Debate Club

Rich Farmers Don't Need Farm Bill's Welfare

By SHARE

By most standards, farmers are rich. For a long time, the average family farm has enjoyed a higher income and has been six or seven times wealthier than the average American family. And the average farmer does not receive most of the farm subsidies that flow from the federal government. Eighty percent of those funds go to the largest 20 percent of farms that have much higher household incomes and are many times wealthier than the average taxpayer. That trend will continue this year when U.S. Department of Agriculture predicts that farm incomes will be higher than ever before.

The House farm bill has two new welfare programs for well-off farmers: a price support program called Price Loss Coverage and a new "Supplementary Coverage Option" crop insurance program in which taxpayers would pick up 70 percent of the premiums. These programs will shovel most of the subsidies to wealthy farmers because they are tied to the amount of land a household farms. Families in real poverty will get very few benefits because they don't farm much land. However, crop insurance companies are likely to scalp about half a billion taxpayer dollars to manage the new insurance program.

[See a collection of political cartoons on the budget and deficit.]

Fundamentally, the House Agricultural Committee's farm policy proposals do not pass any reasonable fairness test. Worse, because payments under the new programs could balloon to as much as $20 billion a year when crop prices fall, they have the potential to be federal budget busters. And, because both programs encourage expanded crop production, they could cause the United States to violate its World Trade Organization commitments on domestic agricultural subsidies, with subsequent penalties that hurt U.S. exports.

Congress should require the House and Senate Agricultural Committees to do better, especially given the urgent need for major federal budget reform. Let's not pass a new farm bill right now which the main purpose of is to give substantial subsidies to wealthy farmers just because some lobbyists claim that food stamp payments and programs that benefit the environment will stop on October 1 if no legislation is passed. That is simply not the case, as a recent Congressional Research Service Report clearly explains. Instead, the House and Senate Agricultural Committees need to be more fiscally responsible, do a better job for their country, and cut off farm subsidies that flow from less well-off taxpayers to very well-off farmers and landowners.

Vince Smith

About Vince Smith Codirector of Montana State University’s Agricultural Marketing Policy Center

Tags
Farm Bill
farming
Congress

Other Arguments

#1
154 Pts
House Farm Bill Cuts Off the Pathway to the Middle Class

No – House Farm Bill Cuts Off the Pathway to the Middle Class

Melissa Boteach Director of the Poverty and Prosperity Program for Center for American Progress

#2
146 Pts
House Farm Bill Ignores Reality of Current Economy

No – House Farm Bill Ignores Reality of Current Economy

Jim Weill President of the Food Research and Action Center

#3
25 Pts
Don't Let the Farm Bill Be a Casualty of Political Silly Season

Yes – Don't Let the Farm Bill Be a Casualty of Political Silly Season

Roger Johnson President of the National Farmers Union

#4
17 Pts
Rep. Boswell: We Need the Farm Bill to Stabilize Food Costs

Yes – Rep. Boswell: We Need the Farm Bill to Stabilize Food Costs

Leonard Boswell Democratic U.S. Representative from Iowa

#5
6 Pts
Farm Bill's Agriculture Subsidies Must Be Dismantled

No – Farm Bill's Agriculture Subsidies Must Be Dismantled

Nan Swift Federal Government Affairs Manager at the National Taxpayers Union

You Might Also Like


See More