New at Reason
Comments to "New at Reason":
Adam W. | August 9, 2007, 3:39pm | #
"Perhaps a vacation and some rest will help the upper chamber move U.S. farm policy out of the 1930s."And perhaps I'll get to bang Elisha Cuthbert. Both would be very good things; the odds of either happening are close to nil.
scandalrag | August 9, 2007, 3:54pm | #
Adam W.,You claim banging Elisha Cuthbert would be a very good thing. I have never banged Elisha Cuthbert, so I don't feel qualified to pass judgement on that. I think it's time for me to do a little research.
ClubMedSux | August 9, 2007, 3:57pm | #
And perhaps I'll get to bang Elisha Cuthbert.It's all fun and games until she's suddenly attacked by a mountain lion while you're doing her.
scandalrag: you at least know who she is, right? And CMS, if that's how I die, that's the way to go.
I live in iowa and the farmers are laughing all the way to the bank. The price of corn has doubled recently (mainly due to ethanol)and they are doing quite well and I don't think they need subsidies, in fact, most of them even think subsidies are a joke.
jh | August 9, 2007, 8:00pm | #
javier -- Didn't you know this is an Elisha Cuthbert thread, not a farm bill thread? RTFA already!Adam W. -- E. Cuthbert might disagree about you banging her being a very good thing.
rm2muv | August 9, 2007, 8:27pm | #
Just how many votes could a legislator lose by providing a sensible plan to provide FAMILY farmers with some real insurance against crop failures and sudden drops in price? I don't get it. What is the hold that the huge farm conglomerates have on these people?There has to be some way to cut farm subsidies down to size. But, we may go through a lot of elections to get there.
I've said it before, I'll say it again. If Satan really does exist and he has a bastard child, its our agricultural policy.
Elizabeth Schmitz | August 10, 2007, 7:12am | #
From Schmitz Blitz: schmitzblitz.blogspot.coma slightly old post
http://schmitzblitz.blogspot.com/2007/07/government-gives-11-billion-to-dead.html
From today's Washington Post:
The U.S. Department of Agriculture distributed $1.1 billion over seven years to the estates or companies of deceased farmers and routinely failed to conduct reviews required to ensure that the payments were properly made, according to a government report.
In a selection of 181 cases from 1999 to 2005, the Government Accountability Office found that officials approved payments without any review 40 percent of the time.
...
Last year, a Washington Post investigation of farm subsidies found more than $15 billion in wasteful or redundant spending in other farm payments, including $1.3 billion to people who do not farm and $817 million to farms that use loopholes to exceed limits.
The $1.1 billion the US government paid dead farmers is more than the 2006 budget allotted for:
-The Nuclear Facilities Safety Board ($22 million)
-Refugee programs ($889 million)
-International disaster and famine assistance ($579 million)
-Iraq relief and reconstruction fund ($10 million)
-USAID operations ($794 million)
-Nonproliferation, antiterrorism, demining, and related programs ($396 million)
-Naval petroleum reserves operations ($22 million)
-Uranium enrichment decontamination ($110 million)
-Nuclear waste program ($148 million)
-Emergency energy preparedness ($164 million)
-Food safety and inspection ($830 million)
-Consumer product safety commission ($62 million)
-Medicare prescription drug administrative expenses ($770 million)
-Armed forces retirement homes ($300 million)
-Affordable housing program ($307 million)
-High-intensity drug trafficking areas program ($200 million)
Senator Chuck Grassley (R-IA), ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee and a critic of farm subsidies to wealthy farms requested the GAO report. Ahead of the report's release, Grassley remarked, "Farm payments are meant for those who need some help getting through the tough times...clearly there are loopholes that should be closed and laws that need to be followed."
Too bad the Senator doesn't practice what he preaches.
According the Environmental Working Group's Farm Subsidy Database, Grassley received over $225,041 in USDA subsidies between the years of 1995 and 2005. Grassley's son Robin has received $653,833 over the same period.
Oh the irony.
What the heck happened to that dusty old veto pen Bush loose it again?