Billions go to House panel members' districts

[Zguy28]

By Ken Dilanian, USA TODAY

Members of the House who crafted a controversial $286 billion farm bill up for a vote today comprise about a tenth of the chamber, but their districts have reaped 42% of the benefits of past crop subsidies, an analysis of farm spending shows.

Constituents of the 46 House Agriculture Committee members, who have bucked complaints from Republican and Democratic critics that the bill is too extravagant, received $15 billion in commodity subsidies from 2003-2005, according to the non-partisan Environmental Working Group, which tracks farm spending.

2003-2005 CROP SUBSIDIES:Total from each member's district

That newly released data illustrate the extent to which entrenched interests have played a role in shaping a farm bill that the Bush administration threatened Wednesday to veto as too costly.

The five-year, $286 billion spending plan has been shaped by a small group of vested interests, critics say. The measure would funnel subsidies to farmers even when crop prices are high, and it would continue a system that concentrates benefits among the largest and richest farmers.

Rep. Ron Kind of Wisconsin, a leading Democratic opponent, said having the Agriculture Committee set the terms of debate is "a guarantee of the status quo," because the panel is beholden to "powerful and entrenched interests." Agribusiness spent $44.6 million on political contributions from 2005 to 2006 and $193 million on lobbying, according to the non-partisan Center for Responsive Politics, which tallies political money.

Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said the bill heeds calls for change because it bars benefits to farmers who earn more than $1 million a year in adjusted gross income. "We are moving as far as we can," he said Tuesday.

The president had proposed a $200,000 cap — which would have cut off subsidies to 38,000 of the richest farmers. Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said Peterson's plan would affect 7,000 wealthy farm owners and operators.

Bush's proposal was designed to alter a system that concentrates benefits among larger farms. The top 10% of crop subsidy recipients took in 66% of the money — $23 billion of $35 billion — from 2003-2005, according to the working group.

Rest of Article...

[chomerics]

The top 10% of crop subsidy recipients took in 66% of the money — $23 billion of $35 billion — from 2003-2005, according to the working group.

If this doesn't piss people off, they don't have a brain. . .

[Zguy28]

If this doesn't piss people off, they don't have a brain. . .

No doubt.

And the whopper of them all, Bush is probably going to veto it because he agrees with you. He wants $200,000 limits on individual farm subsidies. That's going to piss off a lot of rich people.

[Larry]

Bush, veto a massive spending bill?

I may vote for him.

[chomerics]

No doubt.

And the whopper of them all, Bush is probably going to veto it because he agrees with you. He wants $200,000 limits on individual farm subsidies. That's going to piss off a lot of rich people.

I am completely against the idea of subsidies period, but then to top it off, they give the top 10% the lions share of subsidies. :doh:

Sometimes I think our country is a joke.

[Zguy28]

I am completely against the idea of subsidies period, but then to top it off, they give the top 10% the lions share of subsidies. :doh:

Sometimes I think our country is a joke.

I'm not against subsidies per se. Like welfare or anything else, its a good concept with a poor implementation which has allowed for abuse.

There are many small farmers who would go under without subsidies.

[Riggo-toni]

Wow, I agree WHOLEHEARTEDLY with Chomerics...in Tailgate no less.

The GOP congress took some relatively big steps forward in reforming this mess back in the 90s, then completely reversed itself and came up with an even more grotesque farm program early on in W's presidency, which HE SIGNED. :mad:

I don't have a lot of confidence in him vetoing this one either, but I hope it happens.

[Predicto]

What is it about farm subsidies that eventually turns every politician into an idiot? This is disgusting.

[Kilmer17]

If a farmer cant make it without subsidies, then they cant make it.

If I cant pay my bills selling insurance, should the govt give me a subsidy?

I agree with chom, Predicto, Larry and the rest.

What a complete joke.

[ACW]

If a farmer cant make it without subsidies, then they cant make it.

If I cant pay my bills selling insurance, should the govt give me a subsidy?

:applause:

[Larry]

What is it about farm subsidies that eventually turns every politician into an idiot? This is disgusting.

I once had a professor ask that question of his class. My answer was "because 100% of the Senate, and 90% of the House, have farmers in their district".

[Cskin]

A TREASONOUS Act perpetrated on the taxpayers of this country. Build the gallows and line them up!!!!!!!!!!! :doh: I swear.. if this ****roach congress got any dumber... it's be a great reality show.

[Predicto]

I once had a professor ask that question of his class. My answer was "because 100% of the Senate, and 90% of the House, have farmers in their district".

Yes. But 100 percent of the House and 100 percent of the Senate have taxpayers in their districts.

[Stophovr6]

I've always hated farm subsidies.

[Larry]

Yes. But 100 percent of the House and 100 percent of the Senate have taxpayers in their districts.

Yes, but the farmers will overwhelmingly vote according to this one, single issue. Whereas the taxpayers, while they might grumble about it on a message board, won't actually do a thing.

Net result, as seem by Senator Lardbutt: If you vote against this bill, 100,000 farmers will change their vote against you, and 27 taxpayers will change their vote in your favor. (And it will pass, anyway.)

That's the power of a small group of single-issue voters.

[Predicto]

Yes, but the farmers will overwhelmingly vote according to this one, single issue. Whereas the taxpayers, while they might grumble about it on a message board, won't actually do a thing.

Net result, as seem by Senator Lardbutt: If you vote against this bill, 100,000 farmers will change their vote against you, and 27 taxpayers will change their vote in your favor. (And it will pass, anyway.)

That's the power of a small group of single-issue voters.

You are correct again.

The AARP and the NRA and many other groups have proved this time and again.

It still sucks.

[ACW]

Yes, but the farmers will overwhelmingly vote according to this one, single issue. Whereas the taxpayers, while they might grumble about it on a message board, won't actually do a thing.

Net result, as seem by Senator Lardbutt: If you vote against this bill, 100,000 farmers will change their vote against you, and 27 taxpayers will change their vote in your favor. (And it will pass, anyway.)

That's the power of a small group of single-issue voters.

Ah yes, the economic concept of concentrated benefits and dispersed costs. Compare how much each farmer gets versus how much each taxpayer pays.

[Larry]

You are correct again.

The AARP and the NRA and many other groups have proved this time and again.

It still sucks.

Although I have to say, I'm a lot less concerned if the NRA and ACLU have political influence, because they're representing social interests as opposed to economic ones.

The NRA isn't asking for the government to tax everybody in the country and give it to them. They're representing one side in a debate of ideas.

One person's "special interest group" is somebody else's "defender of freedom".

[Zguy28]

It would be interesting to hear from a farmer, instead of a bunch of lawyers and IT junkies like us.

[Larry]

(Remembering a series that Bloom County did, a while back. Opus decided he wanted to be a farmer.

In one strip, Milo is reading from a page:

"In order to be a farmer, you must be able to publicly repeat these two statements, one after the other, with a straight face:

• "The government should mind it's own business and leave us alone." (Opus repeats the statement.)
  
• "Where's my %$%$&^# subsidy?" (Opus cracks up, begins to ROFLMAO)