Sunday, September 1, 2013

Noem's Farm Bill and Communism

Noem did that fair circuit this August trying to ensure people once again that there will be a farm bill passed and signed by the October 1 deadline.  She also is trying to make the point that she is mad with the leadership and telling them to "screw" off.

She lamented a lack of leadership from House Speaker John Boehner and Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia. While she thought the meeting would be to outline a plan to get the farm bill passed — gutting nutrition assistance programs would drain the necessary Democratic support from the bill — instead, Boehner and Cantor asked for ideas from the room. 
 "Screw you ... I'm done helping you," she said, noting she won't support Republican colleagues on their projects until they get behind the farm bill.
Wow, she is so mad that she asked him to come and help her get some money. You must have really scared him to say screw you and then ask him nicely to please come to our state to help me get some money.  Maybe the problem is not in Boehner, but in the confused approach that you and other Ag based GOP take.  You claim that government handouts are bad and that people that get money from the federal government are lazy and drug users, but you then increase the handouts to wealthy farmers and farm insurance salespeople.

An article on "R Street,"a conservative, Libertarian leaning site, explains the confusion:
Given the stinging anti-Obamacare, anti-spending rhetoric, it would be reasonable expect the nation’s bloated farm programs to get the same treat. After all, crop insurance subsidies provide guaranteed prices for crops, protecting even million-dollar agribusinesses from minor losses. The Soviet-style sugar program controls the amount of sugar on the market, keeping prices high and creating a government market for any leftovers (which are then turned into the hated ethanol). The list of egregious, high dollar programs is endless, and the programs are constantly over budget. But if you think tea party Republicans spent any time explaining the dangers related to farm spending, you’d be wrong.... should be infuriating to any fiscal conservative that Cotton would brag about passing the House’s farm bill over the Senate’s version, as the House bill contained more generous spending and no meaningful reform for the biggest outrageous boondoggles, like federal crop insurance. While the Senate bill reduced premium support for farms netting more than $750,000, the House version simply made insurance support more generous. 
Interestingly, in Cotton’s district, farm supports are incredibly concentrated, with 10 percent of farmers receiving 87 percent of the subsidies, amounting to $35,292 average per year between 1995 and 2012. In Arkansas as a whole, 77 percent of farmers didn’t even receive subsidies, while 10 percent of recipients received 81 percent of the subsidies, or $65,464 on average per year between 1995 and 2012. The bottom 80% on the other hand, received $789. It’s shameful that Cotton would support such programs for rich farmers while bragging about cuts to the food stamps that support one in three children in Arkansas and 17 percent of Arkansas’s families. While food stamps certainly need reform, subsidies for millionaires should take a higher priority.
Remember Kristi, you voted yes for the amendments this summer that killed the farm bill that would have prevented this mess.  You are the one supporting toxic measures like drug testing that has proven over and over to cost more than what it prevents and could de-rail this farm bill.  You get full ownership of this mess and need to stop blaming others. 

No comments:

Post a Comment