Agricultural Policymaking: Interest Groups and Access to Governmental Officials

Conservation agriculture that focuses on soil recovery is both economically and environmentally sustainable. This lies in contrast with many of the current agricultural practices, which push for high production, which, in turn lead to over-depletion of the soil. Agricultural interest groups play a role in crafting farming policies with governmental officials. Therefore, my study examined three interest group types agribusinesses, farmer organizations, and environmental NGOs that seek to influence agricultural policy, specifically focusing on the federal farm bill, due to its large impact throughout the nation. The research in which data wasgathered through subject interviews, a literature review, and databases found that access to governmental officials affects the amount of influence a group can have. Access is contingent upon: 1) the number of networks (social, professional, and political), 2) amount of money spent through campaign contributions and lobbying expenditures, and 3) extent of business enterprises and subsidiaries. The evidence shows that there is a correlation between these variables and the extent of access. My research concludes that agribusiness interest groups have the most access to government officials, and thus have the greatest influence on agricultural policies. Because agribusinesses support subsidies of commodity-crops this indirectly impacts conservation agriculture, as the two programs compete in a zero-sum game for funding in the farm bills.

Government Influence and the Failure of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac

In 2008 two government-sponsored enterprises, Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, were placed into conservatorship due to insolvency. The financial bailout of the two publically traded corporations came at the expense of the American tax payer. This study investigates the relationship between direct and indirect government influence and the increasing risk taking of Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac from the late 1990’s through their conservatorship in 2008. As government-sponsored enterprises Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac have many special advantages that other publically traded companies did not possess. These advantages allowed Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to increase their profitability. Theoretical literature regarding Congress and the bureaucracy suggests that the actions of bureaucrats can be linked to the preferences of Congressional members because bureaucrats are responsive to potential threats or perceived threats from the legislature. This theory is applicable to Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac, and is used to explain why the government was able to directly and indirectly influence the government-sponsored enterprises. Overall this investigation has determined that the United States government pursued a clear mission that determined to increase the availability of housing to all Americans, specifically to low-income and under-served individuals, through the use of the government-sponsored enterprises. Despite this link there is no conclusive data to show that the pursuit of this housing mission led Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac to operate in riskier business segments. This study has also found that motivation regarding profit-seeking and compensation structure provide a more plausible explanation for why the government-sponsored enterprises began to engage in riskier business practices that led to their insolvency.