Smithfield is using farmers as ‘pawns’ in hog lawsuits

Clean up ‘mess’

Regarding “Duplin couple gets over $25M in hog-farm case” (July 1): As the end of that old saying goes, “You can’t fool all of the people all of the time.” For Smithfield Foods and its corporate owners, this is one of those times.

For decades, industrial swine operations all across eastern North Carolina have used the outdated lagoon and sprayfield system to dispose of animal waste. Smithfield’s reliance on this archaic system has polluted the air and water and has had a negative impact on surrounding communities.

And when these communities took them to court, juries of North Carolinians demanded that Smithfield do better.

Now, instead of being a good neighbor by correcting their nuisance and pollution, Smithfield has once again hidden behind their contract growers, using them as pawns to fight this out in the court of public opinion. These are the same growers that Smithfield underpays in production contracts. The same ones on which the company tries to foist legal liability.

But this is not about putting Smithfield or its growers out of business. It is about Smithfield insisting on staying in the pollution business instead of investing in technology that would enable hog production without harming neighbors.

Smithfield and its Chinese owners have more than enough money to fix this problem. They have been required to fix it in other states. So, Smithfield, why not in North Carolina? Smithfield needs to face the truth and clean up its mess. The citizens of North Carolina have had enough of its hogwash.

‘Red flags’

Regarding “Targeted incentives don’t play fair” (July 17): I agree with John Hood that the best way for our state to lure large, top-quality prospective employers is not by way of targeted incentives. Hood correctly points out that lawmakers have a poor track record “of guessing which firms make effective use of subsidies.”

State government should not be in the business of deciding which industries to attract and which to ignore. In the 1950s, ’60s and ’70s, under the able leadership of Governors Luther Hodges, Terry Sanford and Jim Hunt, the state of North Carolina broke with other southern states by embracing civil rights and focusing on education and research.

We created the Research Triangle Park and consolidated 16 campuses into the greater University of North Carolina. Because of climate, the “Variety Vacationland” reputation, good schools and equal opportunity, North Carolina became the premier destination – not just in the South, but in the entire United States – for locating a new manufacturing, technology or research facility.

Sadly, we lost that lead. If our state focuses on sound, basic principles – superior education and equal rights and opportunity for all – we will get our share of new industries. As Hood states, a low tax rate and tax incentives will appeal to some, but to the best prospects, these may also prove to be red flags.

‘Spending too much’

Regarding “Here’s what you need to know about Trump’s complaints to NATO allies about defense spending” (July 10): How much should the U.S. spend on its military? Can we still afford to spend as much or more as in the latter half of the 20th century?

We are not manufacturing as many goods anymore and we are running a trade deficit every year. Our national debt is increasing every year. Can we still afford to be the world’s policeman?

Germany spends 1.24 percent, China 2.10 percent and the U.S. 3.57 percent of their Gross Domestic Products. (NATO member states promised to increase their spending to 2 percent by 2021.) An argument can be made that we are spending too much.

Parents are struggling to put their sons and daughters through college. Young couples cannot afford to buy a home. Our infrastructure is crumbling. Research and basic science grants are at their lowest levels in years. We will fall behind the rest of the world in technology, medical research and basic science.

This story was originally published July 18, 2018 at 10:36 AM.