Farm Facts

Let's look at a few facts on farm subsidies, which make even less sense than ethanol subsidies. It's difficult to get traction on this issue around here, for the obvious reason that Illinois is a major corn (pix) and soybean producer. But think about the implications for consumers. And Riedl properly terms it corporate welfare, as some of the biggest beneficiaries are large corporate farms. Brian M. Riedl in the LA Times:

On the first point, producers of just five crops -- wheat, cotton, corn, soybeans and rice -- receive nearly all farm subsidies. In fact, only one-third of the $240 billion in annual farm production is targeted for subsidies. All other farmers -- including growers of fruits, vegetables, livestock and poultry -- receive nearly nothing. This raises the question: If farm subsidies are necessary to produce an adequate food supply with stable prices and thriving farmers, why haven't the growers of nonsubsidized crops experienced these problems?[snip]

These farm policies are more than merely ineffective -- they impose substantial harm. They cost Americans $25 billion in taxes and an additional $12 billion in higher food prices annually. Environmental damage results from farmers over-planting crops in order to maximize subsidies. By undermining the nation's trade negotiations, subsidies raise consumer prices and restrict U.S. exports. Cotton subsidies undercut African farmers, keeping them in desperate poverty.

Bad policy all around. Maybe this time the urban lobby in Congress will do something useful.