Jayson L. Lusk

Much of the USDA’s activity is justified by the claim that it corrects market failures and ensures that markets remain competitive and do not create unnecessary costs. In fact, most USDA activities have little to do with addressing “unfair” competition.

The rise of behavioral economics has bettered our understanding of how consumers make decisions. Proponents of freedom of choice and individual liberty have sometimes found themselves at odds with behavioral economists because of the recent application of these ideas to public policy. But one can accept the premise that consumers sometimes make mistakes while simultaneously rejecting the opinion that expert judgement should override individual choice and market outcomes.

In a new study based on empirical research for the Mercatus Center at George Mason University, agricultural economist Jayson L. Lusk concludes that the reduction or elimination of subsidized crop insurance, SNAP, and ethanol production mandates would reduce food prices for many consumers, benefit food producers who are not heavily subsidized by the government, and provide an overall economic benefit to taxpayers across the United States by potentially decreasing taxes.