ed051608

On the homepage

Vikings

Favre's stats put him in MVP picture

Out There

Pardon Board

Petters

Petters jury will resume deliberations Tuesday

Home | Opinion Exchange | Editorials

Continued: Farm bill only inches toward real reform

Print this story

Follow Opinion Exchange on Twitter

TWO TAKES ON BILL

"We've been able to maintain a safety net for farmers, and we've made some significant reforms.''

U.S. Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn.

•••

"It does not target help for the farmers who really need it, and it increases the size and cost of government ...."

U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer

A number of members of Congress have celebrated this week's passage of the $290 billion farm bill as a great victory for bipartisanship in Washington. If this is what bipartisanship looks like, maybe we should hope for a return to gridlock.

While their constituents are struggling to pay grocery bills, elected representatives in the House and Senate have increased total subsidies for farmers, many of whom are benefiting from rising crop prices. Farm income is expected to reach a record high of $92.3 billion this year, making it difficult to feel sorry for farmers.

Most disappointing was the lack of a complete overhaul of the system that provides income subsidies to well-off farmers. The Bush administration initially took the right stand, proposing to eliminate any subsidy payments for farmers who make more than $200,000 in annual gross income. It later indicated that it could live with a $500,000 limit. However, the bill passed by the House and Senate embraces farm incomes of up to $750,000 and nonfarm income of $500,000 for individuals. Get married, and you can make more than $1.5 million a year in farm income or $1 million in nonfarm income and still receive federal subsidies. "Farmer Wants a Wife," indeed.

A majority of House Republicans broke from the White House despite the president's veto threat, and the Senate passed the bill Thursday in an 81-15 vote, making an override certain. That a veto-proof majority in both houses supported the bill is testament to the power of the agricultural lobby, especially in an election year. And remember that the five-year bill includes a $10 billion boost for nutrition programs.

The farm bill is that rare piece of legislation that means as much to urban centers as it does to rural areas. Minnesota's interests were largely protected. State farmers would continue to collect about $300 million a year in direct-payment subsidies -- the benefits paid without any regard for crop prices. Crop subsidies, which prop up farmers when prices fall, would continue.

U.S. sugar producers would get some protection from imports, which will be well-received by the state's sugar-beet farmers. The legislation also tries to encourage the move from corn-based to cellulosic ethanol. And the state would benefit from increased funding for school food programs and organic farming.

All of this left several key members of the Minnesota delegation talking about the value of compromise. Republican Sen. Norm Coleman said the bill was important for the state. Democratic Sen. Amy Klobuchar said the payment limits represented a "landmark step'' toward reform. But Republican Rep. Jim Ramstad, who opposed the bill, effectively summed up the missed opportunity: "Congress should not force hard-working taxpayers to subsidize millionaire farmers.'' No, it shouldn't.

Recent Editorials stories

Editorial: This Bud Light's not for U - May 15, 2008

Editorial: This Bud Light's not for U - Anheuser-Busch's ill-advised 'Fan Cans'' promotion. More

Comment on this story | Be the first to comment | Hide reader comments

New ideas for the public sector

THERE'S NEVER BEEN A BETTER TIME to create a more efficient Minnesota. Facing large budget deficits at the state, county and local levels, Minnesotans are seeing with new clarity that the public sector must adapt to new economic realities. Only the smartest, most strategic reinvention will ensure that our tax dollars are spent on the best programs and services. Read more

About Opinion Exchange

Opinion Exchange is produced by the Editorial Department, which is dedicated to hosting the discussion on a range of issues of interest to Star Tribune readers online and in print. In its new format, it's our hope that Opinion Exhange will create a more dynamic dialogue between Star Tribune readers and the Editorial Board. Many individual posts will be written and signed by members of the Editorial Board and will reflect their own opinions. Daily editorials will continue to represent the institutional voice of the newspaper and be researched and written by the Editorial Department, which is independent of the newsroom.

Subscribe to RSS|Learn more about RSS