Corporate Farming Battle Examined
For 35 years the Center for Rural Affairs has stood at the forefront of the battle to protect family farming from large corporate interests.
Beginning in the mid 1970s we tried for eight years to get a corporate farming restriction passed in the Nebraska Legislature, to no avail. We had nearly stopped trying when Nebraska Farmers Union launched a petition drive in 1981 to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. Initiative 300 was born, and the fight was on.
The battle that ensued was a critical point in the Center’s history. We proved we could collaborate with our friends, punish our enemies, and speak truth to powerful interests in a way that persuaded the general public.
Armed with the Facts
We used campaign finance disclosure laws to reveal that a $500,000 campaign against the amendment was financed by corporate funds, much of it from out of state. Armed with the facts, we responded to a traveling news conference planned by our opponents.
The news conference was to take place in half a dozen cities across the state with leaders of organizations opposing the initiative being flown from site to site. When the flying news conference showed up, the first question they got everywhere was, “Who’s paying for the jet?” It was a marvelous demonstration of how people can beat money when they know the score.
But maybe the most effective campaign tactic was the simple TV ad we made with a real farmer standing in his field saying: “Let’s send those out-of-state corporations a message: Our land is not for sale … and neither is our vote.”
We did not have the funds to pay for the ad to be run, but we invoked the “fairness doctrine,” a federal regulation (since eliminated) requiring electronic media to cover ballot questions fairly, whether both sides of the issue could pay for ads or not. We wrote every TV and radio station asking for free air time, and most of them gave us some – about one minute for every five the other side bought. Our ad was real, convincing, and powerfully simple.
Election Day 1982
On Election Day, we lost Omaha by a modest margin but made up the difference in Lincoln and won by 2:1 in rural Nebraska. It was a stunning victory of people over corporate power. In some ways, Election Day 1982 is when the battle over corporate farming began. Hell hath no fury like the rich and powerful when they can’t have what they want. The Omaha National Bank filed a lawsuit almost immediately. It failed.
There were six more suits over the years in state and federal court. And nearly every year there was at least talk of legislative attempts or ballot efforts to repeal the ban.
We fought back at every turn. We filled the legislative chamber when hearings were held, confronted paid petition circulators with volunteer ones, and we went inside the bowels of farm organizations that supported corporate farming, cultivating their local leaders and effectively neutralizing these organizations.
Lawsuits Never Stopped The battle raged for 20 years, and the opposition failed repeatedly. But the lawsuits never quit coming.
Six court battles and 23 years after passage opponents finally got something to stick. Having tested their latest legal argument against a similar law in South Dakota, opponents filed a suit in 2004 charging that Nebraska’s corporate farming ban was a violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. A single judge heard the case and issued her ruling – Initiative 300 was unconstitutional. The case was appealed and appealed again, finally being turned away by the U.S. Supreme Court. It was an unfortunate defeat.
Rural People Can Prevail
We have been here before though, facing down political interests more concerned with campaign contributions than the future of our farms and communities. And we have overcome before, showing that when rural people band together they can set their own destiny.
Politicians howl about activist judges who lean left or lean right, but the real threat is a judiciary who rules not in the interest of people or the law, but in the interest of money and corporate power.
See the article on LB1174 for recent developments on efforts to pass a legislative replacement for Nebraska’s landmark corporate farming ban.
-------
This piece is adapted in part from the Center for Rural Affairs History. Find more at http://www.cfra.org/about/history. For more information contact Brian Depew, briand@cfra.org.
Beginning in the mid 1970s we tried for eight years to get a corporate farming restriction passed in the Nebraska Legislature, to no avail. We had nearly stopped trying when Nebraska Farmers Union launched a petition drive in 1981 to place a constitutional amendment on the ballot. Initiative 300 was born, and the fight was on.
The battle that ensued was a critical point in the Center’s history. We proved we could collaborate with our friends, punish our enemies, and speak truth to powerful interests in a way that persuaded the general public.
Armed with the Facts
We used campaign finance disclosure laws to reveal that a $500,000 campaign against the amendment was financed by corporate funds, much of it from out of state. Armed with the facts, we responded to a traveling news conference planned by our opponents.
The news conference was to take place in half a dozen cities across the state with leaders of organizations opposing the initiative being flown from site to site. When the flying news conference showed up, the first question they got everywhere was, “Who’s paying for the jet?” It was a marvelous demonstration of how people can beat money when they know the score.
But maybe the most effective campaign tactic was the simple TV ad we made with a real farmer standing in his field saying: “Let’s send those out-of-state corporations a message: Our land is not for sale … and neither is our vote.”
We did not have the funds to pay for the ad to be run, but we invoked the “fairness doctrine,” a federal regulation (since eliminated) requiring electronic media to cover ballot questions fairly, whether both sides of the issue could pay for ads or not. We wrote every TV and radio station asking for free air time, and most of them gave us some – about one minute for every five the other side bought. Our ad was real, convincing, and powerfully simple.
Election Day 1982
On Election Day, we lost Omaha by a modest margin but made up the difference in Lincoln and won by 2:1 in rural Nebraska. It was a stunning victory of people over corporate power. In some ways, Election Day 1982 is when the battle over corporate farming began. Hell hath no fury like the rich and powerful when they can’t have what they want. The Omaha National Bank filed a lawsuit almost immediately. It failed.
There were six more suits over the years in state and federal court. And nearly every year there was at least talk of legislative attempts or ballot efforts to repeal the ban.
We fought back at every turn. We filled the legislative chamber when hearings were held, confronted paid petition circulators with volunteer ones, and we went inside the bowels of farm organizations that supported corporate farming, cultivating their local leaders and effectively neutralizing these organizations.
Lawsuits Never Stopped The battle raged for 20 years, and the opposition failed repeatedly. But the lawsuits never quit coming.
Six court battles and 23 years after passage opponents finally got something to stick. Having tested their latest legal argument against a similar law in South Dakota, opponents filed a suit in 2004 charging that Nebraska’s corporate farming ban was a violation of the Dormant Commerce Clause of the U.S. Constitution. A single judge heard the case and issued her ruling – Initiative 300 was unconstitutional. The case was appealed and appealed again, finally being turned away by the U.S. Supreme Court. It was an unfortunate defeat.
Rural People Can Prevail
We have been here before though, facing down political interests more concerned with campaign contributions than the future of our farms and communities. And we have overcome before, showing that when rural people band together they can set their own destiny.
Politicians howl about activist judges who lean left or lean right, but the real threat is a judiciary who rules not in the interest of people or the law, but in the interest of money and corporate power.
See the article on LB1174 for recent developments on efforts to pass a legislative replacement for Nebraska’s landmark corporate farming ban.
-------
This piece is adapted in part from the Center for Rural Affairs History. Find more at http://www.cfra.org/about/history. For more information contact Brian Depew, briand@cfra.org.
Bookmark/Search this post with:
Post new comment