Government to Provide More Help to Family Farmers. Oh?

Still seen as the most independent of the independent, there will be more food stamps for independent farm families to enjoy soon. 

Family Farmers

As this article at The Heritage Organization’s The Foundry points out (again),

Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-OH) said yesterday that he will support the bloated farm bill. But as Heritage has been highlighting, this bill does not do what most people think it does.

Eighty percent of the funding it provides will be for food stamps.

The House farm bill is projected to cost $940 billion, according to the Congressional Budget Office. The last farm bill, in 2008, was projected to cost $604 billion. By any measure, passing a bill that is projected to be 56 percent more expensive than the last farm bill is not fiscally responsible.

Oh piffle! Fiscal responsibility is terribly old fashioned — like independent family farmers.

USDA RD Coloring Book Cover

It all makes sense, I guess, because “food stamp spending has doubled under the Obama Administration, and participation is at historic highs.” It’s good to make history! It’s proof of American exceptionalism but — of course — only in understated, humble, compassionate and non-jingoistic ways. That’s why Obama’s historic presidency is so very precious. We can’t wait and must act, now, lest too many European nations outshine us and make our own pitiful welfare programs seem anemic in comparison. What would our neighbors think?

It now appears that among the many inducements to journey to the United States for those yearning for free stuff to be free is the increasing availability — and promotion — of “food stamps” (EBT cards) for illegal aliens our honored guests, eventually to become citizens.

Flyers provided to the Mexican embassy by the USDA include a statement – almost comically emphasized with both boldface and underlining – informing prospective SNAP beneficiaries, “You need not divulge information regarding your immigration status in seeking this benefit for your children.

Democrats We certainly want all we they can get, but thank goodness it’s for the little children! Might it have been a mistake not to include the “farm bill” in the “consensus” Immigration Reform Bill now pending? In any event, let’s help the spending to double again; then, next verse, same as the first. That must be the “fair,” “common sense” way to make our laws.

At least one Senator was pretty blunt about the purpose of the food stamps: just to “get the farm bill passed.” Such a massive program deserves to be considered—and debated—on its own, not lumped in with unrelated programs and slapped with the title of “farm.”

It seems that “our” honorable members of “our” Congress are mastering their Gilbert & Sullivan comprehension.  Although the “farm” bill is a good example of “things are seldom what they seem,” there are many others. What was that thing named “Affordable Care Act?” Oh. That. never mind. Just set everything to music that everyone can sing and hum — each in his own language, each in his own way — and all will be well.


About danmillerinpanama

I was graduated from Yale University in 1963 with a B.A. in economics and from the University of Virginia School of law, where I was the notes editor of the Virginia Law Review in 1966. Following four years of active duty with the Army JAG Corps, with two tours in Korea, I entered private practice in Washington, D.C. specializing in communications law. I retired in 1996 to sail with my wife, Jeanie, on our sailboat Namaste to and in the Caribbean. In 2002, we settled in the Republic of Panama and live in a very rural area up in the mountains. I have contributed to Pajamas Media and Pajamas Tatler. In addition to my own blog, Dan Miller in Panama, I an an editor of Warsclerotic and contribute to China Daily Mail when I have something to write about North Korea.
This entry was posted in 2016 Obama's America, Abuse of Power, Congress, Corruption, Debt limit, Democracy, Fairness, Farm bill, Federal budget, Food stamps, Freedom, Good stuff for everone free, Government reliance, Idiocy, Kiking the can down the road, Money, ObamaCare, Political class, Politics, the Basics, United States and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Government to Provide More Help to Family Farmers. Oh?

  1. I constantly emailed this web site post page to all
    my associates, because if like to read it next my friends will too.

  2. Pingback: Amid All The Scandal Don’t Lose Sight Of The Biggest Issue Of The Day … Amnesty And The Permanent Democratic Majority | danmillerinpanama

  3. Hey Dan, I haven’t left a reply on your blog site in a while. I’ve been busy reading Bertrand Russell and Douglas Adams. I just saw a thing on TV last night about the 1955 Russell-Einstein Manifesto where they explained the dangers posed by nuclear weapons and called for world leaders to seek peaceful resolutions to international conflict. (I’m laughing out loud). How’d that turn out? Good thing nobody listened to those ‘Kumbaya’ one-worlders. What a couple of liberal, socialist, pacifist dopes.

    Our wise leaders figured out that the only thing that can stop a bad guy with a nuke is a good guy with a nuke. So they applied the same strategy that we use for guns and crime in this country: More Nukes, Less Nuclear Attacks. They even applied the same policy of not worrying about background checksAnd it’s worked perfectly since 1945. The only problem I can see is when they learn how to make nukes on those 3D printers. What do we do then? That problem keeps me up at night. At first I thought that we should allow any law abiding citizen to carry nukes with a concealed carry permit. But then I worried about the nukes getting into the wrong hands. I thought about background checks but quickly realized that would be a threat to our liberty. Plus we already know that background checks are completely useless because they never stop anyone from using the thing you are checking them for, which made the time I spent thinking about background checks a total waste.

    I briefly flirted with the idea of the Government monitoring all American citizens but was forced to abandon that because what I used to think was right-wing paranoia has been proven true without a shadow of a doubt with all these recent and numerous revelations. For example, if the IRS can ‘target’ conservative organizations who ask for tax exempt status by asking them all sorts of questions in order to determine if they should be audited but then grant them that status anyway without even auditing them, even though they should not have been allowed that status in the first place because of their political activity — without ‘targeting’ the same number of liberal organizations, even though the conservative ones outnumber and outspend the liberal ones by a very large number and the only organization to actually be denied was liberal — then that means that the Government can do anything to us!

    What a dilemma. If we can’t trust the criminal/terrorists, and we can’t trust the other bad guys who don’t work for the government, who can we trust? I got it! The NRA! No one is as patriotic and committed to protecting freedom and opposing tyranny as those people. You can tell that’s true by how forcefully they tell us it’s true. So when nukes become available on the free market –being we can’t outlaw them because if we outlaw nukes only outlaws (and the Government) will have nukes — we should let only NRA members have nukes. It’s foolproof. Just make sure you don’t tick these guys off because they have hair-trigger tempers.

    That was one long aside. What were we talking about? Oh yeah, the farm bill and food stamps. I haven’t looked into that farm bill closely but I know that a bunch of lib Dems (like Al Franken and Feinstein) voted against it, probably for the reason that the writer from The Foundry alluded to:
    “WHY is the “farm” bill 80 percent food stamps?

    At least one Senator was pretty blunt about the purpose of the food stamps: just to ‘get the farm bill passed.’ Such a massive program deserves to be considered—and debated—on its own, not lumped in with unrelated programs and slapped with the title of ‘farm.'”

    I agree wholeheartedly. Because the food stamp program does deserve to be debated on its own. Lumping it in with unrelated programs that can be described as ‘pork’ helps opponents to describe that program in the terribly unjust way that they do. You know, that food stamps only take money from the tax payers and do absolutely nothing to benefit anyone other than the undeserving lazy bums who ‘depend’ on Government. A fair debate is sorely needed in order to erase the multitude of misconceptions perpetrated by the right. I won’t go into all those deceptions now (except for the following) because this reply is already too long.

    The writer describes food stamps as ‘a massive program.’ And when you throw out numbers like “80 percent of $940 billion, wow, that sounds astronomical. But the writer doesn’t tell you that’s over ten years. She didn’t tell me either but I figured that to be the case because I know how much we spend in a year. A trivial $72 billion. How do I get away with calling $72 billion trivial? By using the right’s own standards. Remember when Obama wanted to let the Bush tax cuts expire on taxable income over $200 and $250 thousand? The right said that the extra revenue would only amount to ( they would throw out all kinds of numbers, none lower than $72 billion — but I’ll go with the one I heard on the FoxBusiness channel — which is probably also low balled) $87 billion, a number they repeatedly described as ‘trivial.’ Because they said it was ‘trivial,’ they argued it wasn’t worth doing. Besides, that money was better left in the hands, and offshore tax dodges, of the wealthy.

    Now isn’t this interesting? $87 billion is ‘trivial’ if it comes from taxes paid by the wealthiest but $72 billion is a massive and unjust burden that must be dealt with immediately, if it goes to the poor. Hey, that $87 billion would more than cover the costs of the food stamps. But isn’t that money taken from the ‘job creators’ (what an obnoxious misuse of words that is) and then wasted on people who won’t work? I’d love to dismantle this one in detail, but for now:

    I know of at least two studies that show the multiplier effects of different spending programs and different kinds of tax cuts, including estimates from the consulting firm Moody’s Analytics which suggest that each dollar spent on food stamps in a depressed economy raises G.D.P. by about $1.70 — which means, by the way, that much of the money laid out to help families in need actually comes right back to the government in the form of higher revenue. Both of these studies showed food stamps to be at the top of the list and guess what was at the bottom? I’ll give you a hint. Tax cuts for the wealthiest.

    Hey Dan, even though I haven’t contributed to your comment section in a while, I have been monitoring your blog, just in case it slipped through a crack in the Feds’ surveillance program of American citizens.


    • Welcome back, Joe.

      I think tax exemptions for (allegedly) non-profit organizations, and tax favors of different types for many favored groups, have gone too far. Some elements of tax favors are (or more likely were but are no longer) intended to promote the economy; few seem to do so. The entire tax code — and the far more voluminous Internal Revenue Code — need to be overhauled, substantially. I doubt that I would be able to lift, much less understand, the current tax code. Unfortunately, the heavy lifting would be an Herculean undertaking and none of the old gods have volunteered. That leaves the Congress and the plethora of lobbyists for each beneficiary. Good luck with that.

      The merits and demerits of the food stamp program — and of our other welfare systems — should be examined. As part of the Farm Bill that will not happen. To the extent that illegal aliens undocumented Democrats not only get our “free stuff” but are officially encouraged to do so, we are keeping whole groups enslaved. Passing out free stuff for votes is inconsistent with my notions of “freedom for all.”

  4. Pingback: Farm Bill – Ask John Boehner WHY | Grumpy Opinions

  5. Tex says:

    I am an independent farmer. Can I get food stamps now so I don’t have to farm anymore?

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )


Connecting to %s