But increasingly wholesome family farms are being bought, hired or taken over by multinational global food producing corporations.

So why is that a problem? As we turn our food production over to multinational agribusiness, we lose control over our food quality. Rather than holding our state health departments, our FDA or even our own US Dept. of Agriculture responsible for food safety and quality, we are handing over control, carte blanche, to the World Trade Organization (WTO).

Do consumers know this?

Consumers do understand many problems. Just think about the headlines consumers have seen in the last few months:

• Mississippi and Alabama recently banned all imported catfish from China after their tests found ciprofloxacin and enrofloxacin, antibiotics forbidden from use in food in the United States.
• Spinach contaminated with E. coli leads to a nationwide recall, with several deaths and hundreds of illnesses in more than 20 states linked to produce from one region of California.
• FDA approves the use of viruses to treat bacteria on processed meats like hot dogs.
• Rice and wheat glutens and flours, imported from China into the US, have been found to be purposely adulterated with melamine, a chemotherapy agent or other poisons.
• Peas imported to the US from China were found to be tainted with pesticides.
• Pepper from China contaminated with salmonella.
• Boric and benzoic acid, industrial dyes, fertilizers and pesticides, antibiotics, bad oil and sulfur dioxide are among the substances found in fresh and packaged foodstuffs throughout Asia.

Consumers may not know which corporations or trade agreements are responsible for the sorry state of the industrialized food system, but they are worried that the food they're eating isn't good for them:

• Consumers may not understand that "dumping" means exporting products at prices below the local cost of production, but they do understand that farmers everywhere deserve a fair price, and can't survive if they are constantly undercut
• Consumers may not understand the role of "tariffs and quotas," but they do understand that local producers should be able to come up with ways to protect themselves from imports that are priced to put them out of business
• Consumers may not understand what "non-tariff barriers to trade" are, but they do understand that they want the rules on labeling, food safety, and labor conditions to be determined by their government, not the World Trade Organization
• Consumers may not be able to tell you what the acronyms GATT, NAMA, or AoA stand for, but they do understand that the race to the bottom driven by the free trade agenda produces food that they don't want to eat

With the Farm Bill being discussed openly in Congress this month - you may hear talks about WTO rules, farm subsidies, lobbyists for commodities, etc.

Most consumers know that the U.S. farm subsidy regime must be overhauled. But, there's a great deal of confusion about what needs to change. You may hear a news report where a pundit says that we should do away with all subsidies in order to comply with WTO rules and therefore encourage more "free trade." Or you may hear a vegetable farmer complaining that a wheat farmer gets more subsidy.

Everybody wants to fix the subsidy system, but there are different camps wanting to change it for different reasons. Right now, there is tremendous pressure on Congress from global agribusiness corporations and from the WTO.

These large entities want Congress to either keep subsidizing large corporate farmers or do away with them altogether - without mention of what this would do in either scenario to the regional farmers and our healthful food supplies. The WTO and the international "trade partners" want us to do away with subsidies altogether.

The subsidies - roughly $18-billion US dollars a year - badly distort global trade in key crops, encourage overproduction, condemn farmers in the developing world to poverty and benefit mainly a small elite of already wealthy farmers and landowners. Billions of dollars go to agrifood conglomerates, corporate farms and millionaire landowners. In 2004, for example, 25,000 farmers who reported income of at least $200,000 were on the subsidy payroll.

Two-thirds of the country's roughly two million farmers get nothing at all.

Sixty percent of America's farmers and ranchers get no support while a great bulk of subsidies and federal support go directly to big special-interest corporations. It's even worse for people who grow most of our food: fruits, vegetables, and row crops are largely bypassed in favor of lavish subsidies for a few commodities.

But, what do we, the consumers in America, really need?

• We need regional food supplies. In order to ensure that regional or local food supplies are available, we also need to make sure that local farmers get a fair price so they can stay in business and supply local markets.
• We need better food. We need a diversity of breeds and crop varieties, instead of the few promoted by agribusiness that can be grown with intensive techniques and stand up to a trip halfway around the planet.
• We need our own FDA and USDA to inspect our food supplies. We do not need to give up our own rights to control the safety and healthfulness of our food system and turn it over to the WTO in the name of free trade. Food is different. Food is not free game. We need to ensure the safety of our food.
• We need to re-establish and protect the right of individual countries (or states) to ban a certain hormone, pesticide, or technology like Genetically Modified Organisms (GMOs) or irradiation, without fear of starting a trade war that will ultimately be decided by an un-elected panel of lawyers at the World Trade Organization (WTO).
• We need to protect our right as a country (or a state) to label our food the way we want to.

Lobbyists from multinational agribusiness would like Congress to cede control over food production to the WTO. Why? Because the WTO rules are more lax than our own FDA and USDA.

Here we have an opportunity to craft a policy that is fair to all farmers.

If we turn our food production over to multinational agribusiness, we lose control over our food quality.

With the 2007 Farm Bill, we have the opportunity to protect not just regional and family food producers - but also consumer access to healthy food. By standing firm on our rights to control the inspections and laws, we are not conceding control over our food to the World Trade Organization.

As consumers learn more about what the corporate-controlled food system is feeding them, the appeal of local, family-farmed food grows. Rightfully so.

Hopefully, consumers will get on board with helping protect family-farmed food before all the US family farms disappear, and consequently the control of our food moves overseas.

Pictured below is a montage of who really is fighting the hardest for complete control of our American food system - multinational corporations, free trade and treaty wonks, and agribusiness barons: