The Farmers Are Right Back Where They Started: With A Need for Organizing

The farmers of Wisconsin are trapped. They must fight their own way out the way they did it nearly a century and a half ago.

A New York Times article (2/17) displayed the pathetic conditions of county roads in west central Wisconsin, particularly Trempeleau County. I can say without a question that, since I drove north of there to Lake Superior, across to Hurley, down U.S. 51 and across on Wisconsin State Road 29 three years ago, the conditions are similar if not worse.

Because there has been so little funding for them from either state or federal sources, the county's roads, those that farmers so greatly count on, have been crumbing beneath the enormously massive and heavy 16-wheelers with their grain and dairy products to market. The pavement simply can't resist the weight of the trucks and gradually cracks. Patchwork repairs are done, but they're unsuccessful warding off the inevitable.

Wisconsin Governor Tony Evers tried to get the Republican-controlled legislature, rife with gerrymandered districts, to take on an eight-cent-per-gallon state gas tax, but it wasn't having any. Evers campaigned to fix the roads that Mr. F. Gow (Most Recent Former Governor of Wisconsin) had pretty much completely neglected, but has been thwarted by a legislature of the opposite party that's now entrenched.

So they have nowhere to go with their grievances, at least not by themselves. If in fact these folks are 45 supporters, too, they aren't paying much attention. He doesn't give a hoot about them, either. He keeps telling them they're so wonderful but provides no tax support (remember, the rich get that). And the roads continue to crumble, making the big trucks go miles out of their way to pick up the grain and dairy necessary to feed the rest of us. In the long run, that raises the costs for everyone.

The farmers might have asked for help, but to this point, they won't get it from Republicans. What they need, right now, is organizing assistance. They need to act together to improve their economic circumstances.

They need granges. Granges were organizations of mostly grain farmers in midwest and western states, including Wisconsin, that began as the Patrons of Husbandry in 1877. They only lasted about two years because after they grew with enormous speed, they expanded too far and spent too much too soon. But while they existed, they made an impact upon state legislatures.

Ostensibly, they were formed to fight the monopolies that the railroads represented, especially those which had to go off the regularly-used tracks to pick up produce. The farmers involved were greatly overcharged; it was called short-haul discrimination. They applied pressure to state legislatures, especially in Illinois, where Springfield, the state capitol, was in the middle of farm country, far down the road from the metropolis of Chicago. That legislature finally passed a law that forced private corporations to act in the public interest, something unprecedented to that point in our history. The railroads sued in federal court, and in Munn v. Illinois, the granges won a decisive, if temporary, victory.

But the granges went bankrupt in 1879 because they tried to create their own farm machinery business. That took on still more big business, and they were doomed. Their legal guarantees lasted but a few years, since Republican President Rutherford B. Hayes, he who had been put in with a last-minute compromise in 1877 that nearly resulted in another civil war, made a few Supreme Court appointments that reversed attitudes toward economic regulation.

Wisconsin has its own Farmers Union in Chippewa Falls, a Potato and Vegetable Growers Association in Antigo, a National Farmers Organization in Fond du Lac, a Dairy Products Association in Madison, and a State Cranberry Association in Wisconsin Rapids. There are also groups representing cheese producers and cattlemen. I wonder if there's a cat-herding association, since getting all these folks on the same page would probably be equivalent to that. I'm not sophisticated about the politics regarding the interactions among these groups and their legislative support, but as an old union guy, I'm guessing it isn't simple.

This isn't being critical. It's an acknowledgment of the diversity of interests and therefore approaches that democracy arranges and sometimes demands.

Yet, they all need good roads to haul what they need and for others to pick up what needs hauling. They have their differences and, after having read a statement to the legislature last August on another topic, it seems that they can be easily set against each other. That's in the best interests of Republicans, who can then say that there's no consensus about raising taxes for better county roads for farmers.

The more people set upon each other, the less chance there will be for some kind of consensus. Yet, consensus is the lifeblood of democracy; you can't make it work without it. People like farmers, who are, after all, independent sorts of folks and take pride in that, don't like being told what their priorities are. But someone has to rally them to band together if the problems of the roads are to be successfully addressed--or at least a decent attempt is to be made.

It's awful to feel helpless against forces you can't control. But the roads need fixing beyond patchwork, and just one of the above-mentioned groups won't get it done by themselves. They have to unite, if only temporarily (which is how it's often done), to get their grievance addressed. They have to keep their sights on that single issue; then they'll have a chance of success.

Someone did that in the 1870s. Amazing the way things come back around. Just sayin'.

Be well. Be careful. I'll see you down the road--if the road's still there.


Mister Mark