Talk:Agricultural policy of the United States

United States: Government Low‑importance

	United States portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject United States, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of topics relating to the United States of America on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the ongoing discussions. Template Usage Articles Requested! Become a Member Project Talk Alerts United StatesWikipedia:WikiProject United StatesTemplate:WikiProject United StatesUnited States articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.
	This article is supported by WikiProject U.S. Government (assessed as Low-importance).

Agriculture Low‑importance

	Agriculture portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Agriculture, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of agriculture on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.AgricultureWikipedia:WikiProject AgricultureTemplate:WikiProject AgricultureAgriculture articles
Low	This article has been rated as Low-importance on the project's importance scale.

Influences edit

Latest comment: 12 years ago2 comments2 people in discussion

"for example, California, New York and Texas have the largest populations, but only have two senators each. Those states also represent a substantial proportion of the United States' agricultural output."

Some points that need editing and citation: 1) New York is ranked pretty low in agricultural output. 2) What constitutes a "substantial proportion"? 20%?

69.181.166.195 (talk) 02:25, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

Somebody seems to have disagreed with the conclusion of this section (which I drew from the source "Food and Agricultural Policy"), so they tried to make their own, un-supported argument. I've reverted this section back to its original version. johnpseudo 12:03, 14 June 2011 (UTC)Reply

incomplete article edit

Latest comment: 9 years ago1 comment1 person in discussion

The article is somewhat of a joke. History here stops in 1970's! It needs to include 1970-2014. The first sentence is plagiarized from a Barnes and Nobles Book review, great sign .... Maybe someone can track the user and remind him/her...

--Wuerzele (talk) 02:02, 1 September 2014 (UTC)Reply

Add topic