0
Never Underestimate the Farm Lobby
By Deborah Lehmann —
Budgets passed last week in both the House and the Senate left out Obama’s proposed subsidy cuts for rich farmers. The President had called for channeling that money instead to improve child nutrition programs, but the farm lobby raised a ruckus and Congress immediately rejected the plan.
The White House budget proposed cutting direct payments to farmers with gross annual sales over $500,000 and funneling an extra $1 billion each year to child nutrition programs. But the plan had widespread critics from the start, as some were concerned that it would cut subsidies for medium-sized family farms as well. Even the Environmental Working Group, which has fought strongly to reduce subsidies, said the proposal was faulty.
The budget bills in the House and the Senate make no mention of subsidy limits. According to an article in The Des Moines Register, the Senate bill does cut crop-insurance spending by $70 million a year for five years, allocating half of the savings — or $175 million — to child nutrition programs. But that’s much less than Obama’s proposed reduction of $500 million per year for crop-insurance. And the House bill proposes no cuts at all.
The New York Times reports that while Congress has adopted much of Obama’s proposed budget, limits on subsidies remain unpopular outside the White House. Representatives from the Corn Belt told the chair of the House Budget Committee that any changes to the compromises they won in the 2008 farm bill were out of the question. A few days after Obama proposed the cuts, the National Farmers Union met with White House officials and urged Congress to oppose the plan. Crop insurance companies are now working to make sure the cuts in the Senate bill don’t make the final budget.
USDA officials wouldn’t comment to The Register about where they might look for funding for child nutrition programs. But it’s pretty clear right now that it’s not going to come from America’s industrial farmers.
Latest Comments: