Farm checks don’t just follow yields

In the 1970s, farmers woke up to a new reality: government checks for every bushel of corn they grew. Under Richard Nixon’s Secretary of Agriculture Earl Butz, laws were rewritten to pay farmers directly instead of storing surplus grain. Suddenly the cheapest way to stay solvent was to grow more corn—and subsidized corn fell in price. That’s why a processed snack made with high-fructose corn syrup is often cheaper than a bag of apples.

This indirect subsidy reshaped American fields and plates alike. Farmers planted more acres of corn and soy until most supermarket products from soda to cereal carried fractions of these grains. While consumers benefit from low prices, the full costs—environmental damage, obesity, water pollution—are borne by taxpayers and communities downstream of farm fields. Farm checks now amount to billions every year, funding a system many never see or question.

Subsidies aren’t inherently bad. They were originally meant to stabilize farm income and prevent price crashes. But when policy fails to adapt to surpluses, it drives overproduction and invisible market distortions. Understanding these hidden subsidies shows why healthful foods—fruits, nuts, vegetables—often cost more than commodity-based junk. Once you grasp how politics fuels prices, you can shop, cook, and vote with greater clarity.

Next time you stand in front of the snack aisle, pause to wonder why a box of corn-based chips costs less than a bag of nuts. Take five minutes to look up your local farm bill representative’s stance on subsidies and share a quick note arguing for diversified, sustainable agriculture. You’ll transform your grocery habit into a tool for change. Give it a try tonight.