape and rearrange the
numbers any way you want, but they always
add up the same way – rural Kansas is
becoming more rural.
These trends have huge and
lasting ramifications on our hometowns –
economically, socially and politically. In
some cases, even survivability is in doubt.
Farm bills are traditionally
broken down into “titles,” and one of them
is Rural Development. The government spends
millions of dollars on things like water and
sewer systems, housing, health clinics,
emergency service facilities and electric
and telephone service.
We farmers have sort of a
love-hate relationship with our federal
government. The independent entrepreneur
streak in us bumps right up against the fact
that so many of our business decisions are
intricately interwoven with dictates from
Washington. Sometimes there’s friction.
One of the things we’re not
especially enamored with is the disconnect
between so many of the projects done in our
hometowns under the banner of rural
development.
Within Kansas Farm Bureau,
we’ve spent the last couple of years getting
smarter about all of the organized efforts
one can find under the heading of rural
development. Despite their best intentions,
when you examine the population and economic
trends in Kansas, one can make a compelling
case they haven’t worked.
Our organization’s consensus
has emerged around this fundamental concept
– truly meaningful rural development must
come from within the community. The critical
ownership essential for sustainable success
simply does not exist in a top-down
government approach.
Which leads, logically, to
this premise: If our government is going to
drop millions – or any amount – on rural
development, wouldn’t those taxpayer dollars
be best invested in efforts where people
have an active stake in the outcome?
We have begun the
conversation in Washington with members of
our Kansas Congressional delegation, who, in
turn, have opened doors to other key
committee and sub-committee chairs to engage
them in this dialogue. Our early discussions
are encouraging.
We want our hometowns to be
thriving, active centers of social and
economic activity. Most 21st
century family farms in Kansas involve one
of the spouses working full or part-time off
the farm. If there are no jobs available in
town, it’s harder to keep that family on the
farm.
Our consensus is centered on
four fundamental concepts, aimed at adding
value and structure to the hundreds of small
town Kansans who seek nothing less than to
save a culture.
Those concepts are fostering
entrepreneurship, retaining youth, retaining
wealth and developing leaders. Imagine the
potential for our hometowns, if our
government’s investment in rural development
were built upon the foundation of these four
community-centric pillars.
Our members will have plenty
to say about the other component “titles” of
the farm bill, but at the end of the day,
the same underlying motivation drives us:
The decisions made by our federal government
in the 2007 farm bill can and should help
those of us who live it every day – preserve
our rural heritage and way of life.
|
