Sunday, December 22, 2002
WELFARE FOR RICH FARMERS
San Francisco Chronicle: As political fights go, farm subsidies have long been a second-tier issue for most California residents, despite the significance of agriculture here.
Although federal farm subsidies soak up tens of billions of dollars annually in taxpayers' money, little of that money has traditionally gone to the state's growers, and the issue seemed relevant mostly to faraway Great Plains farmers.
This month, however, it all came home. California's Democratic U.S. Sens. Barbara Boxer and Dianne Feinstein got caught in a public-relations mess when they switched positions on one of the fattest subsidies in the federal farm bill. Competing versions of the bill have passed the House and Senate, and now are being reconciled -- that is, dickered over -- in conference committee.
After originally supporting a limit of subsidy payments to $275,000 for each farming couple, Boxer and Feinstein switched to the grower-supported version, with an annual cap of $550,000.
The subsidies, an expensive and archaic outgrowth of Depression-era payments to Dust Bowl dirt farmers, now have morphed into fat checks for millionaire growers of eight commodity crops. In California, that means the huge cotton and rice farms of the Central Valley. In contrast, more than 90 percent of the state's farmers are ineligible for the subsidies.
Price crash: It looks suspiciously like welfare for the rich. The state's farm lobby replies that cotton and rice need the subsidy because of the dramatic crash in world prices for those two commodities in recent years. Unless the higher of the two subsidy caps is adopted, about one-third of the state's cotton growers would be forced to switch to other crops, the lobby says.
As a short-term solution, higher subsidies may be necessary. But it points up the absurdity of the nation's whole farm support system. Why should wealthy growers be paid to grow crops that the free market doesn't want? True, small family farms need protection from price fluctuations. But overall reform is needed to prevent taxpayers' money from going to the rich.
The House and Senate conferees will be deciding on other farm bill details that will affect Californians. For example, several clauses would prevent food stamp benefits from being extended to many legal immigrants. These restrictions are unacceptable -- especially for California, where 100,000 people would be affected.
There's no reason why America's hard-working farmers should be pitted against the poor. It's past time for comprehensive review and overhaul of the nation's farm policy.