Hypocrites in Washington

[zimmy]

I get my information on ag. from Lancasterfarming.com, which is the website for electronic edition of The Farming News. For months, it has had articles about the dozens of programs that will end September if the new bill doesn't pass, including crop insurances. There seems to be substantial concern about very specific aspects of the bill, like the fact that without immediate enactment of a new bill the USDA is "unable to activate all of its disaster programs (from August 12 edition, p.A14). Based on all the information I have read over the past months, it is pretty clear that the statement that almost nothing in the farm bill would affect drought stricken farmers is patently false.

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

I get my information on ag. from Lancasterfarming.com, which is the website for electronic edition of The Farming News. For months, it has had articles about the dozens of programs that will end September if the new bill doesn't pass, including crop insurances. Existing law already provides subsidized crop insurance for more than 80 percent of the nation’s farmland; many dairy farms, too, enjoy subsidized insurance against rising feed costs.

There seems to be substantial concern about very specific aspects of the bill, like the fact that without immediate enactment of a new bill the USDA is "unable to activate all of its disaster programs (from August 12 edition, p.A14).
Ryan voted for, and the House passed, a narrow $383 million emergency relief measure and sent it to the Senate. But instead of quickly passing and signing it, President Obama and his Democratic allies are holding the Midwest hostage in the name of passing a $1 trillion big-government goodie bag laden with useless subsidies and unprecedented welfare spending.

Based on all the information I have read over the past months, it is pretty clear that the statement that almost nothing in the farm bill would affect drought stricken farmers is patently false.

I guess if the farmers are going to end up on food stamps like so much of Obama Nation...you may have a point
I thought we were SUPPOSED to be going through these things and eliminating waste and pork and unnecessary government subsidies ?

just another attempt to fund overbloated programs and create new ones wrapped around an emergency and demonization of anyone who gets in the way....just sad

[zimmy]

Originally Posted by scottw

I guess if the farmers are going to end up on food stamps like so much Obama Nation...you may have a point
I thought we were SUPPOSED to be going through these things and eliminating waste and pork and unnecessary government subsidies ?

You might know that the changes in the eligibility requirements in the 2002 and 2008 farm bills, combined with the recession, led to the growth in food stamp use. The bill Obama backs cuts something like $4 billion from food stamps. I know, everything was perfect until mid 2009 when some of Obamas policies started to take effect and wrecked the country.

By the way, you call it "unprecedented welfare spending." Your words? What are you basing it on?

[scottw]

Originally Posted by zimmy

You might know that the changes in the eligibility requirements in the 2002 and 2008 farm bills, combined with the recession, led to the growth in food stamp use. The bill Obama backs cuts something like $4 billion from food stamps. the Senate’s version of the farm bill contains just $4.5 billion in cuts to the program, and the House Agriculture Committee’s is not much better at $16.5 billion.
I know, everything was perfect until mid 2009 when some of Obamas policies started to take effect and wrecked the country.

By the way, you call it "unprecedented welfare spending." Your words? What are you basing it on?

"Food stamps are currently the nation’s second-largest welfare program, behind Medicaid, and account for fully two-thirds of the Department of Agriculture’s budget. The standard liberal line that the program’s rolls have expanded because of the recession doesn’t scan: They have expanded in good times and bad, from one in 50 Americans in the 1970s to one in seven today, including a surge from 30 million enrollees to 46 million under this administration unprecedented. A better explanation is so-called “categorical eligibility” standards, which state that individuals who receive other federal welfare benefits are presumptively eligible for food stamps, and which are so loosely interpreted that some states consider receiving a welfare brochure close enough for government dole. (Under the program as currently structured, a state that makes more people eligible can transfer federal dollars to its citizens at almost no cost to itself.) As if that wasn’t bad enough, President Obama’s stimulus further eroded the eligibility standards by suspending the work requirements for the able-bodied."

In fiscal 2011, the federal government spent more than $75 billion on food stamps, up from $34.6 billion at the end of fiscal 2008, according to the USDA.

NEW YORK (CNNMoney) -- More than one in seven Americans are on food stamps, but the federal government wants even more people to sign up for the safety net program.

The U.S. Department of Agriculture has been running radio ads for the past four months encouraging those eligible to enroll. The campaign is targeted at the elderly, working poor, the unemployed and Hispanics.

The department is spending between $2.5 million and $3 million on paid spots, and free public service announcements are also airing.

President Obama's stimulus act made it easier for childless, jobless adults to qualify for the program and increased the monthly benefit by about 15% through 2013.

About 80 percent of the bill’s nearly $1 trillion price tag (over 10 years) reflects the cost of food stamps...this doesn't soud like any kind of serious reduction from 75 billion in 2011