Puzzling that they don’t treat them like government cheese and distribute them to the moochers and the unfortunate.
FDR forced a lot of this type activity during the depression. People were starving and food/animals were withheld from the market & dumped.
Managed markets are always favored by dems and commies.
Sweet cherry growers do just fine in the free market
Every Christmas for the last fourteen years have ordered the same items from Cherry Republic in Glen Arbor and they have become pretty standard fare as stocking stuffers for family members.
This summer we received a letter from them highlighting all the various liberal causes they are “pleased to be able to contribute to”. Made me angry and very sad to ask them to take me off their mailing list. Just don’t understand why companies choose to get involved in the political arena or if they get involved why they advertise their donations.
Now it looks like they have more problems. Interesting.
If you like your cherries you can keep your cherries. But what is really important is some AA loser, who is unemployable anywhere else, can keep her job in DC.
These USDA “marketing orders” are a remnant of one of FDR’s many statist, failed, economic and social-engineering projects, which is all approved as a valid Constitutional activity of Fed.gov by the universally misrepresented “interstate commerce clause.”
Somewhat related:
https://content.govdelivery.com/accounts/USDAOC/bulletins/15ef836
...WASHINGTON, Aug. 23, 2016 –
The U.S. Department of Agriculture (USDA) today announced plans to purchase approximately 11 million pounds of cheese from private inventories to assist food banks and pantries across the nation, while reducing a cheese surplus that is at its highest level in 30 years.
The purchase, valued at $20 million, will be provided to families in need across the country through USDA nutrition assistance programs, while assisting the stalled marketplace for dairy producers whose revenues have dropped 35 percent over the past two years...
The cherry farmers need Congress to force gas companies to use cherry ethanol as fuel. (I wish that was sarcasm)
The tart pie cherry market has a limited demand; people only eat so much per year. Growers will deliberately leave millions of pounds on the trees in order to not crash the price.
If we all ate more cherry pie, the problem would be solved
The free market would actually take care of a surplus if the government would stay out of it. When prices drop, cherry farmers start growing something else and the market remains stable without waste and manipulation.
It’s really very simple. It’s not the way of centralized governmental control, but it’s simple and effective.
Gee! That is like Roosevelt having cattle slaughtered during the Great Depression to raise prices. It didn’t.
"The Cherry Industry Administrative Board is given the power by Congress and the U.S. Department of Agriculture to control the prices of tart cherries (though not sweet cherries)."
FR: Never Accept the Premise of Your Opponent’s Argument
Refardless what FDR’s state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices wanted everybody to think about the scope of Congress’s Commerce Clause powers (1.8.3), a previous generation of state sovereignty-respecting justices had clarified that the states have never delegated to the feds, expressly via the Constitution, the specific powers to regulate either INTRAstate commerce or agricultural production. This is evidenced by the excerpts below.
”State inspection laws, health laws, and laws for regulating the internal commerce of a State, and those which respect turnpike roads, ferries, &c. are not within the power granted to Congress [emphases added].” —Gibbons v. Ogden, 1824.
”From the accepted doctrine that the United States is a government of delegated powers, it follows that those not expressly granted, or reasonably to be implied from such as are conferred, are reserved to the states, or to the people. To forestall any suggestion to the contrary, the Tenth Amendment was adopted. The same proposition, otherwise stated, is that powers not granted are prohibited. None to regulate agricultural production is given, and therefore legislation by Congress for that purpose is forbidden [emphasis added].” —United States v. Butler, 1936.
But what’s arguably worse then the feds exercising powers that the states have never expressly constitutionally delegated to them is this. The Founding States had made the first numbered clauses in the Constitution, Sections 1-3 of Article I, evidently a good place to hide these clauses from Congress (sarc), to clarify that all federal legislative / regulatory powers are vested in the elected members of Congress, not in the executive or judicial branches, or in faceless, non-elected bureaucrats such as those running the EPA, IRS, FAA, EEOC, DOL, CRC and USDA as examples.
So Congress has a constitutional “monopoly” on federal legislative powers whether it want it or not. But by unconstitutionally front-ending itself with non-elected bureaucrats who are effectively running the country, Congress is wrongly protecting federal legislative powers from the wrath of the voters in blatant defiance of Sections 1-3 mentioned above.
In other words, corrupt lawmakers are wrongly letting constitutionally unauthorized federal officials get away with stealing and exercising legislative powers, a lot of these powers actually 10A-protected state powers which the feds have stolen from the states, so that federal bureaucrats can do Congress’s unconstitutional and unpopular legislative work for it.
By allowing this to happen, lawmakers are able to keep their voting records clean so that they can fool low-information patriots, patriots who don’t understand the fed’s constitutionally limited powers, into reelecting them imo.
Remember in November !
Patriots need to support Trump / Pence by also electing a new, state sovereignty-respecting Congress that will work within its constitutional Article I, Section 8-limited powers to not only support Trump’s vision for making America great again for everybody, but will also put a stop to unconstitutonal federal taxes and unconstitutional interference in state affairs as evidenced by federal interference in INTRAstate agriculture and commerce.
Note that such a Congress will also probably be willing to fire state sovereignty-ignoring activist justices.