To the Editor,

Is David Kruse now having “buyer’s remorse?” His column “Obama’s eroding support” (April 17 issue) would seem to suggest his pronouncement prior to the election – “voting for McCain would be like getting shot between the eyes” – was perhaps in error. Kruse’s blind adherence at the altar of ethanol caused David to put all of his eggs in Obama’s basket, because McCain did not support ethanol subsidies.

Now he’s concerned that “foodies” are running the U.S. Department of Agriculture and that Obama thinks his mandate is to restructure agriculture in the image of organic-cult food production.

Of course it is. It’s always been so, but Mr. Kruse couldn’t grasp the fact that Obama will continue the Clinton Administration’s goal to not only legitimize organic food production, but make it the law. Unfortunately, they get a free pass from the press, who think that organic is “going green,” despite the fact that organic uses more fossil fuels resulting in less production.

Organic is the complete antithesis of green, or anything sustainable.

The organic industry will thrive under Obama, which means that all of the technology of modern agriculture, including the great advances in plant breeding from Iowa’s own Norman Borlaug, will be discarded. I hope our society will make the transition back to the farm, because we’ll need half of the population to feed us.

Unless we in agriculture take a proactive stance right now, modern day livestock and crop production will be a footnote in history. Will the Monsantos, Duponts, Syngentas and Deeres of the world demand equal representation at the USDA? We can’t depend on our legislators such as Harkin who is a big fan of organic production.

Agriculture is in big trouble. Never in all of recorded history has feelings dominated facts. That will change in the Obama Administration unless we step up to the plate and not only say, “no,” but “h– no” to organic.

And David Kruse can partially redeem himself by being the second to say, “No.”