For newer readers let me preface I am apolitical - both parties are doing an excellent job of running the country into the ground and concentrating wealth into fewer and fewer hands.   I got a nice big laugh this morning out of a story on Yahoo Finance titled Republicans Dodge Farm Subsidy Cuts.  The more things change, the more they stay the same despite all the rhetoric.  I posted this piece [Mar 27, 2008: WSJ - Farm Lobby Beats Back Assault on Subsidies] three years ago.... sounds incredibly familiar.  The amount cited below is not huge in the big picture but its the principal of it all.

(note - Jeff Flake of AZ, a long time REAL fiscal conservative, is one of the few Republicans actually serious about what he says, unlike so many who you have to watch what they do, not what they say)

Oh yeah that stupid corn ethanol subsidy?  Alive and well.  After all the 2012 Iowa primary is not far off.  Right Newt?  [Dec 24, 2007: Bloomberg Outraged by Ethanol in Farm Bill]  On the positive side, low income mothers (and their kids) do not have a powerful lobbying group - hence it should be much easier to take away programs for them.  Priorities people!

Via AP

  • Republicans have quietly maneuvered to prevent a House spending bill from chipping away at federal farm subsidies....The GOP move will probably prevent up to $167 million in cuts in direct payments to farmers, including some of the nation's wealthiest
  • The maneuver, along with the Senate's refusal Tuesday to end a $5 billion annual tax subsidy for ethanol-gasoline blends, illustrates just how difficult it will be for Congress to come up with even a fraction of the trillions in budget savings over the next decade that Republicans have promised.
  • Meanwhile, the annual bill to pay for food and farm programs next year would cut food aid for low-income mothers and children by $685 million.
  • The farm subsidy cuts won bipartisan approval in the House Appropriations Committee two weeks ago, but as debate on the House floor began Tuesday, Republicans turned to a procedural maneuver to drop that language.  Rep. Frank Lucas of Oklahoma, the Republican chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, won an agreement from party leaders to strike the cuts in direct payments if just one member objected on the floor. Some Democrats hope to force a vote but aren't sure they will be able to.
  • The takeaway from this is that nothing has changed with regard to farm subsidies, it's the same old, same old, said Rep. Jim McGovern of Massachusetts, a Democrat who has pushed to restore the money cut from food aid.
  • Direct payments to farmers have been a frequent target of fiscal conservatives and other critics of farm programs because they are paid regardless of crop price or yield. They have survived for years, along with tens of billions annually in other subsidies for farmers, because a powerful coalition of farm state lawmakers in both parties has protected them.
  • While there has been consensus even among some farm-state members that direct payments should be cut in the coming year to help reduce the deficit, Republican leaders have been content so far to push off that debate and let farm-state members on the House Agriculture Committee hash it out as part of the next five-year farm bill in 2012.
  • Rep. Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., wrote the subsidy cut language. Farmers can now make as much as $750,000 annually and still receive subsidies, but Flake's amendment would lower the threshold for some to $250,000, saving about $20 million annually.