Ms. Collins has written an excellent article exposing the reverse Robin Hood mind-set of House Republicans who recently passed a farm bill heavy on subsidies for big agriculture companies, but devoid of any mention of food stamps for the poor.
(Any underlines are mine.)"For decades, Congress has merged food stamps--which help poor people pay for their groceries--with agricultural subsidies in one big, messy, bipartisan farm bill...
...Lately, the House has begun chopping up big, complicated bills into what Speaker John Boehner once described as 'bite-sized chunks that members can digest.'"
What is Mr. Boehner saying exactly? Surely every man and woman elected to Congress must be smart enough to read and understand large pieces of legislation. But then we have Michele Bachmann, so there goes that theory."So the farm bill got divided. The two parts were not equally tidy. As Ron Nixon reported in The Times, the the rate of error and fraud in the agricultural crop insurance program is significantly higher than in the food stamp program.
And while food stamps go to poor people, most of the farm aid goes to wealthy corporations.
So House Republicans passed the farm part and left food stamps hanging."
There's the Republican Party we all know and love to hate."Tea Party conservatives have an all-purpose disdain for anything that smacks of redistribution of wealth, and food stamps are a prime target. 'The role of citizens, of Christians, of humanity, is to take care of each other. But not for Washington to steal money from those in the country and give to others in the country,' said Representative Stephen Fincher of Tennessee during a speech in Memphis."
It should be noted that Mr. Fincher sees nothing wrong with the taking/giving process if he is on the receiving end--since 1999, he has received $3.5 million in subsidies for his Tennessee farm. More on his subsidies-for-me-but-not-for-you philosophy here: http://whateyethynk-politics.blogspot.com/2013/05/quick-fact-in-tennessee-they-spell.html"'This is a victory for farmers and conservatives who desired desperately needed reforms to these programs,' said Representative Eric Cantor, the majority leader."
A victory? So Republicans see it as a war against the poor in this country who desperately need to eat?"The House bill actually spent more money on subsidies for farmers than the bipartisan Senate version the Republicans scorned. It also dropped the Senate's limit on aid to farmers with incomes of more than $750,000 a year. And while it mimicked the Senate in dropping most of the much-derided direct payments to farmers, the House gave cotton farmers a two-year extension."
We give federal aid to farmers who make $750,000 a year?! Really?!?!
Oh, and did I mention that Mr. Fincher's Tennessee farm is a cotton growing operation? How nice that his crop was singled out for an extension on direct payments."Crop insurance gets bigger under the new plan...You, the taxpayer, fork over the majority of the cost of farmers' policy premiums. (Up to 80 percent in the case of cotton.) Also, you spend about $1.3 billion a year to compensate the insurance agents for the fact that they have to sell coverage to any eligible farmer, whatever his prospects for success. Plus, if yields actually do drop, you have to compensate the insurance companies for part of the cost of claims.
Is this beginning to sound a little like Obamacare? No! No way! The House Republicans hatehatehate Obamacare! They vote to repeal it as often as they change their socks! Because Obamacare will, you know, distort the natural operation of the markets.
The larding of benefits to farmers didn't come up during the House debate. It was all about food stamps, and Democrats asking to know why their colleagues wanted to cut aid to hungry children and old people...Representative Juan Vargas of California quoted Jesus' lesson that 'whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.'
That raised Representative Fincher's hackles. 'Man, I really got bent out of shape,' he told that Memphis audience, proudly reporting that he countered with Thessalonians: 'The one who is unwilling to work shall not eat.'"
So I guess Mr. Fincher, who actually does no farming himself, will be giving that $3.5 million in subsidies back?
No comments:
Post a Comment