Trim the farm bill
Bristol Herald Courier, November 7, 2007

Chew on this: Ten percent of the nation’s farmers receive two-thirds of the $34.8 billion that the government forks out in commodity-crop subsidy payments each year.

That’s quite a lot of pork. Worse, it’s increasingly evident that this taxpayer largesse is primarily subsidizing the nutritionally devoid, manufactured foods that are fueling a national obesity crisis.

Reform is in order. This week, the Senate has the opportunity to take a bold stand and end (or significantly modify) the Depression-era commodity crop subsidy program. If the Senate balks, then President Bush should make good on his veto threat.

We’re not against the farmers. But in its present incarnation, the farm bill provides large sums to a very small group of farmers – giants of agriculture rather than those struggling to keep the family farm.

The current system mostly pays farmers to grow just six crops: corn, wheat, oats, rice, cotton and soybeans. Farmers who grow fruits and vegetables, termed "specialty crops" under the law, are out of luck.

This perverse subsidy system is one reason that Cokes and Twinkies cost less than carrots and apples. The farm bill guarantees a steady stream of high-fructose corn syrup and partially hydrogenated soybean oil at rock-bottom prices. As a nation, we’re underwriting our own health crisis.

There is a better alternative. A bipartisan group of senators has introduced a reform measure that goes by the nifty acronym FRESH – short for the Farm, Ranch, Equity, Stewardship and Health Act.

The FRESH Act ends the subsidy program and replaces it with an insurance program that covers every farmer in the nation at no cost to the farmers. The act’s sponsors argue that it’s cheaper to insure every farmer against a disastrous year than to continue direct payments.

The measure’s savings would be redirected to hunger relief efforts, improvements to the Food Stamp Program, "specialty crop" research and conservation. Another $3 billion in savings over five years would go to deficit reduction.

"The farm bill, as it stands is bad policy," said Sen. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J. "Our bill provides a safety net to farmers ... regardless of what they grow or where they farm."

Senate debate on a mostly status quo version of the farm bill began Monday. Lautenberg and FRESH Act co-sponsor, Sen. Dick Lugar, R-Ind., have vowed to take their competing legislation directly to the Senate floor – bypassing a committee system that seems to squelch reforms.

Lautenberg and Lugar have the support of an odd coalition that includes environmentalists, doctors, government watchdog groups and fiscal conservatives. The Bush administration hasn’t weighed in on FRESH, but the president has pledged to veto the House version of the farm bill which keeps the bloated subsidies intact.

Three of the region’s four senators have made public statements in favor of some type of farm bill reform. Sen. John Warner, R-Va., has expressed grave concerns with the present farm bill, describing it as "a departure from past successes." And Sens. Bob Corker and Lamar Alexander, both R-Tenn., have recently spoken against trade-distorting sugar subsidies. Sen. Jim Webb, D-Va., hasn’t staked out a clear position, although he appears inclined to leave the subsidies in place.

We urge our senators to support FRESH or some other meaningful reform of the farm bill. Lawmakers won’t have another chance to fix the system until 2012. They must end the subsidies that line the pockets of a few wealthy farmers, harm the nation’s health and distort trade policies. The pork should stop here.