McCain says he would veto farm bill

http://www.upi.com ^ | 5-2-08 | UPI

[NoLibZone]

McCain says he would veto farm bill Published: May 2, 2008 at 9:11 PM

DES MOINES, Iowa, May 2 (UPI) -- Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., told an audience of Iowans that if he were president, he would veto a farm subsidy bill now making its way through Congress.

"I do not support it. I would veto it," McCain told the audience of about 250 people in Des Moines Thursday. "I would do that because I believe that these subsidies, the subsidies are unnecessary."

The Republican Party's presumptive presidential nominee later told The Des Moines Register in an interview, "At this time, to have an increase in agricultural subsidies when farmers are having higher incomes than at any time in memory, I just think it's legislation that's not in keeping with the economic hard times of America where people are losing their homes and their jobs."

McCain said, however, he hoped voters in farm states such as Iowa would appreciate his plan to expand markets for U.S. agricultural products abroad, The Register reported Friday.

"I will open up every market in the world to the most efficient, productive sector of America's economy, and that's our farm and agricultural worker," he said.

[NoLibZone]

WOW!

Even Reagan would not take a stand on this, one of the four pillars of FDR socialism!

McCain, I shall now vote for you.

[Fawn]

Wow is right! I’m shocked.

[MCCRon58]

Whoops, look like McCain is going after the Farm welfare. (at least from what I saw of this article)

Wish I knew the whole story.

[EGPWS]

"I do not support it. I would veto it," McCain told the audience of about 250 people in Des Moines Thursday. "I would do that because I believe that these subsidies, the subsidies are unnecessary."

Conviction over votes via pandering?

Impressive for a politician.

[stylin19a]

Plus the freaking farm bill is still loaded up for food stamps.

[detective]

With all the problems in America today why is McCain trying to alienate farmers. Farm subsidies are not a big expense as a part of the total budget and not a big problem. Over the lasr 60 years of farm subsidies America has had cheap and abundant food supplies. If it ain’t broke don’t fix it.

[edcoil]

I will withhold comment until after the vote. Republicans have voted for this annually since the beginning - paying the richest farmers not to farm and hold prices up.

[JaneNC]

Wrong. The subsidies for ETHANOL are outrageous and are driving food prices up...as a result

[PubliusMM]

Well...good on him. That’s a bright spot in the otherwise cookie cutter world of the current Presidential race.

[lesser_satan]

Farm subsidies are not a big expense as a part of the total budget and not a big problem.

There are other reasons to oppose it besides the cost. The massive dislocations that ethanol subsidies are creating in the energy and food markets, to name one. We'd be better off just giving them money with no strings attached.

[Strategerist]

Farm subsidies are not a big expense as a part of the total budget and not a big problem.

Farm subidies are a pretty big budget item and a lot bigger than stuff that people stupidly get their undies in a bunch over, like Congressional Salaries and Foreign Aid.

Over the lasr 60 years of farm subsidies America has had cheap and abundant food supplies.

Which has diddly squat to do with the subsidies. There are plenty of unsubsidized industries producing cheap and abundant supplies of whatever they produce.

[browardchad]

I don't believe it's the ethanol subsidies he's talking about vetoing. From what I understand, farmers are still getting the age-old subsidies -- for growing certain crops/not growing crops/whatever -- in addition to the ethanol subsidies, and those traditional subsidies is what he would veto.

I don't think McCain wants to talk about ethanol subsidies, for fear of offending environmentalists.

[detective]

“There are plenty of unsubsidized industries producing cheap and abundant supplies of whatever they produce.”

My point was that farm subsidies are not necessarily beneficial but there are far bigger problems for McCain to deal with. During the time farm subsidies have been in place we have enjoyed cheap and abundant food supplies and for the most part a stable agricultural economy. So why is there such an urgent need to change things?

[detective]

The article didn’t mention ethanol. I’m not sure that it was about ethanol.

[detective]

The article didn’t mention ethanol. I’m not sure it was about ethanol.

[1035rep]

I like it!

[Maceman]

McCain is not too bright, has no coherent set of principles, is wrong more often than right, and has some truly destructive positions that make me worry for the future and direction of my beloved country under his Presidency.

But he does have major nads, I’ll give him that. And I do support him on this position.

[The Pack Knight]

America has had cheap and abundant food supplies throughout its history, not just in the last 60 years. Also, two-thirds of our food production is unsubsidized, and unsubsidized crops have also been cheap and abundant in the last 60 years. Our country's agricultural production ain't broke with or without subsidies.

Farm subsidies were meant to be nothing more than a temporary measure to deal with a crisis in farm income during the Depression, when there were a lot more farmers than there are today and many of them were facing a serious financial crisis due to falling income and rapid depreciation. Today, farm subsidies serve no purpose; like most government programs, they're a solution in search of a problem.

They're a waste of resources and are, by and large, just a form of corporate welfare. It's well past time to get rid of them.

[Norman Bates]

BUMP!