Will US politicians ever take a stand against agricultural subsidies?

[goodsamaritan]

"The U.S. Agricultural Department is required by law to subsidize over two dozen commodities. Between 1996 and 2002, an average of $16 billion/year was paid by programs authorized by federal legislation dating back to the Agricultural Adjustment Act of 1933, the Agricultural Act of 1949, and the Commodity Credit Corporation, among others."

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Agricultural_subsidy

That is a riduculous amount of money being spent on a program that virtually any intelligent person realizes is [censored].

It is amazing that this program has survived for so long without virtually any opposition. This seems like an issue that both Democrats (help poor people in Africa) and Republicans (free market) should in theory be able to unite against. Is there a large portion of the population that is strongly in favor of agro-subsidies? Or do the vast majority of people just not know or care?

I guess lobbists are just that strong. It's really sad, because I think this issue could be solved with a lot of popular support if a couple of politicians were willing to take a principled stand against it and bring the issue to the forefront.

[pvn]

Farmers are sacred cows. [img]/images/graemlins/frown.gif[/img]

[pvn]

Of course, $16B/year is chicken feed compared to other boondoggles. Plus farm subsidies are a lot more popular than cowboy expeditions on the other side of the world (well, this year, at least). But yeah, basically you're getting screwed for special interests.

[WordWhiz]

This is Public Choice Theory 101. Basically, it costs us all a few pennies each for these programs, so there's no real incentive to lobby against them. But it makes the farmers millions each, so they do have a huge incentive to lobby for them.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
I guess lobbists are just that strong. It's really sad, because I think this issue could be solved with a lot of popular support if a couple of politicians were willing to take a principled stand against it and bring the issue to the forefront.

[/ QUOTE ]


This is terribly naive.

The role of politicians is exactly to serve these interests.

[Nielsio]

[ QUOTE ]
This is Public Choice Theory 101. Basically, it costs us all a few pennies each for these programs, so there's no real incentive to lobby against them. But it makes the farmers millions each, so they do have a huge incentive to lobby for them.

[/ QUOTE ]


Yes.

And herein we find the real truth about politicians. They seek power to use power. They seek power to *sell* power.

[ConstantineX]

[ QUOTE ]
The role of politicians is exactly to serve these interests.

[/ QUOTE ]

[pvn]

[ QUOTE ]
[ QUOTE ]
The role of politicians is exactly to serve these interests.

[/ QUOTE ]

[/ QUOTE ]

This is much more insightful than even it sounds.

If the role of the politician were to serve individuals, his role would best be fufilled by *doing nothing*. The *existence* of politicians excludes this possiblity right off.

[BCPVP]

An report from The Heritage Foundation (conservative think tank)

[SNOWBALL]

I'd like to hear the other side to this issue, but I don't expect to be impressed.