This is what The Austin American Statesman can come up with to attack Rick PerrY?
How typically liberal.
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.
It’s comical to see the sort of “dirt” that’s being dug up here. Do they really think people will care?
If this is all they’ve got, they’ve got nothing. I do worry if there’s a DUI somewhere they plan to hide until the last moment like they did with Dubya. You know they’ll try it if there is one.
Agreed.
Farm subsidies are nothing compared to that.
I don't see it. Perry will be ready for it. It's probably only going to be of slightly more significance than the difficulty the folks who bring it up have with properly spelling Guardasil. :)
Shssssssssssh
The spelling bee may have been interesting had it continued.
At least he used loopholes, his secretary of treasury, decided he simply wasn't going to pay taxes, and if he had not been nominated, he would never have paid his taxes.
“Is that the same Paul Ryan who voted for McConnell’s Satan Sandwich?”
There is no such thing as a perfect candidate. But, with the economy the key issue, Ryan versus Obama would be like the Yankees versus your local High School team.
Why don’t you give us the details if its going to be a big problem?
What??? don’t really know that much about Perry’s Guardasil thing? You did know it included a PARENTAL OPT-OUT and was never mandatory?
Well hot damn, we have a weiner! :)
So??? Its still a non-story no matter how you spell it.
I have been so amazed at so many obvious Palin people who feel no restraint at sliming another candidate, so unlike Palin herself!!!
Forcing 12 year girls to get a vaccination for a sexually transmitted disease is a big deal.
Just as bad is insinuating that your fellow Republicans in the legislature, who overturned you by a wide margin, are murderers.
The DREAM act thing is a big deal also.
It’s not slime it’s Perry’s record.
Perry = Bush all over again.
No thanks.
Well, guess you can play a lib game all you want, but in an honest man’s way, you are sliming a good man.
Its dirty stuff like this from Palin supporters that really make me want to reconsider my consideration for her campaign. You don’t see one person who thinks its a good idea to have another good conservative in the mix, Perry, run about telling half truths about Palin, now do you?
For now, I would still like to see Palin throw her hat in the ring and I think the best ticket would be Palin/Perry or Perry/Palin, however they best see fit.
Lib game? Perry’s record is off limits then?
If Perry can win the nomination I can vote for him. I don’t have to pretend GARDASIL, the DREAM act and other things didn’t happen or don’t matter to come to that conclusion.
Half truths are Lib games. Claiming Gardisil was mandatory is not fact.
Everyone’s record is for debate, just be factual and not HALF factual like the other PDS posters. If you don’t know the full story (Gardisil for instance) don’t just repeat it under some mistaken nothion it’ll boost your candidate.
It was mandatory, quit lying!!!
Perry issued an order mandating it! what do you think the order was a suggestion??
Talk about lib games, you’re good at playing them!!
I notice you have no defense to Perry calling his fellow republicans women killers huh?
Where did you dream up that BS?
Obviously your one of those nosepicker paulnutz or a nobama troll.
Go away, fool
Not surprised.Like all Perry-bots you are incapable of defending him on this so you resort to name calling.
Here is Perry insinuating that the Republicans who overturned his Gardasil order are responsible for for women getting deadly cancers:
"...I challenge legislators to look these women in the eyes and tell them, "We could have prevented this disease for your daughters and granddaughters, but we just didn't have the gumption to address all the misguided and misleading political rhetoric."
I want to thank those legislators who voted against this bill. They will never have to think twice about whether they did the right thing. No lost lives will occupy the confines of their conscience, sacrificed on the altar of political expediency."
http://www.nccc-online.org/health_news/topics/controversial/rick_perry.html
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.