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

Akin votes against Farm Bill; opposes food-stamp spending

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.”

1 Star2 Stars3 Stars4 Stars5 Stars (1 votes, average: 5 out of 5)
Loading ... Loading ...
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