Posted on 08/09/2011 8:26:48 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
When Gov. Rick Perry was the state's agriculture commissioner, the federal government paid farmer Rick Perry not to farm his 40 acres in Haskell County.
The $9,624 that Perry was paid under the Conservation Reserve Program to leave his land fallow between 1991 and 1998 is tiny in comparison with the $15 billion the federal government pays every year in federal farm subsidies. In fact, it doesn't even put Perry near the top of the subsidy stack for farmers in his family ZIP code.
But for Perry, a fiscal conservative who has called on the federal government to "stop spending all the money," the issue of farm subsidies could be delicate if he enters the presidential race, especially in the Iowa caucuses.
At least one of the GOP presidential candidates, U.S. Rep. Michele Bachmann of Minnesota, already has come under fire for her personal ties to farm subsidies.
Bachmann voted against the 2008 farm bill, saying it was loaded with "outrageous pork and subsidies for agricultural business and ethanol growers." A year later, she praised the U.S. Department of Agriculture for propping up pork and dairy commodities, according to a Los Angeles Times story published as she entered the presidential race in June.
The Times reported that Bachmann's father-in-law's farm, from which she and her husband receive income, received $260,000 in dairy subsidies between 1995 and 2008.
"That wasn't about farm subsidies; that was about the hypocrisy factor," said Drake University political scientist Dennis Goldford.
The 1990s payments weren't the only ones Perry or his family has gotten from federal farm programs.
His tax returns from when he was in the Legislature show he received $72,687 in agricultural program payments between 1987 and 1989, when he was farming his land. His father, J.R., received a total of $6,443 in cotton and wheat subsidies in 2002 and 2003.
As for his 40-acre farm, Perry sold it in 1998. Perry claimed a $17,693 loss on his federal income taxes for that year.
To put the Perrys' subsidies in perspective, there were 21 farms in their ZIP code that received more than $1 million in federal subsidies between 1995 and 2010, according to a database maintained by the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based advocacy organization that says farm subsidies harm the environment and are a form of corporate welfare.
While campaigning for passage of the 1995 farm bill, Perry urged the nation to move away from direct subsidies for farmers. He said they should be given incentives, such as reduced capital gains taxes and inheritance taxes.
"In the 1995 farm bill, we must carefully but thoughtfully move our farmers and ranchers away from a subsidized system to a market-driven system," Perry said in a speech delivered in Iowa . "We must move away from government assistance to opportunity enhancement."
Former U.S. Rep. Charles Stenholm, D-Stamford, was a leading Texas lawmaker on the agricultural policy front in the 1990s. Stenholm said Perry's position was very much in line with what the Republican Party wanted at the time. Stenholm said Republicans eliminated most subsidies because prices were high but then reinstated many of them when prices fell several years later.
One subsidy that Perry backed in 1995 but now opposes is federal support for using grain such as corn in the production of ethanol.
As agriculture commissioner in 1993, Perry praised the federal Environmental Protection Agency for requiring ethanol in reformulated gasoline. Perry said it enhanced the chances of an ethanol plant being built in corn-growing regions of Texas.
"Ethanol also has the potential to raise the price corn farmers receive by 16 to 20 cents a bushel," Perry said in a Dec. 15, 1993, news release. "I am excited about its potential for the Texas economy, and I strongly support its increased use and production in the Lone Star State."
As governor, Perry started coming out strongly against grain-based ethanol in 2007, saying it was driving up the prices of feed corn given to livestock and poultry. At the behest of poultry producer Lonnie "Bo" Pilgrim, Perry unsuccessfully sought an EPA waiver from fuel standards, a waiver that, if it had been granted, would have effectively undermined the grain ethanol industry.
"We don't want to be put in the place of having to decide whether we are going to feed cattle or fuel vehicles," Perry said in 2007. He favored instead the conversion of biomass from city wastes or timbering into ethanol.
Perry spokeswoman Katherine Cesinger defended Perry's subsidies, saying, "The governor is proud of his years in the farming industry, which he believes is an important part of the nation's overall economy."
But Cesinger added that Perry also believes that "out of control Washington spending is threatening every aspect of our economy, and now, more than ever, the federal government has an opportunity and obligation to have a real conversation about how to get our country's fiscal house in order."
Cesinger said Perry also supports a "comprehensive energy policy" for the nation "that no longer artificially props up one industry at the expense of another."
Monte Shaw, executive director of the Iowa Renewable Fuels Association, said that in the current presidential campaign, direct subsidies for corn and ethanol are not an issue. He said corn prices are so high that most farmers cannot collect a subsidy, and he said the subsidy for ethanol goes away at the end of the year.
However, Shaw said Iowa corn growers and ethanol producers will be watching to see if Perry and other candidates support congressional efforts to ban the EPA from requiring an ethanol mix in gasoline.
Shaw said the ethanol industry also is interested in whether tax credits for the oil industry continue while credits are denied to ethanol. He said the tax credits give oil an unfair advantage over ethanol.
"If (Perry) says we shouldn't turn a single grain of corn into ethanol, he may have problems in Iowa," Shaw said. "Ethanol support is very important in Iowa, even in the Republican caucuses."
Iowa State University political scientist Steffen Schmidt said Perry's emphasis on controlling federal spending would play well in the state caucuses because "it's the tea party activists who are pushing the agenda."
He doesn't see Perry's past use of subsidies as a problem, saying most politicians in Iowa have farms and receive subsidies, so Iowans do not hold the acceptance of subsidies against them.
Stenholm said that in the current federal budget-cutting atmosphere, eliminating traditional farm subsidies probably will be on the table when Congress starts writing a new farm bill later this year.
He said most farmers and ranchers, other than corn growers, favor a better crop insurance system for bad times rather than direct subsidies no matter what the market is doing.
Opposition to agricultural subsidies, especially grain-based ethanol, by 2008 GOP presidential nominee John McCain was considered a major contributor to him losing Iowa and Indiana to President Barack Obama.
However, in the context of this year's GOP primary, where budget cutting is a prime requirement, sentiments might have changed. And reducing farm subsidies has been an item in the negotiations over budget cuts as part of the debt ceiling debate.
A recent poll done for The Iowa Republican political blog found that 56 percent of likely Iowa caucus-goers would support a candidate who wants to cut ethanol subsidies, while just 31 percent would favor a candidate who backs subsidies.
Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney has defended subsidies as an issue of national defense to protect the food supply.
Candidate Newt Gingrich, the former U.S. House speaker, pushed to phase out farm subsidies in favor of the free market while in Congress. In January, speaking to the Renewable Fuels Association in Des Moines, Gingrich supported ethanol and took a swipe at those who claim the use of corn to produce ethanol is driving up the price of food.
"The people who talk about food versus fuel are just plain flat wrong," Gingrich said.
Republican presidential candidates Jon Huntsman, Ron Paul and Tim Pawlenty all oppose continued farm subsidies.
Following the rules is not a problem. Advocating that those rules be changed is not a problem.
Not paying tax on vacation homes and income, (Charlie Rangel), IS a problem, and yet, ol’ Charlie still has his job.
I’d take it a step further and say, if Gov. Perry was offered the subsidy and didn’t take it, he’d be less than thoughtful, and not a good candidate!
Did Perry cavort with known terrorists and America-haters?
No? Then I don’t care what “farmer” Perry did to keep some of his money from the Feds....
This is a stupid argument. You can be Conservative and take advantage of a broken system. It is the only way to keep up with your competition. Are they going after Conservative candidates who take the Mortgage Deduction next?
There will be many problems that will come up with a Perry candidate. He is NOT what one wants him to be. Just sayin. GoCards in Dallas!!
No.
This is like a loophole in the tax code. Nobody blames anyone for taking a legal tax deduction. They may not like that the particular tax deduction exists, but nobody gets blamed for taking it.
These stories are always SO bogus. Conservatives advocate that the gov’t 1) STOP taking our MONEY and 2) STOP making us jump thru hoops to get it back.
ROFL!
wow, the liberals are throwing everything but the kitchen sink at Perry now!
You can ALWAYS tell who they are most afraid of, by who they attack.
If this is the best they can dig up, it’s pretty sad
$10,000 claimed from a legal approved agriculture dept program? Is that the best they can do?
Maye we compare obama’s use of tax loopholes to lower his personal federal tax rate to 23%?
The Austin American-Statesman is a well known Democratic newspaper. It never liked Perry and you can see they’re digging up dirt on him!
All I want are facts! Both sides! Not digging up dirts!
That’s why I quit the paper! It is good for wrapping fishes!
“There will be many problems that will come up with a Perry candidate.”
And the problem that I see is there is no good candidate in the GOP field. Each has their own fatal flaw, either ideologically, or due to a poor track record, or both.
Are you reading this Paul Ryan?
Is that the same Paul Ryan who voted for McConnell’s Satan Sandwich?
If the government wanted to pay me to NOT plant on my land next year I’d think they were loopy but I’d probably take the money.
“A fool and his money....”
Cutey. Too bad she’ll be washed up, dried out or dead by age 30.
the austin statesman is a socialist rag.
frankly I think his brazen abuse of Executive Orders in the Gardisil affair is a much bigger problem for him
What was abusive about it? The girls could opt out of the vaccination if they didn’t want it and it would protect them against potential harm if they took it. Where is the abuse?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.