News

Not a single agriculture topic was covered during last night's debate

Reading Time: 2 minutes

debateFor more than two hours on Tuesday night, Donald Trump, Jeb Bush, Ted Cruz and six other republican presidential candidates engaged in a nationally televised debate live from The Venetian Hotel in Las Vegas. If you were a farmer who tuned in hoping to hear at least a question or two related to food, farming, trade or biofuels policy, you went to bed disappointed.

Despite the fact that everyone in America eats, food and farming never came up on Tuesday night. Not even the Renewable Fuel Standard or the Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership — two issues that have been in the news recently — were broached.

How about GMO labeling, an issue that generates endless discussion and debate online and through social media outlets? Nope. Nothing.

The debate focused primarily on terrorism and combating ISIS. Obviously, keeping Americans safe is an extremely important topic and a top priority. It should be the lead topic of any debate. Most of us in agriculture also understand that many of the issues related to food and farm policy rarely reach the “mainstream” and usually fly under the radar.

But that doesn’t mean agriculture issues should be left completely unaddressed. The candidates share their thoughts about terrorism and ISIS daily through media outlets. Most of the republican candidates say the same thing: President Obama hasn’t done enough to fight ISIS and (insert name of candidate) will do better. National security answers on the democratic side of the ticket also include grand pledges to fight terrorism.

That was the general tone of every terrorism-related answer on Tuesday night and it likely won’t change in the months leading up to the election.

It would have been nice to hear from the candidates about biofuels. Or their thoughts on the recent attempt of Congress to seriously slash crop insurance. Or where they stand on GMO labeling. Or water quality concerns related to farming, which is a topic growing in buzz throughout many agricultural states, especially Minnesota.

Not only would at least one food and farming question have been beneficial to farmers (and anyone who eats), it also would have tested the candidate’s knowledge of issues that go beyond the “news of the day.” For example, the Trans Pacific Trade Partnership isn’t a mainstream issue, but it’s something a presidential candidate should have a clear viewpoint on.

Instead, we got the same ‘ol, same ‘ol. For some reason, our political process seems to dictate that it’s only important to address agriculture issues when in Iowa.

Oh well. So far this presidential race is shaping up to be more of a circus than an election, anyway. Maybe it’s for the best if agriculture issues stay out of the spotlight for now.

Did you like this article?

Share this post with your friends!