Our forgotten election issues: food and farming

Largely absent from this year's election debate has been a rigorous discussion of critical issues that impact Minnesota's largest industry — and the hundreds of thousands of Minnesota jobs that depend on whether state policies encourage or discourage the continued growth of this hugely important sector.

Minnesota's farm and food economy has grown to become the state's largest or second-largest industry, depending on how one counts the economic activity and jobs. Unfortunately, many people assume that anything related to farming and the food industry is only important to rural communities and doesn't mean anything to them.

Minnesota is indeed fortunate to have rich soils, favorable weather (at least half the year!), and outstanding farmers who grow the crops and raise the livestock fundamental to the food we eat every day.

In addition, Minnesota is home to thousands of companies across the entire state that are directly tied to farming and food, including several global companies that are headquartered here. Minnesota's farm and food economy supports hundreds of thousands of good Minnesota jobs from food processing, farm inputs, financing, transportation, energy and manufacturing to advertising, legal, accounting, and dozens of other goods and services.

Unfortunately, this significant industry is receiving insignificant attention in the current election discussion.

Here are a few critical farm and food issues that should be discussed by candidates:

•  Let's agree to end the zero-sum debate of large vs. small farms, traditional vs. organic. Consumers want high-quality, nutritious foods, and Minnesota is fortunate to have tens of thousands of great farmers — large, small, traditional and organic — producing the food we depend on every day.

•  We have no disagreement about the value of providing consumers food labeling for nutritional and allergy-sensitive ingredients that informs food-buying decisions. Requirements from individual states, however, that would require additional labeling for such things as GMOs (genetically modified organisms) would impose a costly burden on food companies that could be required to manage 50 different labels for 50 different states for the same food product. Accepted science has concluded that GMO foods are safe and that they provide many benefits to consumers and the environment.

•  We should support environmental policies that are based on sound science, best practices and do not put Minnesota farmers and companies at a competitive disadvantage. After all, Minnesota farmers are responsible stewards of their land and water and have a vested interest in protecting the environment in and around their farms.

•  Let's make sure our food continues to be safe to eat. We want and need our farmers and food producers to follow responsible regulations and implement best practices to protect the quality of our food and how it is produced. Let's also make sure the process in which our food is prepared is held to the same standard of care and safety across the board by supporting one set of uniform food-safety rules at a federal level.

A coalition of Minnesota farm, agriculture and food interests have joined together to form "A Greater Minnesota" — or AGM — to help inform Minnesotans about our industry and the issues that are critical to the continued growth and vitality of this hugely important sector of our economy, both in Greater Minnesota and in the Twin Cities. We've asked all candidates running for the Minnesota House of Representatives where they stand on our 5-Point MN Farm and Food Pledge. Go to farmandfoodmn.org to find out more about these issues, where your candidates stand and information on how to vote.

Minnesota voters should take the time to find out where candidates stand on farm and food issues before they vote on Nov. 4. Minnesota, our economy and our jobs all stand to lose if we assume farm and food issues "don't mean anything to me."