FARMING FOR DOLLARS

National Center for Policy Analysis ^ | 7/6/2007 | Editorial

[bruinbirdman]

An enduring myth about farm subsidies is that they go to needy family farms. But in reality, price supports have accelerated the demise of small farms because the benefits go to the most profitable growers, says the Wall Street Journal.

According to Citizens Against Government Waste:

-- Three-quarters of the payments under the 2002 farm bill have gone to the richest 10 percent of farmers.

-- More than half of the $1.9 billion sugar program lines the pockets of the wealthiest 1 percent of plantation owners.

-- In 2003 the biggest single recipient of farm aid was Riceland Foods in Arkansas, which bagged $69 million.

-- Other "farmers" collecting payments include ExxonMobil, Chevron, International Paper and Caterpillar.

In response, an ambitious effort is being pushed by an unlikely pair of House Members, Ron Kind (D-Wis.) and Jeff Flake (R-Ariz.), to phase out most direct cash subsidies to farmers and reroute funds into "risk management accounts."

Under their plan:

-- Farmers would receive insurance policies they could draw upon in years when their incomes fall unexpectedly.

-- Some of the money for the funds would come from the government, in lieu of subsidies, and some would come from the farmers themselves.

-- Farmers could put up to $8,000 a year tax-free into the accounts, similar to a contribution to an IRA.

-- After 2014 the accounts would become self-financed by the farmers and government payments would eventually cease.

Further, The Kind-Flake bill would steer tax dollars away from the wealthiest agribusinesses, while funding a safety net for moderate-income farmers facing real financial strain due to bad weather, low prices, or crop failure. Only farmers with gross incomes of less than $200,000 would be eligible for aid.

Source: Editorial, "Farming for Dollars," Wall Street Journal, July 6, 2007.

For text:

For more on Federal Spending & Budget Issues:

[stephenjohnbanker]

“Three-quarters of the payments under the 2002 farm bill have gone to the richest 10 percent of farmers.

— More than half of the $1.9 billion sugar program lines the pockets of the wealthiest 1 percent of plantation owners.

— In 2003 the biggest single recipient of farm aid was Riceland Foods in Arkansas, which bagged $69 million.

— Other “farmers” collecting payments include ExxonMobil, Chevron, International Paper and Caterpillar.”

Thank you so very much for this post.

I doubt most Americans are aware of this hornswoggle!!

B T T T

[endthematrix]

Luger has a “FARM 21” plan implementing “risk management accounts” but it encompasses all sorts of things including trade issues.

Cut the aid to large Agribusiness and small farms can get (gov insured?) basic crop insurance.

June 20, 2007
How Farm Subsidies Harm Taxpayers, Consumers, and Farmers, Too
http://www.heritage.org/Research/Agriculture/bg2043.cfm

[Ben Ficklin]

I’m not here to defend ag supports but unless ag supports are examined on a per acre basis instead of a per farmer basis, it is a useless discussion.

[Mrs. Ranger]

“I doubt most Americans are aware of this hornswoggle!!”

Judging from the comments on various and sundry “ag” articles, even most of the posters here are unable to distinguish between “farming” and “agribusiness”. :(

[stephenjohnbanker]

Thanks for the info.

[doosee]

To see the actual payouts down to the state and county level ——
http://farm.ewg.org/sites/farm/index.php?key=nosign

[Geritol]

“unless ag supports are examined on a per acre basis instead of a per farmer basis, it is a useless discussion.”

I was thinking something along the same lines. I am curious about per-acre comparrisons, and per-pound or ton produced comparrisons.

The article as it stands is like saying that 90% of the taxes in my family are payed by 20% of the people. Rather meaningless without lots of other information.

[stephenjohnbanker]

Thanks!

[Lady Jag]

[stephenjohnbanker]

LOL!!

[bruinbirdman]

I’ll yitbos that!!