Farm Bill Update
Hmmmmmm… David Brooks’ column this week is interesting in some parts, but falls short in others for me. His criticism of Obama’s action (or lack thereof) really resonated with me:
Barack Obama talks about taking on the special interests. This farm bill would have been a perfect opportunity to do so. But Obama supported the bill, just as he supported the 2005 energy bill that was a Christmas tree for the oil and gas industries.
Obama’s vote may help him win Iowa, but it will lead to higher global food prices and more hunger in Africa. Moreover, it raises questions about how exactly he expects to bring about the change that he promises.
If elected, Obama’s main opposition will not come from Republicans. It will come from Democratic leaders on Capitol Hill. Already, the Democratic machine is reborn. Lobbyists are now giving 60 percent of their dollars to Democrats, according to the Center for Responsive Politics. The pharmaceutical industry, the defense industry and the financial sector all give more money to Democrats than Republicans. If Obama is actually going to bring about change, he’s going to have to ruffle these sorts of alliances. If he can’t do it in an easy case like the farm bill, will he ever?
This might be the one of the few issues where I actually agree with the Republican nominee more than the Democratic one. John McCain has an adimirable and courageous article out in the Chicago Tribune today:
It may surprise some people by saying what few presidential candidates would ever be willing to say out loud in farm country: I’d veto the farm bill—a bloated expansion in federal spending that will do more harm than good.
When agricultural commodity prices and exports have reached record highs, we no longer need government-grown farms and mammoth government bureaucracies. As grocery bills soar, food banks go bare and food rationing occurs on a global scale, we must challenge the wisdom of this bill. We must question policies that divert more than 25 percent of corn out of the food supply and into subsidized ethanol production. We must question a supply-control sugar program that costs Americans $2 billion annually in higher sugar prices.
Can we honestly demand fair and free trade from other countries when this bill increases trade distorting payment rates and restores an illegal cotton program? Sen. Barack Obama has raised the rhetoric on fair trade and restoring fiscal discipline, but his support for the farm bill betrays the inconsistency of his position: Cry foul with our trade partners, but break the rules at home.The majority of subsidies in this proposal go to large commercial farms that average $200,000 in annual income and $2 million in net worth, and the bill allows a single farmer to earn more than $1 million before cutting subsidies. How can we credibly extend this largesse to this constituency? If I am elected president, I will seek an end to all farm subsidies and tariffs that are not based on clear need.
The farm bill will cost taxpayers nearly $300 billion, including $5 billion for direct payments each year to farmers, regardless of whether they grow anything. Growing better crops using less land, water and natural resources requires a more robust research approach, but this bill spends more than twice as much on direct payments as it does on agricultural research.
I am not opposed to providing a reasonable risk management for farmers. When farmers suffer from a natural disaster such as droughts or floods, we should assist them. But this bill fails to make the reforms needed to provide that assistance responsibly.
Such sensible reforms may be missing, but the pork is not. Congress should be ashamed of this mockery of its promise to rein in waste and earmarks. Buried within its hundreds of pages is $93 million in tax breaks for race horses, a $4 billion trust fund for disaster payments on top of subsidized crop insurance that is supposed to take care of such “disasters,” and the list goes on. If that wasn’t enough, this bill would send $250 million of taxpayers’ money to Plum Creek Timber Co. in Montana. Plum Creek, according to its Web site, “is the largest and most geographically diverse private land owner in the nation” and paid a healthy dividend to shareholders last quarter.
It is time to wean ourselves from the huge crop subsidies being paid by taxpayers and the flawed policies that distort the markets, artificially raise prices for consumers and pit producers against consumers.
I wish the democratic candidates (both Clinton and Obama) had spoken out about this issue. Especially Obama, though, because with all of his talk about special interests and the need for change, he really didn’t do the right thing with the farm bill (or even say the right thing!). This would’ve been the perfect place for him to tell voters what they “need to hear” instead of just what Iowa and other farm states want to hear. The fact that he remained silent on this critical issue is not a surprise, and frankly I don’t expect any of the presidential contenders to try to grapple with the farm bill and make a big issue out of it in an election year (Iowa=swing vote state=potential political suicide if candidates speak out against the Farm Bill), but with all the soaring rhetoric about change and damning politics as usual, it’d be nice if Obama would at least speak out about this issue.
I respect John McCain. I think what he did today was commendable. I will not vote for him, because we disagree with him on so many ideological levels, but I respect him. I do not respect Obama very much - mainly because his health care plan is a pandering piece of potential policy, and because there’s such a discrepancy between his ability to talk about change, and his tendency to actually speak up on the issues that need to be changed. But I agree with his political leanings, so I hope that he will defeat McCain in the fall.
The farm bill ended up being like Christmas for everyone. The fruit and vegetable growers got their piece of the pie, the agri-business corn growers got their share, etc… The bill ended up passing with veto-proof majorities because it gave a little something so everyone would leave happy. It’s cowardly, it’s fiscally irresponsible, and it’s very, very American. I hope that sometime in the future Congress and Presidential candidates will finally do what is right, and not just what is easy. John McCain showed today that he has what it takes to be a real leader on this issue, and I hope that someday a prominent Democrat can do the same.
