The size of tomatoes and heads of lettuce is unprecedented in the history of humankind. In just a few short generations we have become accustomed to increasingly genetically modified food. This new food is much more tasteless and durable than food of the past. Variations in soil and growing conditions allowed food grown for different reasons to possess unique regional flavors. Food grown near the place it was sold allowed taste to be prized over transportability. While many have described this decrease in food quality as a result of industrialization and the demands of efficiency, it is much more correctly enunciated to be a result of government corruption arising from a socialistic instinct.

Politicians on both sides of the aisle generally support the idea of America as a free market economy, yet they all fall victim to a basic human fallacy: "What you see is all there is." Their desire to protect the foundation of America's high quality of life is clouded by the lobbyists and lucrative PACs right in front of them. Timeless principles of wise governance seem unimportant and distant when a Kansan Sorghum Farmer is shedding real tears onto your office carpet. The farmer's desire to keep things as they are infests the minds of all politicians who happen to interact with him. Small details, like the fact that he is representing a near-risk-proof corporate farm with an army of middle management, become unimportant. Smaller farms that cannot hire lobbyists will inevitably receive the short end of the stick because they have no way to remind the politicians of their existence. Fallible Politicians with a desire to make things right through government intervention rather than honor liberal principles will inevitably favor corporate farmers above both small farmers and the American populace.

Governmental inability to hold back from action has damaged the very concept of local cuisine. Small family farms already had difficulty surviving against larger farms with vast economies of scale, and government support of "American Farmers" (corporations large enough to keep perpetual spokespeople on staff) only makes this struggle more difficult. Even from an interventionist standpoint, it would be better for more unstable businesses to receive more assistance, so the free market would be perceived as better than the current situation where the strongest multi-state farms are subsidized most heavily.