Department of Agriculture

[wyomingosualum]

Every few years, the USDA sends out a survey (e.g., what crops do you grow, how many acres do you farm, how many colonies of bees do you have, etc).

Not a colossal pain in the ass, but then again, why would I waste my time doing such a thing? I don't take any federal money. I don't participate in any federal crop insurance programs. They don't pay me to not grow anything. I sell my crop to intrastate end users.

I can be fined for not answering their questions. I think I'll risk it. Why?

There is no provision for the establishment of an agriculture department in the constitution. It's just not there, period. Today, the United States Department of Agriculture employs over 100,000 people and spends around $140,000,000,000.00 each year. How could this happen? Probably because not enough people said, "You can't do that."

If they come after me, I'll have my day in court and see what happens. I would just like to be left alone. I don't think that's asking too much.

 

[imprimis]

Every few years, the USDA sends out a survey (e.g., what crops do you grow, how many acres do you farm, how many colonies of bees do you have, etc).

Not a colossal pain in the ass, but then again, why would I waste my time doing such a thing? I don't take any federal money. I don't participate in any federal crop insurance programs. They don't pay me to not grow anything. I sell my crop to intrastate end users.

I can be fined for not answering their questions. I think I'll risk it. Why?

There is no provision for the establishment of an agriculture department in the constitution. It's just not there, period. Today, the United States Department of Agriculture employs over 100,000 people and spends around $140,000,000,000.00 each year. How could this happen? Probably because not enough people said, "You can't do that."

If they come after me, I'll have my day in court and see what happens. I would just like to be left alone. I don't think that's asking too much.

I've learned over many years that it's all about the paperwork with governments. You can do pretty much anything so long as your paperwork is in order. I get SBA/Dept of Commerce surveys annually only theirs has a mandatory compliance statement in the instructions. Woe be to anyone who doesn't return the paperwork.

Good luck with your protest.

 

[Medic007]

Every few years, the USDA sends out a survey (e.g., what crops do you grow, how many acres do you farm, how many colonies of bees do you have, etc).

Not a colossal pain in the ass, but then again, why would I waste my time doing such a thing? I don't take any federal money. I don't participate in any federal crop insurance programs. They don't pay me to not grow anything. I sell my crop to intrastate end users.

I can be fined for not answering their questions. I think I'll risk it. Why?

There is no provision for the establishment of an agriculture department in the constitution. It's just not there, period. Today, the United States Department of Agriculture employs over 100,000 people and spends around $140,000,000,000.00 each year. How could this happen? Probably because not enough people said, "You can't do that."

If they come after me, I'll have my day in court and see what happens. I would just like to be left alone. I don't think that's asking too much.

I got one of those long, intrusive Census Bureau American Community Surveys. I chose not to answer it. They bugged me with a couple of mail reminders that I ignored. That was in 2015 and no fine or jail time so far.

 

[CowboyJD]

Every few years, the USDA sends out a survey (e.g., what crops do you grow, how many acres do you farm, how many colonies of bees do you have, etc).

Not a colossal pain in the ass, but then again, why would I waste my time doing such a thing? I don't take any federal money. I don't participate in any federal crop insurance programs. They don't pay me to not grow anything. I sell my crop to intrastate end users.

I can be fined for not answering their questions. I think I'll risk it. Why?

There is no provision for the establishment of an agriculture department in the constitution. It's just not there, period. Today, the United States Department of Agriculture employs over 100,000 people and spends around $140,000,000,000.00 each year. How could this happen? Probably because not enough people said, "You can't do that."

If they come after me, I'll have my day in court and see what happens. I would just like to be left alone. I don't think that's asking too much.

There is a SCOTUS decision concerning regulations from The New Deal era that says even if you just grow your crop in state and sell to intrastate end users, a farmer is still subject to federal regulation under the interstate commerce clause. Wickard v Filburn.

Later used to defend and uphold federal drug laws against marijuana even if it is grown and consumed purely in state.

 

[07pilt]

Food is a strategic resource.

 

[imprimis]

There is a SCOTUS decision concerning regulations from The New Deal era that says even if you just grow your crop in state and sell to intrastate end users, a farmer is still subject to federal regulation under the interstate commerce clause. Wickard v Filburn.

Later used to defend and uphold federal drug laws against marijuana even if it is grown and consumed purely in state.

Wickard v Filburn was also cited in the Obamacare lawsuits regarding the Commerce Clause and its ability to force people to pay a fine (tax) even if they chose not to buy coverage.

 

[wyomingosualum]

There is a SCOTUS decision concerning regulations from The New Deal era that says even if you just grow your crop in state and sell to intrastate end users, a farmer is still subject to federal regulation under the interstate commerce clause. Wickard v Filburn.

Later used to defend and uphold federal drug laws against marijuana even if it is grown and consumed purely in state.

I'm familiar with that case. If I recall correctly, that poor bastard was growing grain for use on his own farm and the FDR era court said that this still impacted interstate commerce. What a stretch.

I have looked around to see if the constitutionality of the USDA was ever challenged and I can't find anything. Got any knowledge on that angle?

 

[wyomingosualum]

Food is a strategic resource.

My "food" is consumed by horses. We have a hay farm.

 

[07pilt]

My "food" is consumed by horses. We have a hay farm.

Still

 

[CowboyJD]

I'm familiar with that case. If I recall correctly, that poor bastard was growing grain for use on his own farm and the FDR era court said that this still impacted interstate commerce. What a stretch.

I have looked around to see if the constitutionality of the USDA was ever challenged and I can't find anything. Got any knowledge on that angle?

You wouldn't be challenging the right to exist of a particular agency in court. Executive branch pretty much gets to set up it's organization how it sees fit.

You'd be challenging the regulation or action in question as unconstitutional overreaching. IMO, that's not a winner in this situation.

 

[JimmyBob]

You wouldn't be challenging the right to exist of a particular agency in court. Executive branch pretty much gets to set up it's organization how it sees fit.

You'd be challenging the regulation or action in question as unconstitutional overreaching. IMO, that's not a winner in this situation.

Send him a bill; the jerk deserves it!

 

[HighStickHarry]

My "food" is consumed by horses. We have a hay farm.

Don't the people of Central America have a right to know what their food is eating?

 

[wyomingosualum]

You wouldn't be challenging the right to exist of a particular agency in court. Executive branch pretty much gets to set up it's organization how it sees fit.

You'd be challenging the regulation or action in question as unconstitutional overreaching. IMO, that's not a winner in this situation.

I wonder about this. Grover Cleveland signed a bill passed by Congress that created the USDA as a cabinet level department. Jimmy Carter did the same with the Department of Education. I recall that Reagan wasn't fond of the education department and wanted to dismantle it, but Congress wouldn't get on board. This makes sense because funding would have to originate with Congress, I suppose.

Anyway, what I dislike is an interpretation that provides the federal government with unlimited authority because it's necessary and proper. Anything that vague is an invitation for abuse. I prefer a narrow and specific interpretation. But you probably already had that figured out.

A department of education or agriculture is certainly not an enumerated power. I resent being coerced into completing a survey to avoid a fine so people in an office somewhere can produce endless statistics. I would like to have more control of the federal government instead of being a servant to it.

Does that make me a rebellious soul? I hope so!