Posted on 07/09/2013 1:22:12 PM PDT by SeekAndFind
Could the time actually be ripe to end the perennial pairing of the federal food stamp program together with U.S. agricultural “policy” (hem, hem) into a single “farm bill,” and thereby break up the perverse urban-rural synergy that usually ensures the bill’s passage and deliberately obfuscates its many moving parts? On Monday night, National Review reported that House Majority Leader Eric Cantor got pretty frank about his perturbation with GOP chairmen over the unexpected and epic fail of the House farm-bill proposal in June; nevertheless, Roll Call reports today, House leadership has been moving forward with their plan to whip-count the possible separation of the ever-expanding food stamp program and the agribusiness lobby’s corporate-pork menu into two (relatively) standalone pieces of legislation. Even more surprising, the House Agriculture Chairman says there’s at least a possibility he could be okay with it:
House Republican leaders have decided to drop food stamps from the farm bill and are whipping the farm-only portion of the bill for a vote that will likely come this week, according to a GOP leadership aide. …
Rory Cooper, a spokesman for Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said leadership has not yet decided to schedule a vote.
“There has been no decision made to schedule a vote on a farm bill, in any form,” he said in a statement to CQ Roll Call.
House Agriculture Chairman Frank D. Lucas said Tuesday morning that he would support splitting the farm bill — as long as it can pass the House.
“I’m willing to do what it takes to get a farm bill done,” Lucas said as he exited a Republican Conference meeting Tuesday morning. “If that means doing it unconventionally, maybe we got to give it a try.”
Asked whether it was fair to say he supports splitting the farm bill, the Oklahoma Republican replied: “It’s fair to say that Chairman Lucas is at a point where he has got to look outside the box, and splitting the farm bill is certainly outside the traditional box.”
That’s some progress, I suppose, but I’ll admit I’m not getting too excited, because I don’t know that splitting the two up will get either of them done. Too many Republicans manage to sum up excuses to suddenly justify cash payouts, subsidies, and big-government market interference against which they so often rage when its their rural districts that stand to get the leg up, and I wouldn’t think stripping away the ballooning food stamp program from what is essentially a love note to the agribusiness lobby will make that any less awkward. We shall see.
Gee, about damned time they split the ag bill up, food stamps and big agri business payola has no place in an actual farm bill....
When you remove food stamps and ag payola, what’s left?
I thought the whole darn thing was pretty much one form of ag payola or another.
The ag budget is something like 80-90% food stamps
The Department of Agriculture has more employees then there are farmers.
about 80%, per this WaPo breakdown.
I wonder how much of the $100 billion that isn't food stamps is really necessary. And don't get me started about those @#$%^&* ethanol mandates.
Corporate welfare and farm welfare are still welfare, Eagle. We can't afford it.
I would break up all omnibus bills into smaller, individual issues. Then I would put a limit on the number of pages for any legislation.
I would do the same with immigration bill. I would kill the bill from the Senate and start over with a bill regarding protecting the border and then one revising or re-defining the rest of the immigration laws that are currently on the books.
Probably none. All the programs do is even out prices at a lower level for the farmers.
You do get lower prices at the store as a result of the programs. But, of course, that's more than made up for (overall) by higher taxes.
I'll bet that the large majority of American farmers would jump at the chance to get out from under the thuggish thumb of the Government. The character of who they are hasn't changed that much since I left in 1986.
Start with getting the EPA out. And OSHA
>> Start with getting the EPA out. And OSHA
One hundred per cent agree with you on that, brother!
USDA counts a little over two million farms in the U.S., so that's not really true. The assertion, however, has been around a long time, and is probably based on the fact that about 150,000 large commercial farms produce over 70% of the nation's food, feed, and fiber. USDA has about 100,000 total employees, so the assertion still isn't accurate, but it's kinda sorta close enough to make a humorous point. But ....
The biggest chunk of USDA's employment is in the Forest Service, which is a USDA agency. Then there are the meat inspectors in all the processing plants, the APHIS guys working to quarantine and/or eradicate plant and animal diseases, the Foreign Agricultural Service, which works to expand export markets for U.S. products, the conservation and rural development folks, etc. USDA is quite a broad conglomeration of agencies. Risk Management and the Farm Services Agency are the two USDA entities that directly service production agriculture, and they have a combined employment of about 5,000, much of it in the FSA field offices. This is the appropriate figure to compare to the number of farmers.
No, I don't work for USDA.
>> Start with getting the EPA out. And OSHA
Add FDA to your list.
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/f-bloggers/3040937/posts
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.