| Chapter 1: | Farm Bills, Interest Groups, and Policy Change |
|
|
2005–2006 under WTO pressures to reform commodity supports, and its subsequent return to a stability-oriented farm bill in 2006–2008 under pressure to promote increased biofuels production, is understood here as the opening and closing of a policy window. Policy theory also provides a model for postpositivist or deliberative policy analysis, in which attention to situational factors and interest group activities is complemented by a focus on the role of language and discourse in shaping policy development. In this book, I hold policy window and postpositivist policy literatures up to the empirical case of the 2008 farm bill to examine both the causes and implications of a shift from reform-oriented to stability-oriented farm policy, as well as to explore the insights this case can provide to both areas of theory.
I have also drawn from social movement theory as a complementary framework for understanding processes of change, or in this case, lack of change, in farm bill commodity policies. Social movement theory posits that in order for change to occur, political opportunities for change must exist, groups must have the resources to make use of these opportunities, and they must in turn frame their calls for change in a way that resonates with the public and with policymakers. In this book, I examine the particular combination of political opportunities, interest group positions, and framing strategies that characterized policy change efforts for the 2008 farm bill and that propelled and then inhibited potential policy reform over the period of 2005 to 2008. I focus less on interest group resources than do traditional social movement studies, largely because the interest groups involved in farm bill politics are not typical social movements3 and because, in this case, interest group resources changed little over the period of study, even as political opportunities and framing strategies shifted more significantly.
The remainder of chapter 1 provides a background and context from which to approach the shifts that took place in farm policy debates between 2005 and 2008. It fleshes out the argument that farm policy debates changed significantly between 2005 and 2008, ties this argument to histories of change and of stability in farm bills over time, describes the range of interest group positions that mobilized around and contributed