I suspect the irony was lost on the President. On the same week he
signed the farm bill, he was in the midwest advocating tougher
workfare requirements for welfare moms.
Six years ago, Congress passed the Freedom to Farm Act promising to
phase out farm subsidies. It would introduce farmers to the power of
markets. Farmers
would learn to stand on their own two feet. And taxpayers would
benefit from reduced spending.
We heard similar arguments when Congress passed welfare reform.
Welfare moms would learn about the virtues of the marketplace. They
would learn to stand on their own two feet. And taxpayers would
benefit from reduced spending.
Welfare reform was deemed a great success. Welfare rolls have shrunk
by more than half. And the percentage of children living in poverty
is down.
But the President's acquiescence on the new farm bill says that we
have given up on reforming welfare for farmers.
I guess the farmers didn't like all that tough love. Sure it's hard
to step away from the government trough. But if welfare moms can do
it, why can't farmers?
There's no good economic reason for having farmers on the dole and
welfare moms off it. But the politics must be pretty persuasive.
The farm lobby speaks loudly in a number of states. When farmers
feel pinched or even poked, lots of their suppliers and their
employees feel it and complain.
These folks have a lot of power. They are highly organized. And
their representatives in Congress are powerful, too.
But there's another group that helps smooth the political way for
paying big subsidies to farmers. You and me. Many Americans
romanticize farming. We don't think of farmers being on the dole.
Welfare moms get called lazy or cheats. But that's never stopped us
from paying farmers not to farm.
When we think of farmers, we think of sturdy folk in overalls working
the land. Never mind that a lot of farmers who receive government
payments are millionaires with clean fingernails.
It's depressing but not surprising that politicians from farming
states are in favor of spending my money and yours to enrich their
constituents.
But the President campaigned on free markets and free trade. When he
endorses a massive porkfest like this, it has consequences. It will
be harder for him to stump for free markets at home and abroad. He's
in favor of free trade, except for steel. He's in favor of
self-reliance for welfare moms, but not for farmers. By signing the
farm bill, he has betrayed his principles.