Views expressed in guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media.
Visit the complete Guest Column archives.
Farm Bill Billions
Guest Column | By Paul M. Weyrich | May 20, 2008
I was
interviewing one of the most liberal Democrats in the House of Representatives,
Representative Earl Blumenauer (D-OR), when suddenly he surprised me by saying,
“I hope the President vetoes the farm bill and if he does I’ll try to round up
votes on my side of the aisle to sustain the veto.” He went on to state that if
the veto is sustained, “then we can start over and do it
right.”
Indeed, the
Heritage Foundation just issued a report entitled “Seven Reasons to Veto the
Farm Bill.”
The author,
Brian Riedl, points out that since the last farm bill was enacted in 2002 net
farm income has more than doubled. Yet the new bill expands farm subsidies by
some $25 billion. Moreover, the majority of these subsidies go to commercial
farmers with an average income of $200,000 and a net worth of around $2 million.
But the new bill continues the subsidies to multimillionaires and large
agribusinesses.
This new bill
also repeals income limits so some wealthy farmers will now be able to collect
millions more than they are now receiving in annual
subsidies.
House Rules
require a PAYGO approach, so theoretically an increase in spending in a new bill
requires a decrease in spending elsewhere. But the Congressional Budget Office
reported that the bill is filled with gimmicks to get around the PAYGO
requirements.
This bill, in
addition, increases subsidy rates. As Riedl points out, despite sky-high crop
prices, subsidy rates are increased for more than a dozen crops. So if prices
drop from the current high levels subsidies would be
triggered.
And no matter
how high corn prices soar, the direct payment program states Riedl, “would force
taxpayers to send $2 billion in direct payments to corn farmers every year.
Wheat farmers would receive $1 billion and farmers of other crops would receive
an additional $2 billion.”
The bill, which
Blumenauer wants the President to veto, would create a new permanent
disaster-aid program. The cost? $3.8 billion over five years. Farmers already
receive $20 billion in annual commodity and conservation subsidies plus an
additional $3 billion in crop insurance
subsidies.
Finally, the
bill utterly fails to modernize farm policy for the 21st Century. We
are still operating within the framework established by FDR in the 1930s. Even
Canada and Australia have updated their farm
programs by substituting insurance plans instead of massive subsidies to even
out the fluctuations caused by weather and pest
invasions.
The problem for
President George W. Bush is that the farm bill passed both Houses of Congress by
veto-proof majorities. That would appear to doom the effectiveness of the
President’s veto. But not necessarily. I recall when President Richard M. Nixon
vetoed the Brademas Child Development Bill in 1971. The bill had passed with a
single no vote in the House and only five no votes in the Senate. Yet after
extraordinary arm-twisting the President’s veto was sustained in both Houses of
Congress. Assuming the President does veto the farm bill, whether the veto is
sustained likely will depend upon how much effort the President and his people
are willing to work on the effort.
Paul Weyrich is Chairman and CEO of the Free Congress Foundation.
© This column is the property of the Free Congress Foundation and may not be reproduced without their permission. For comments and inquiries, contact Phyllis E. Hughes at . Visit our website at http://www.FreeCongress.org.
Guest columns do not necessarily reflect the views of Accuracy in Media or its staff.
2 Comments | Post a Comment
Republicans are no longer Republicans.
As for why they did it - it is simple. Big agribusiness - with loads of money to contribute.
It’s really that simple.
May 21 at 9:05 am | #1 | Link
It is difficult to believe that so many Republicans voted for this bill. The Republicans cannot be called conservative any more.
We need another party to represent the conservatives in the United States. We need to vote out the current slate of Republicans and I’m affraid that will happen this fall.