ALEXANDRIA, VA — Government spending, everyone realizes, is
out of control. During President George W. Bush’s tenure from
2001 through 2009, the national debt doubled. According to Bruce Riedl
of the Heritage Foundation, the prescription drug bill alone is projected
to add nearly $400 billion in its first decade.
|
Both parties are clearly in this together. According
to Factcheck, “Spending under President Obama remains at
a level that is quite high by historical standards. Measured
as a percentage of the nation’s economic production, it
reached the highest level since World War II in fiscal 2009....”
Since 2009, the Obama administration has maintained trillion dollar
deficits. Writing in Roll Call, Dustin Siggins and David Weinberger
report, “If we average spending as a percentage of GDP under
Bush from 2001 to 2009, it comes to just over 20 percent.... If
we do the same for Obama from 2010 to 2012, we get about 24 percent,
quite a bit higher than the historical average.” |
One place to cut spending is to eliminate depression-era farm subsidies.
But since each farm state has two senators — some Democrats, some
Republicans — this has been difficult to do. Now, in our era of economic
decline and skyrocketing government debt, it is time to take a serious
look at this wasteful program.
In 2012, the Department of Agriculture is projected to spend $22
billion on subsidy programs for farmers. Veronique de Rugy of the Mercatus
Center at George Mason University notes that this program was introduced
in the 1930s to help struggling small family farms. However, “the
subsidies have become the poster child for government welfare for the
affluent. Farm households have higher incomes, on average, than do
non-farm U.S. households. Figures from the U.S.D.A. show that in 2010
the mean farm household income was $84,400, up 9.4 percent from 2009.
This is 25 percent higher than the average U.S. household income of
$67,350 as reported by the U.S. Census Bureau for 2010.”
Beyond this, farm subsidies tend to flow to the largest and wealthiest
farm businesses. According to the Environmental Working Group database,
in 2010, 10 percent of farms received 74 percent of all subsidies.
These recipients are large commercial farms with more than $250,000
in sales, and they disproportionately produced crops tied to political
interests. The Cato Institute’s Tad DeHaven and Chris Edwards
calculate that more than 90 percent of all farm subsidies go to farmers
of just five crops — corn, wheat, soybeans, rice, and cotton. For
every federal dollar spent on farm subsidies, 19 cents goes to small
farms, 19 cents goes to intermediate (middle income) farms, and 62
cents to the largest commercial farms.
In De Rugy’s view, “The tragedy is that while cronyism
benefits the haves, all other Americans — especially those with lower
incomes — suffer from the resulting distortions. Take the domestic
sugar industry as an example. The government protects its producers
against foreign competitors by imposing U.S. import quotas, and against
low prices generally with a no-recourse loan program that serves as
an effective price floor. As a result... U.S. consumers and businesses
had to pay twice the world price of sugar on average since 1982....”
According to the Center for Responsive Politics, the U.S. farm lobby
contributes millions of dollars to political campaigns to maintain
federal support for the subsidies. The agribusiness sector as a whole
spent $124 million on lobbying in 2011. For the past decade, the amount
of money this sector has spent on lobbying has grown more than 60 percent.
Between 1995 and 2009, 23 farmers currently serving in Congress have
signed up for farm subsidies.
The fact is that the U.S. has the richest, most productive agricultural
sector, and the best fed population, in the world. Boosted by $136.3
billion in gross sales to other countries, U.S. net farm income hit
a record $98.1 billion in 2011. A new Economist Intelligence Unit report
ranks the U.S. as the most “food secure” nation in the
world, based on the affordability and quality of its food supply. The
U.S. provides the equivalent of 3,748 calories per day for each of
its roughly 314 million people. That is nearly 1,500 calories more
than the minimum necessary for a healthy life.
Still, every five years, Congress drafts a farm bill as if U.S. agriculture
cannot possibly exist in a real free market economy. At this very moment,
farm-state lawmakers and the lobbyists who swarm around them are preparing
to extend this program of subsidies. The Senate has already passed
a measure priced at $969 billion over the next decade. The House has
gone on summer vacation without acting as Republicans weigh the election-year
political risks of proceeding with that chamber’s own near-trillion
dollar measure.
Editorially, The Washington Times points out, “Like the bank
bailouts and TARP, the farm bill illustrates the capture of the legislative
process by special interests. The last farm bill in 2008 was the focus
of $173.5 million in lobbying expenditure.... This is all money spent
on what the Mercatus Center’s Matthew Mitchell calls ‘unproductive
entrepreneurship’ where people are organizing and expending their
talent to become rent seekers, and the end result is wealth redistribution,
not wealth creation. Real entrepreneurship innovates in ways that are
socially useful. Cronyism diverts resources... into a system that rewards
privileges to favored groups. In the case of the 2008 farm bill, recipients
of subsidies of $30,000 or more had an average household income of
$210,000.”
Many in Congress who proclaim their belief in the free market and
decry huge government deficits nevertheless seem ready to extend farm
subsidies. This tells us, unfortunately, that what we are witnessing
is politics as usual. And both parties are in it together. No one needs
to wonder why we can’t bring government spending under control.
This example demonstrates why.
The Conservative Curmudgeon archives
The Conservative Curmudgeon is copyright © 2012
by Allan C. Brownfeld and the Fitzgerald
Griffin Foundation.
All rights reserved. Editors may use this column if this copyright information
is included.
Allan C. Brownfeld is the author of five books, the latest of which
is The Revolution Lobby (Council for Inter-American Security). He has
been a staff aide to a U.S. Vice President, Members of Congress, and
the U.S. Senate Internal Subcommittee.
He is associate editor of The Lincoln Reveiw and a contributing
editor to such publications as Human Events,
The St. Croix Review, and The Washington Report on Middle
East Affairs.
The Fitzgerald Griffin Foundation needs your help to continue making
these columns available. To make a tax-deductible donation, click
here.