Congressman Akin got it half right. The “13% of the bill designated for our farmers” is even worse than the food stamp increase. I’m not excited about either one of those increases - but if I have to choose between giving away more food stamps, or writing bigger checks to ADM and other politically connected agribusinesses, I’ll choose the food stamps every time.

Regarding the 13 - 73 % difference. What is the percentage of hungry people vs farmers in the second cong. district? Can he really talk about increased grocery costs and not realize the mere pittance most get on food stamps would feed anyone very nutritiously?

In addition, some of that food stamp/EBT can be used at Farmers Markets. Won’t that benefit the farmer as much as the 13% of the bill that was subsidies?

That’s deplorable!!

Suzyjax,
I’m not going to sugar coat it…I think that most of the subsidies that farmers get are against conservative values and the free market. However, your assertion that the EBT/Food Stamp program is “a mere pittance” is way off. I used to be a cashier at a grocery store, and it used to tick me off like no other twice a month when people would come through with two cart loads of groceries (NAME BRAND AT THAT) and use an EBT card. When they went over, they put the vegetables and other healthy items to the side while keeping the Oreos and bottles of Coke. I’m all for helping individuals down on their luck (and think the WIC program is outstanding), but Speaker Jetton wasn’t all that far off when he said the best he’s ever eaten was when he was on food stamps. The program needs a huge overhaul.

Although I may be objective, it’s the blind squirrel theory: even a nut fins a blind squirrel every so often. Right vote, perhaps, tho that can be argued either way, not sure what I would do (hope to find a better bill, would be my answer), the totally wrong reason.

“finds”, of course.

Bill:

You’ll always be my blind squirrel expert.

Or are you the expert nut?

I forget which sometimes.

MissouriRight,
There will always be people who do the wrong thing. We cannot judge the system based on your anectdotal evidence from a long ago cashier’s job. For example, the Farmer’s Market EBT use could hardly be used for twinkies and prime rib. It definitely is a move in the direction of making sure healthy choices are made.
Cape Girardeau Congresswoman Joann Emerson tried the “food stamp diet”. With that she took the typical $21 a week alloted to single food recipients. Yes, I consider $21 a week a mere pittance.

Here we go again with the “food stamps don’t provide enough” discussion. So for those of you who missed it last time, here’s a link to the program description, along with benefit amounts:

http://www.fns.usda.gov/fsp/applicant_recipients/fs_Res_Ben_Elig.htm

As I have pointed out every time this issue comes up, a family of 4 can receive up to $542 a month in food stamps. That is more than this Aldi shopper ever spends on food for our family. We don’t buy soda, we buy very little junk food, and we almost never buy name brand products. But we always eat well - tonight, for example, we’re having homemade beef stew. Tomorrow, steak. All the meat was “almost expired” clearance at Aldi.

If you aren’t satisfied with the amount you get in food stamps … get a job!

Akin did the Christian thing here. Those who God has blessed with wealth and abundant food should not have to provide any concern or care for the least among us. The weak, poor and sick are that way for a reason and the fewer there are of them, the better the rest of us Christians are.

Contrary to common knowledge we are no longer “all in this together” as evidenced by the Christian concern shown by Rep Akin.

As Akin complains, maybe we are taxing the wrong folks, if any increase is a huge burden to the average American Family then maybe the 200K a year or more crowd would not feel so put upon?

Nick Kasoff
what an arrogant and self centered comment. ..
are all repubs as egotistical and conceded as you?

That Todd! What a guy!

Gotta love massive entitlement bills that come up during election years. This one was just too chocked full of goodies for a politician to pass up. The supporters of corporate welfare, both Republican and Democrat, couldn’t pass up the chance to pander for votes among farm bureaus and the agri-business lobby. And what self-respecting “progressive” would pass up the chance to play Santa Claus with food stamps? Guess Jo Ann Emerson’s pauper for a day stunt worked after all.

Farm subsidies arguably made sense when first proposed in the 1930s, but in 2008 when less than 2% of Americans live on farms and crops are selling at record prices they’re just nuts.

Hey go fish, Just because there are fewer farmers today than there were in the 1930’s doesn’t mean America’s food supply is any less important. I do agree that the farm bill has gotten out of hand and needs more reform, but I think you would rather have a family farm raising your nation’s food than to have the government or walmart taking over instead. The farm bill should be strictly just a safety net. If all it entailed for the american farmer was a crop insurance program to help out in bad years that would be fine with me. But I have a feeling that if the safety net wasn’t there that a few bad years could easily wipe out the family farms and then you have consolidation and monopoly’s forming and becoming the producers of your food. Thats a scary thought when it comes to your food supply.