Given the huge increase in food prices and farm incomes, I wonder why some of our politicians aren’t proposing a windfall profits tax on farmers.
To the contrary, Congress is passing a big farm bill with more pork for farmers:
A Porker Of A Farm Bill
The latest score on farm legislation: Congress 1, President Bush 0. And there's a good chance for a shutout within the next few days.
Wednesday afternoon, the House of Representatives overwhelmingly passed a much-debated Farm Bill, with a veto-proof 318-106 vote. The measure, stuffed with lawmakers' pet projects for local farmers, now moves to the Senate, where it is also likely to pass. Bush, now traveling in the Middle East, has threatened to veto the $290 billion bill because it gives generous subsidies to farmers, many of whom are now reaping the benefits of higher food prices.
"Farm income is expected to exceed the 10-year average by 50% this year, yet Congress' bill asks American taxpayers to subsidize the incomes of married farmers who earn $1.5 million per year," he said in a statement Tuesday.
Nonetheless, if it passes the Senate by a two-thirds majority, the president's veto would be moot. Still, Bush is likely to try--Congress has only overridden his veto once in the past seven years. It's also a smart move for him. As a lame duck president, he can call for reductions in government spending, then put the blame on a Democrat-controlled Congress for going over budget in an election year.
The "farm bill" is actually far more than funding for agriculture programs. The measure passed Wednesday increases funding for nutrition programs by $10.4 billion, provides $1 billion for renewable-energy investments, increases conservation spending by $7.9 billion and adds $84 million to international food aid and nutrition programs. The National Food Bank Network praised the bill, which provides $1.25 billion to food banks. The bill also cuts the corn ethanol tax credit [slightly to 45 cents a gallon], redirecting the money to incentives to improve research on cellulosic ethanol [subsidized at $1.01 a gallon].
But it's also laden with pork. According to Ryan Alexander, president of the watchdog group Taxpayers for Common Sense, the bill includes "tax breaks for horse racing and timber companies, millions for salmon fishermen and subsidies to millionaire farmers." The group says just 8% of all producers receive 78% percent of the subsidies in the farm legislation. . . .
When the current farm bill was proposed in February 2007, Bush wanted to provide subsidies only for farmers with incomes under $200,000 per year. The bill that just passed the House would provide subsidies for farmers who make up to $750,000 annually, $1.5 million for couples.
It is nonsense to continue subsidizing ethanol, propping up food prices, and providing other forms of government welfare for the rich.
UPDATE: Here is an example of the sort of provisions that lobbyists got inserted into the farm bill.
What, they couldn't override the other one?
Don't use logic when talking about politics. It hurts the brain.
Frankly, the time has arrived for a political reformation to take place in the Republican Party. It is timely to recall what Oliver Cromwell stated to his fellow Members of Parliament who overstayed their usefulness:
“You have sat too long for any good you have been doing. Depart, I say, and let us have done with you. In the name of God, go!”
Cromwell's foregoing indictment is most applicable to the House Republicans. In the name of God, just go!
Nothing against food banks, but isn't that an extraordinary amount of money? I mean, we already have welfare, food stamps, and WIC. Now we need another billion for food banks - which is, let's be honest - all on top of private donations, soup kitchens, and local charities that do that type of work.
The bigger problem is that Bush says that the farm price supports should be limited to couples with adjusted gross incomes of $200,000. Congress didn't want those poor farmers to suffer, so the only farmers eligible for farm price supports are couples with $1.5 million adjusted gross incomes.
Think about it for a minute: if you have an adjusted gross income of $1.5 million, it is either from non-farm income (in which case you are so rich that your farm is a hobby), or you have a farm that is worth many millions of dollars. (If your farm is worth only $1.5 million dollar, then your annualized return on investment is 100%--so these farmers must have farms worth $5 million or more.)
And this is why the Democrats are insistent on this program?
All that said, this is still an abomination. More and more people are beginning to think we need a 3rd party in this country. I think two political parties are fine...just not the two we have now.
Just noting that both Iowa Senators favored the lower limit, Grassley especially has been pushing for a lower limit. The push for the higher limit came from elsewhere.
If the bill would give me a mere 10% of that amount, just $125 million, I hereby promise to praise the bill to the skies, 24/7 from now to the next election.
The word you're looking for is copyrighted. To "copywrite" is to "write copy", that is, to produce text for advertisements.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Copywriting
Are you sure about that? The provision seems to have very little public support, but seems to hang on very well anyway. That suggests that a number of folks treat the provision with disdain publicly while protecting it privately.
I know nothing about the Iowa senators actual views about this subject. Only that if everyone who is publicly against this measure were actually against it we would see it disappear. It seems to have substantial support from unknown quarters.
Right. That will bring all farm pork to a screeching halt! You'd never see a Democratic Congress passing bills like this .....
Congress is a reflection of the American people. In other words, the idiots are the people in the voting booths. Swapping out a bunch of "R"s for "D"s won't change a thing.
America seems to be run by and for the agri-industry. Take time out from bashing Congress to point a finger at the people doing the bribing.
No, they have exactly as much representation as they "deserve". These were the terms of the contract under which the soverign states entered into the United States. The real problem is the existence of the Federal income tax, which allows DC to engage in this sort of behavior in the first place.
The solution to our over-centralized government is not more centralization, but less.
Congress is a reflection of the American people. In other words, the idiots are the people in the voting booths. Swapping out a bunch of "R"s for "D"s won't change a thing.
SIG357, you miss my point. There is no dispute that Congressional Democrats are any better than Congressional Republicans. However, Congressional Republicans are supposed to know better, and frankly, were sent to Washington DC by their grass roots constituents to behave like conservatives instead of RINOs. Because the current crop of Congressional Republicans have betrayed every single conservative principle, they should not expect the support of the conservative grass roots any longer. Judgment Day is coming for the Congressional Republicans who have committed political apostasy and they are found wanting.
You are so naive. Their "grass roots" constituents are the very same people who profit so handsomely from these subsidies and fall over themselves to get this farm bill passed. The farm bill is bloated because it has something for everyone--but especially the hypocritical "I don't need no stinking government unless they are going to give me massive handouts" rural voters.
There's not a cognizant reform wing of the Congress to reel in either side with welfare reform or military spending reform, so the spending gets out of control. Now if we in America actually had to VOTE in each spending bill, you'd hope we could revive the reformists and spending-conservatives.
Think about it; if you had a spending/legislation ballot each month, you might pay a little more attention. Of course, you could argue that this defeats the purpose of electing representatives - but at the same time we only get one check on their enormous powers each election cycle, which gives them time to flip-flop as convenient.
We hold hearing on "windfall" oil profits, but this abomination passes with a veto proof margin. This is just a disgrace.
You're kidding me? There is no such animal as "Congressional Republicans". Or even "Congressional Democrats". Each Congressman is a party of one, and answers to his own particular voters and lobbyists.
If your own Congressman is a Republican, and you're not happy with him, then don't vote for him. But to attribute your own dissatisfaction to some nebulous entity called "Congressional Republicans", most of whom never signed up to your agenda in the first place, is politically naive. I suspect the 100 GOP Congressmen who voted against this bill represented people who feel as you do. The eighty who voted for it represent people who feel differently.
Gee, if the "conservative grass roots" have such awesome power, how come the GOP Senate is so infested with statist-internationalists? How come they elected Bush? How come they nominated McCain, who makes Bush look like Barry Goldwater?
I'd like to see them manifest their anger in more constructive ways than staying home in November. Perhaps they could actually cough up some money in support of better candidates? And then vote for them?