Insurance not subsidies
Spartansburg Herald Journal, October 25, 2007

Congress has a choice between maintaining a farm subsidy system that amounts to little more than corporate welfare or reforming the system to save taxpayers money and genuinely help farmers.

The bill that emerged from the Senate Agriculture Committee this week maintains the status quo, except that it spends even more money.

Senators agreed to create a $5 billion disaster program that will help farmers when their crops are destroyed by natural disasters. But they didn't use that program to replace crop subsidies. Instead, they plan to pass a bill that will cost taxpayers $288 billion over five years. And most of that money will go to huge agricultural corporations.

Congressional leaders and the White House have called for major reforms of the farm subsidy programs, but the farm-state senators who fill the committee are resisting.

The Senate should refuse to pass their bill. Instead, it should pass an alternative sponsored by Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Sen. Richard Lugar, R-Ind.

The alternative bill would replace the subsidies with a crop insurance program that helps farmers whenever they have losses.

The benefits of the alternative program go far beyond its lower cost and subsequent benefits to the taxpayers. The subsidies go only to those who farm a few crops, focusing on corn, wheat and soybeans. The insurance would be available to all farmers, including those who grow fruits and vegetables. The subsidies are paid each year whether farmers need them or not. The insurance would be given out only when actual losses are incurred.

Leaders in Washington from both parties have declared their intention to reform farm subsidies. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi made it one of her top priorities. Even Iowa Sen. Tom Harkin, chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, proposed reforms. But those reforms were rejected by his committee. Pelosi has withdrawn from demanding reform, concerned that limiting subsidies might hurt incumbent Democrats in farm states.

Congressional leaders should stand up for taxpayers and refuse to continue this form of corporate welfare. The nation can establish an adequate safety net for farmers without wasting hundreds of billions on huge agribusinesses.

If Congress passes another bill that simply extends the current subsidies, President Bush should veto it, demanding that Congress pass the alternative bill instead.