Bloated Farm Subsidy Bill Vetoed
Kurt Brouwer May 21st, 2008
This administration has not been terrible at cutting government spending and there are plenty of other complaints many Americans have with this president. However, in this case, President Bush is doing the right thing. This veto is an appropriate — though probably futile — response to an absurd government subsidy program.
On the one hand, we are all aware of sharply-higher food costs. And, as with oil companies, farmers and other food producers are doing very well. Yet, Congress just passed a bloated farm bill to funnel more government subsidies to farmers at a time when their business is booming.
Just one example from this bill should suffice:
Sugar. You may or may not know that as Americans we pay roughly twice the world price for sugar because we have trade restrictions on imported sugar. Why? Politics. Sugar producers are wired in with both political parties and they have used their clout to maintain trade restrictions on sugar for decades. That’s bad enough.
Now, this Farm Bill would essentially have the government buy sugar at the inflated price and then re-sell it to ethanol producers at the lower world price. How’s that for a government boondoggle? Here’s what the Detroit News wrote in an editorial [emphasis added]:
Bloated Farm Bill Should Be Plowed Under (Detroit News, May 21, 2008)
Imagine if Michigan’s struggling Big Three automakers suddenly struck this deal with Congress: The U.S. government would buy the Motor City’s cars for roughly twice the world market price, then resell them at about an 80% loss.
This boondoggle of a deal would spur worldwide protest, and rightfully so. But the five-year, $307 billion farm bill is equally ludicrous. President George W. Bush is expected to veto it within days, but no matter. Congress appears to have the votes lined up to override.
Everyone from taxpayer watchdog groups to foreign presidents have rallied to stop its passing. Even the U.S. Department of Agriculture, which is responsible for providing a safety net for American farmers, is denouncing it.
So why are both Democrats and Republicans supporting this absurdity? Plain and simple: they are acting like pigs at the taxpayer trough…
Within the bill are enhancement for the Food Stamp program and other nutritional programs that have merit. I’m perfectly fine with those and would support them if they were in separate legislation. However, I have no desire to subsidize farmers earning $1.5 million a year and that is what this bill does. Nor do I have any desire to subsidize wealthy sugar producers. And, at a time when food prices are soaring, why are we paying farmers not to farm anyway?
Just because a few meritorious programs have been included in the legislation does not change a pig’s ear into a silk purse. This bill, if approved, would be harmful to the interests of all Americans, other than a few agricultural producers and a few politicians. This is a horrible piece of legislation that should be thrown out.
Via: Carpe Diem
Update: This Is Just Embarassing:
Mixup Throws House Veto Override In Doubt (Associated Press, May 22, 2008, Mary Claire Jalonick & Julie Hirschfeld)
Apparently, the leadership of the House of Representatives sent the President an incomplete bill by mistake. Seriously? Oh yeah. Did they miss a period or something? No. They missed 34 pages…
The House overwhelmingly rejected President Bush’s veto Wednesday of a $290 billion farm bill, but what should have been a stinging defeat for the president became an embarrassment for Democrats.
Only hours before the House’s 316-108 vote, Bush had vetoed the five-year measure, saying it was too expensive and gave too much money to wealthy farmers when farm incomes are high. The Senate then was expected to follow suit quickly.
Action stalled, however, after the discovery that Congress had omitted a 34-page section of the bill when lawmakers sent the massive measure to the White House. That means Bush vetoed a different bill from the one Congress passed, raising questions that the eventual law would be unconstitutional…
- Business , Economy , Geopolitics , Money
- Comments(0)
Did you enjoy this article?
