Web Search powered by YAHOO! SEARCH
05.14.2008 7:20 pm

Akin votes against Farm Bill; opposes food-stamp spending

Special to the Post-Dispatch
  • Email this
  • Print this

U.S. Rep. Todd Akin , R-Mo., announced today that he voted “against a 44 percent increase in government spending in the $307 billion farm bill.”

Otherwise known as the ”Food, Conservation and Energy Act of 2008,” the bill is estimated to cost the government $658 billion over the next ten years.

Akin complained that it offered “few market reforms.”

Here’s his statement:

“I support the 13% of the bill designated for our farmers and agriculture. However 73% provides for an increase in food stamp entitlements, which is an increase that places too high a burden on taxpayers and the overall economy.

“It is inappropriate to ask the average American family, already burdened by increased grocery costs, to foot the bill for this $300 billion piece of legislation.”

14 comments

Comments are closed.

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

— llbean
11:38 am May 15th, 2008

That Todd! What a guy!

— gaydem
1:52 pm May 15th, 2008

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.

— Go_Fish
2:35 pm May 15th, 2008

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.

— Midwest Man
4:37 pm May 16th, 2008

Pages: « 1 [2] Show All