By “It,” of course, we mean betray supporters of limited government by voting for a ridiculously overstuffed “farm bill” (Jim Bowden, who was my preferred candidate in what I now call the Night of the Long Dull Spoons).
Yours truly has been so distracted with work lately that I actually missed this. Rest assured, Tim Watson picked up the torch (actually, we time-share that torch, I think):
The United Nations and the World Trade Organization have increasingly gotten annoyed at the massive subsidies provided by the United States Government (The WaPo, different link).
Vote round-up provided by James Atticus Bowden at his blog:
Democrats — Boucher, Y; Moran, Y; Scott, Y.
Republicans — Drake, Y; Forbes, Y; Goodlatte, Y; Wittman, Y;
Fiscal Conservative Republicans – Goode, N;Cantor, N; Davis, Tom, N; Wolf, N.
Wolf, Goode and Cantor have farmers in their districts, yet they voted “No”. Good job, guys.
And the corporate welfare aspect:
Continues to subsidize millionaires. Currently, all full-time farmers may be eligible for farm subsidies regardless of income (part-time farmers must earn less than $2.5 million annually). President Bush reasonably proposed limiting farm subsidies to those who earn less than $200,000 a year.
Rather than follow that commonsense approach, the conference agreement reportedly rejects allfarmer income tests for the countercyclical and marketing loan subsidy programs and includes only a weak net farm income cap for direct payments ($750,000 for single farmers and $1.5 million for married farmers after all business deductions). Direct payments would also be restricted to singles with non-farm incomes under $500,000 ($1 million for married couples).
That is not reform. Farmers with incomes in the millions of dollars would still be eligible for permanent subsidies. Farm subsidies would remain America’s largest corporate welfare program: Most subsidies would continue to go to large agribusinesses. President Bush is right to insist that farmers earning more than $200,000 per year no longer be eligible for subsidies.
One other thing Tim doesn’t mention is that the bill continues both the deplorable ethanol subsidy (althought it was “cut” to 45 cents a gallon – Reuters) and a 54 cent-a-gallon tariff on ethanol imports. In other words, a lot more corn will go to this boondoggle instead of feeding poor Americans (wealthy Americans can still afford food at the resultant jacked-up prices), to say nothing of the rest of the world.
The president has promised to veto this monstrosity, and I sincerely hope he does. In the meantime, I am now in the shocking position of finding my member of Congress to be worse than Tom Davis!!!
“In other words, a lot more corn will go to this boondoggle instead of feeding poor Americans (wealthy Americans can still afford food at the resultant jacked-up prices), to say nothing of the rest of the world.”
Of course, as corn prices go up, food will prices will go and the government will “have” to increase the amount of money going to food stamps.
Indeed.
John Warner voted for it too (no big suprise).
McCain, Obama, Clinton all recorded as not voting (link.
[...] seats that went 60% for Bush in 2004 Take a look at Tom Thune’s justification for the farm bill monstrosity (AP via Washington Examiner): “If you’re running for office this year, [...]
[...] seats that went 60% for Bush in 2004 Take a look at Tom Thune’s justification for the farm bill monstrosity (AP via Washington Examiner): “If you’re running for office this year, [...]
And the reason this kind of stuff continues to happen is that the conservative majority in this party won’t hold these officials’ feet to the fire by primarying these people on a regular basis. Not to throw Wittman in this crowd, but that is how we end up with thieves and scoundrels like Jerry Lewis, Ted Stevens, Bob Ney, Don Young etc. and so on.
This week’s Jeffersoniad Journal…
Or, at least, that’s what the working title of this series is [rolls eyes at self]….
[...] other words, Pelosi and company have to go through this all over again, exposing themselves as spendthrift, pork-loving politicians again, and giving the President a chance to do the right thing again and [...]
[...] Supporting a pork laden, $290,000,000,000, corporate welfare bill (link)? [...]
[...] the archetype social-conservative-first Republican. His record on spending issues has rankled this quarter on many occasions, although he did stand very, very tallin opposing TARP last year. He [...]