At a time of record food prices, when the price per bushel of commodities that benefit from taxpayer price supports ranges from 24% to 93% above their five year averages, Congress is set to pass a $ 300 billion (!!!) farm support bill.  As today's Wall Street Journal puts it, "This year, farm income is expected to reach an all-time high of $92.3 billion, an increase of 56% in two years, making growers perhaps the most undeserving welfare recipients in American history."

Nancy Pelosi and the Democrats are of course supporting the bill, and plenty of Republicans are joining in.  It is an absolutely HUGE program of subsidies, and the "reforms" attached to it are a joke.  (Senate Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin, asked how many top-income farmers in Iowa would be excluded by the new income caps, replied, 'two or three".)

Also from the Journal, "If you wonder why urban Democrats would vote for this rural giveaway, the answer is that they have been bought off with $10 billion in extra funding for food stamps and nutrition welfare programs.  Someone should tell them that their constituents might not need this cash if the farm bills were not helping to keep food prices high."   Even the recently elected "blue dog" Democrats, supposedly fiscally conservative, are going to ignore the fact that this farm bill busts the budget caps by over $ 10 billion, because they too are being bought off - by $5.9 billion in handouts for their districts.  This whole bill is a great case study on the way Washington works.

President Bush has promised to veto the bill; however, there may very well be enough Republican support to join the Democrats in overriding the veto.  (And we wonder why, as another conversation here today points out, Congress' support is at an all time low).

And how about our Presidential candidates?  As the Journal reports,

"... John McCain says, 'I would veto that bill" and will vote against it in the Senate.  Strangely silent is Barack Obama.  A major theme of his campaign is to battle corporate special interests in Washington on behalf of the 'middle class'.  Here is one of his first tests, and it will be fascinating to see if he sides with a well-funded lobby over consumers and taxpayers."

MWL

Why can't Congress stop attaching amendments?

Why can't Congress vote on a bill that has only ONE provision?

What happened to the 5 day work week promised by Nancy Pelosi?

Why can't Congress get anything done WITHOUT an election year looming?

 

Why, why why.......? 

They want DEM votes, that's why! (Maybe I should change that to DIM votes)

Twin, check out the vote on 5/7, about bailing out the people who are in foreclosures...we are all going to pay!

Lulu

Watching Congress work is like watching sausage being made.

Mark 

Leach: This is an instance in which I agree with you, as would a lot of people from both parties. Election years can cost the public an awful lot of money. "Although it is called a farm bill, the huge, five-year piece of legislation contains not only aid for farmers but also money for land conservation and rural development — plus money for food stamps for the needy, a priority for many urban lawmakers. It might be an exaggeration to say that the bill contains something for everyone, but the variety of benefits is a key to its strength. It includes, for example, tax breaks for racehorse breeders, a bonus sought by Senator Mitch McConnell, the Republican minority leader, who is from Kentucky. A big sticking point is how much money would go to wealthy farmers. Married farmers with joint incomes of up to $1.5 million a year and individuals who make more than $750,000 could qualify for some crop subsidies. The Bush administration has called for much lower limits that would deny subsidies to anyone with an average adjusted gross income above $200,000 a year." That's from the NY Times.

As agriculture represents such a small part of US employment - and many workers are on work visas or illegal - doesn't one have to assume that the support is being driven by corporate interests?  I guess I am a bit confused in that nobody seems to like these subsidies yet they continue.  Or as an urban dweller am I am suffering from extreme ignorance on this subject??

 I've decided to only vote for the third party candidate or the libertarian candidate (when possible).  I certainly will not vote for any incumbent who doesn't continously rail against such ridiculous pieces of legislation.

Andrew

McCain is voting against the bill.