Michael Pollak wrote:
> [And we think of ourselves as comparatively abstemious when it comes to
> farm subsidies. The Chinese better not try anything like this at home.]
>
> US subsidy bill for farms nearly as high as net income
>
> Financial Times, Mar 15, 2001
>
> By NANCY DUNNE
>
> US farm lobbyists are pushing for billions of dollars in "emergency"
> payments - on top of existing subsidies - over the next 10 years, although
> the federal government is already paying many farmers more than they are
> earning from commodity sales.
>
> The US Agriculture Department has estimated that net farm income may
> decline from Dollars 45.4bn (Pounds 31bn) last year to Dollars 35.6bn in
> 2002.
>
> Government payments - including regular subsidies and emergency aid - to
> farmers this year are expected to hit Dollars 32bn, and they could rise
> further next year, according to department officials.
>
> Buffeted by low commodity prices, a coalition of 20 farmer organisations -
> ranging across the political spectrum - are pleading for Dollars 9bn-
> Dollars 12bn in additional aid each year for the next decade. A letter
> sent by the coalition to the congressional budget committees urges a swift
> response.
>
> "Delaying this work only harms those producers who are unable to obtain
> production financing without at least some signal that Congress will
> approve additional assistance," it said.
>
> The letter comes as the administration asks industries to hold back
> special requests that might appear to bust the budget until the
> president's Dollars 1,600bn-plus tax-cut package wins approval.
>
> So far, President George W. Bush has not requested new farm spending, but
> his agriculture secretary, Ann Veneman, said she would work with Congress
> to provide "an adequate safety net".
>
> However, farmers - despite their declining numbers - retain strong
> political clout in Washington.
>
> It has been five years since passage of the Freedom to Farm Act, which was
> supposed to wean farmers off their "subsidy addiction". The act eliminated
> an earlier land set-aside programme to discourage all-out planting. Output
> soared and prices fell. Surpluses elsewhere in the world and the Asian
> financial crisis also depressed export demand.
>
> Meanwhile, farmer payments are going more than ever to larger family and
> corporate farms.
>
> Clark Williams-Derry of the environmental working group, a research and
> advocacy organisation, said the top 10 per cent of recipients - 144,000
> farmers and farm businesses - collected 61 per cent of the 1996-98
> subsidies. They received even more for disaster and conservation spending.
>
> Copyright: The Financial Times Limited
--
Michael Perelman Economics Department California State University Chico, CA 95929
Tel. 530-898-5321 E-Mail michael at ecst.csuchico.edu