[Editorial] President Must Veto Grain Management Act That Encourages Overproduction and Distorts Market Order
-
Writer
CFE
-
On the 28th, opposition parties including the Democratic Party of Korea forcibly pushed through a harmful revision of the Grain Management Act. This is the second time. Although Minister Song Miryeong of the Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs, the minister of the competent department, publicly expressed her opposition and appealed her concerns, the opposition once again committed the “tyranny of the majority.”
Ahead of the bill’s passage, Minister Song stated that she would advise President Yoon Suk Yeol to exercise his right to request reconsideration. That is the right decision. The president’s veto is also absolutely necessary. The Constitution granted the president the veto as an inherent power and a last line of defense precisely in order to block this kind of hasty legislation rammed through by sheer force.
The fundamental cause of the “falling rice price” that farmers say is causing hardship is, in the end, excessive supply relative to demand. Unlike in the past, when diets depended overwhelmingly on rice, there are now far more diverse staple alternatives. Ultimately, rice prices can be stabilized only when supply is adjusted to match demand. One cannot simply force people to consume rice unconditionally.
The Grain Management Act can only result in the downward equalization of domestic agriculture. If the government steps in and unconditionally purchases rice, supply that should be reduced will instead increase, causing nothing but overproduction. This leads to a vicious cycle of further declines in rice prices.
When supply is excessive, prices fall, and in response to that signal suppliers reduce output. This is the most natural essence of market order. Why should taxpayers’ money be used to keep rice prices at a certain level, while consumers are forced to pay inflated, overpriced rice prices?
Not only the Grain Management Act, but also the amendments grouped together and passed by the opposition as the so-called “four laws”—the amendment to the Act on Distribution and Price Stabilization of Agricultural and Fishery Products, the amendment to the Agricultural and Fishery Disaster Countermeasures Act, and the amendment to the Agricultural and Fishery Disaster Insurance Act—are all harmful revisions that seriously distort voluntary private transactions and produce nothing but side effects.
The fundamental solution that will ultimately help both farmers and household finances is the advancement of agriculture focused on quality rather than quantity, diversification of production items, and securing competitiveness in the global market. Populist bills that abuse legislative power and only increase the burden on the public must be stopped.
2024. 11. 28.
Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)
Original title: [논평] 과잉생산 부추기고 시장 질서 왜곡하는 양곡법 개악, 대통령은 반드시 거부권으로 막아야
Author: Center for Free Enterprise (CFE)
Date: 2024-11-28
Source: https://www.cfe.org/bbs/bbsDetail.php?cid=comment&pn=2&idx=27117