Redstate

By Flyover Country Posted in Policy — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »

Well, the new Farm Bill has passed the House with a veto-proof majority, indicating any attempt by President Bush to wield his veto cutlass will be met by an overriding vote of incompetence by our illustriously corrupt representatives. This beast is loaded with pork that effectively buys support from key lawmakers.

Read on for commentary on the bill and the vociferous critics of farmers...

For one example of juicy pork goodness, check out Mitch McConnell's prize -

McConnell included a tax break for horse owners that would benefit horse farms in his state of Kentucky. His office asserted that the provision, which ensures that all race horses are depreciated over three years for tax purposes, regardless of when the horses start training, did not qualify as an earmark because it would affect tens of thousands of taxpayers in nearly every state. The Joint Committee on Taxation estimates this would cost $126 million over 10 years."

Um, Mitch? That is not fiscal responsibility. Just so no one is confused, it's a bi-partisan slopfest. Dingy Harry Reid gets his vittles, too -

The department [of Agriculture] also took aim at $175 million in funds championed by Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid, D-Nev., to provide water for desert lakes in his state."

Water from where? Is there another earmark for a rainmaking machine? Is some of that wampum going to Native Americans to conduct a series of rain dances? What boondoggle is Dingy Harry going to waste my freakin' tax dollars on?!

In the interest of full disclosure, I work with some of America's brightest and business-savvy farmers. They vary in size from smaller family farms to very large family farms. That is the critical term here - family farmers. This misperception of any farm over 2,000 acres as some "corporate farmer" is a ridiculous and outmoded notion. True, 15 years ago, when corn was a $1.50 cash and beans were $3.75 cash, the subsidies were welcomed by one and all. And taxpayers by and large didn't complain because it kept their food prices low by allowing farmers to produce more crops with better technology.

However, in this current era of high commodity prices, it has become fashionable to lump all of agriculture together, assume everyone is making "windfall profits" (a ridiculous term if there ever was one) and castigate the whole lot for their barbaric pillaging of the tax spoils. That is patently idiotic. As I showed in my last entry, farmers of every size are getting deep-sixed by a combination of forces, nearly all of which are out of their control, nor were of their own making.

Now, onto the title of my piece. The future of agriculture rests in two camps. Producers will either get bigger to enable economies of scale (and consequently, bigger profits), or they will take some kind of off-farm employment, and farm small as a hobby. The middle ground is gone. So, for the producers who are choosing to get big as a matter of economic survival, stop knocking them as "corporate farmers" raping the values of Middle America. That is the same crap that activists and pols push to justify increasingly onerous tax and regulatory burdens on the private oil industry. These guys are not suckling at the taxpayer teat. 67% sticking percent of the new Farm Bill goes towards social welfare food programs. By definition, the only true "corporate farmers" are the contract chicken, beef and hog producers who work for Tyson, Cargill and Smithfield, and they are not getting rich either.

The ire of anti-subsidy people should be placed at the feet of the (very few) truly wealthy people who receive conservation payments or direct payments for land they happen to own. I disagree with their receipt of those payments, and view it as a misuse of funds meant to preserve highly erodable farmland and allow for some ground to remain in its natural state. Farmers will be receiving little to no price supports this year, or for the forseeable future, since they will be making good money on their crops. The trend of consolidation is advancing, and it is unstoppable.

Like any Middle American, I view the loss of rural populations as a detriment to social values and morality. However, only 1% of the total US population currently lives on a farm, anyhow. That ex-rural migration trend began long ago, and it is foolish to continue to castigate and criticize the farmers still producing abundant crops as some evil profiteering robber barons. That's bush league boilerplate, and untrue to boot.

To sum up...I think the Farm Bill is a bloated POS laden with pork to satisfy the appetites of our crooked leaders. However, I urge conservatives and free market lovers to not turn their anger onto the farmers, since of all interested parties, they receive the smallest benefit from the bill. You should thank God we still have the best farmers on earth - Congress has been suffocating the ag industry with their misguided policies since FDR. We have the cheapest, most diverse diets in the world because we have the best producers. They represent the best of American ingenuity, values and industry.