"President Bush Has Vowed To Veto This Congressional Goody Bag, And He Should Make Good On That Promise"

The New York Times: "President Bush should keep his promise to veto it and demand better legislation." "[T]he bill perpetuates the old subsidies for agriculture at a time when the prices that farmers are getting for big row crops like corn, soybeans and wheat have never been better. Net farm income is up 50 percent. ... [E]ven the increases in conservation spending are not nearly as generous as advertised. President Bush asked for $4 billion more than Congress provided. He also complained, rightly, that House and Senate conferees had killed a program to conserve rare prairie grasslands while narrowing two programs that paid farmers to protect wetlands and wildlife habitat." (Editorial, "A Disgraceful Farm Bill," The New York Times, 5/16/08)

The Washington Post: "The bill includes only the most tepid reforms, which, though trumpeted by the bill's advocates, deny benefits to only a tiny handful of farms." "A small number of farm-state senators from both parties demanded its most wasteful provisions, such as guaranteed payments to big cotton and rice growers and 'disaster relief' for farmers in arid areas. These members of the less-representative body leveraged their right to filibuster into billions of dollars for people who are better off than the average taxpayer." (Editorial, "Farm Bill Chestnuts," The Washington Post, 5/16/08)

Los Angeles Times: "Farm subsidies have survived for this long by holding the good hostage to the bad." "The run-up in food prices, in some cases worsened by our agricultural policies, created a chance to break out of this rut. So did a growing awareness of the economic damage wrought by subsidies, which destroy livelihoods of farmers overseas who can't compete with government-backed American grain." (Editorial, "Pork, Not Policy," Los Angeles Times, 5/15/08)

National Review Online: "Even though $300 billion is a big burden on American taxpayers, it's apparently not big enough to change the political calculus of farm-subsidy supporters in Congress, as this week's votes indicate." "In light of an increasing food-scarcity problem in less-developed countries, the Bush administration asked Congress to help cut down on transportation costs by allowing the food-aid program to purchase 25 percent of the food it distributes overseas from local farmers in destination countries. This would have allowed the U.S. to provide more food for starving people for same amount of money. Bowing to the American farm lobby, Congress refused." (Editorial, "Pork Farm," National Review Online, 5/16/08)

The Baltimore Sun's Jay Hancock: "By approving the farm bill, the same Congress that decries tight supplies and painful prices in energy has intentionally inflicted the same forces on consumers of sugar and other food." "This, when food inflation is worse than at any time since 1990." (Jay Hancock, "Farm Bill Is Sweet For Big Sugar," The Baltimore Sun, 5/16/08)

The Las Vegas Review-Journal: "The $290 billion farm bill symbolizes everything that is wrong with Washington." "Members of Congress couldn't even bring themselves to seriously limit direct cash payments to millionaire farmers. Defenders of the measure say it would cap federal payments to individuals with more than $750,000 in annual farm income. But loopholes allow married farmers who make more than $1.5 million to still cash in." (Editorial, "Agricultural Handouts," The Las Vegas Review-Journal, 5/16/08)

The Des Moines [IA] Register: "Farm bill's potential cost 'off the charts.'" "Under a new program created by the bill, subsidies for corn alone could reach $10 billion a year nationwide if market prices dropped to $3.25 a bushel, a historically high level. Another $4 billion could be paid to soybean growers at a market price of $7 a bushel. This would push the price tag for the farm bill well over the $300 billion mark over the next five years. It was estimated by Congress to cost $289 billion over five years." (Philip Brasher, "Farm Bill's Potential Cost 'Off The Charts,'" The Des Moines [IA] Register, 5/16/08)

The Milwaukee [MN] Journal Sentinel: "Congress has passed wasteful legislation that will set farm policy on the wrong course for five more years." "President Bush has vowed to veto this congressional goody bag, and he should make good on that promise. ... Farm subsidies distort domestic markets by favoring large agribusiness concerns over family farmers and undercut the economies of poor nations and international trade talks." (Editorial, "A Missed Opportunity," The Milwaukee [MN] Journal Sentinel, 5/15/08)

The Indy [IN] Star: "[T]he president should kick this mess back to Capitol Hill with the message that taxpayers are fed up with wasteful spending." "The Bush administration wanted to be able to use foreign aid money to buy food at locations near where it's needed by starving people. That move would reduce transportation costs and allow foreign aid dollars to be stretched further. The bill instead continues a requirement that all food aid must be purchased from U.S. farms." (Editorial, "Goodies For Farmers, Bad News For Taxpayers," The Indy [IN] Star, 5/16/08)

The Rocky Mountain [CO] News: "It's indefensible to expect every American to subsidize the few who are doing fine." "President Bush still says he'll veto the measure anyway. We hope the president stands firm, despite the long odds of prevailing." (Editorial, "Still A Bad Bill," The Rocky Mountain [CO] News, 5/16/08)

"Lawmakers Missed An Opportunity To End The Gravy Train"

Environmental Working Group President Ken Cook: "Democrats are supposed to stand on principles of fairness and equity, not sell them. And today they sold them on the cheap." "In a period when crop prices and farm incomes are soaring to record levels, the continuation of bloated subsidies to the largest, most prosperous farms in the country can only be seen as a breathtaking cop-out on the part of congressional leaders." (Environmental Working Group, "Statement On House Passage of 2008 Farm Bill," Press Release, 5/14/08)

U.S. Chamber Of Commerce Executive Vice President For Government Affairs R. Bruce Josten: "The Farm Bill sends the wrong signal to U.S. trading partners." "The current system of farm subsidies, which is determined by crop, not poverty level or need, is inequitable and inefficient, and is hampering the U.S. ability to gain greater international market access through reduced tariffs and non-tariff trade barriers." (U.S. Chamber Of Commerce, Statement To Members Of Congress, Key Vote Alert, 5/13/08)

American Conservative Union Director of Government Relations Larry Hart: "Supporters of the Farm Bill claim they have 'reformed' the subsidy program." "But this bill will still allow married couples who farm and have adjusted gross income of $1.5 million to get taxpayer subsidies. Individuals who do not even farm but own the land and have incomes of $500,000 will also qualify." (Larry Hart, Letter To ACU Members, 5/13/08)

Taxpayers for Common Sense President Ryan Alexander: "Instead of reforming farm programs at a time of record profits in farm country, this bill actually increases subsidies and continues to allow millionaire farm households to receive handouts from taxpayers." "Lawmakers missed an opportunity to end the gravy train for fat cat farmers by not increasing the automatic giveaways in the direct payment system and capping payments to wealthy farmers." (Taxpayers for Common Sense, "Statement On House Passage Of Farm Bill Conference Report," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Council for Citizens Against Government Waste President Tom Schatz: "[T]he Farm Bill simply continues the present system that doles out huge payments to wealthy farmers whether they are needed or not." "With 2008 net farm income forecast to be $92 billion (51 percent above its 10-year average) this should have been the perfect opportunity to provide real reform of farm policy." (Council for Citizens Against Government Waste, "CCAGW Urges Veto Of Farm Bill," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Defenders Of Wildlife: "[T]he Conference Committee bill simply fails to provide the resources needed to address conservation needs on America's farmlands." (Defenders Of Wildlife, Letter To Congressional Leaders, 5/14/08)

Sugar Policy Alliance: "H.R. 2419 will make a bad sugar program even worse, jeopardizing American industries, workers and consumers." "The sugar program has always been touted as 'no net cost' to taxpayers, yet this costly new measure requires the government to give away taxpayer dollars." (Sugar Policy Alliance, "Farm Bill Jeopardizes American Industries, Workers And Consumers, U.S. Sugar Policy Falls Short," Press Release, 5/15/08)

Competitive Enterprise Institute Adjunct Fellow Fran Smith: "[T]axpayers and consumers will be paying the bills for a Farm Bill that increases farm subsidy programs, provides payments to millionaire farmers, and increases spending by about $20 billion, without any significant reform. [The farm bill] is a win for special interests, and a blow for taxpayers." (Competitive Enterprise Institute, "Farm Bill Vote A Loss For Consumers And Taxpayers," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Associated Builders and Contractors And Independent Electrical Contractors: "[W]e strongly oppose any expansion of the Davis-Bacon Act in this Report." "This has a disproportionate impact on minority-owned businesses, which tend to be smaller and nonunion companies. The toll is real: one study estimates Davis-Bacon reduces the number of minority workers in the construction industry by 25,000 each year." (Associated Builders and Contractors and Independent Electrical Contractors, Letter To Congressional Leaders, 5/13/08)

Grocery Manufacturers Association President And CEO Cal Dooley: "Congress increased subsidies for some farmers ... at a time of record food inflation." "Despite record farm prices and wealth, farm bill negotiators missed a rare opportunity to reform farm subsidies to help many more farmers, consumers and communities, and to meet our commitments to our trading partners." (Cal Dooley, Letter To Congressional Leaders, 5/13/08)

"It Is Clear That Elected Leaders In Washington Have Lost Sight Of What This Bill Means To So Many Making An Honest Living Providing Food For Our Nation"

Rep. Jeff Flake (R-AZ): "Despite record high commodity prices, Congress has squandered an opportunity to make any significant reforms in federal agriculture policy." "Not only is it market-distorting and fiscally irresponsible, but it complicates our current trade obligations and will continue sending taxpayer money to wealthy farmers and landowners." (Rep. Jeff Flake,"Congressman Flake Votes Against Deeply Flawed Farm Bill," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Rep. Ron Kind (D-WI) "This bill was well designed to avoid every opportunity for serious reform of wasteful, outdated subsidy programs while actually piling on additional layers of unnecessary spending." "My colleagues and the President should reject these sham reforms, and demand a farm bill that helps only the family farmers who need it, and is worth the confidence of the American taxpayer." (Rep. Ron Kind, "Farm Bill Reform Leaders Criticize Conference Report As Absent Meaningful Reform, Urge Rejection Of The Bill," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Rep. Paul Ryan (R-WI): "The conferees have squandered yet another opportunity for meaningful reform." "The farm bill should be focused on providing a safety net for family farmers in times of need, yet Congress has instead opted to subsidize the wealthy at a time when food prices are surging. Our agricultural policies are in desperate need of commonsense reform and this bill fails to deliver." (Rep. Paul Ryan, "Farm Bill Reform Leaders Criticize Conference Report As Absent Meaningful Reform, Urge Rejection Of The Bill," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR): "At a time when Americans are struggling to pay their mortgage, food and energy bills, we should help people who need it and not lavish resources on people who don't." "With record high farm prices, we should not give money to couples earning up to $1.5 million in farm income and $1 million in non-farm income when most farmers still get little or no help." (Rep. Earl Blumenauer, "Farm Bill Reform Leaders Criticize Conference Report As Absent Meaningful Reform, Urge Rejection Of The Bill," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Sen. Richard Lugar (R-IN): "Trade distortion is yet another major problem with the bill." "Surprisingly, instead of fixing the programs to shield U.S. farmers from these challenges, this Farm Bill continues these programs and provocatively increases the subsidy rates. ... Failure to move toward compliance will invite retaliatory tariffs that legally can be directed at any U.S. industry." (Sen. Richard Lugar, "Lugar Says The Fiscal, Food And Trade Policy Costs Of The Farm Bill 'Too Great And Too Damaging," Press Release, 5/14/08)

Sen. Tom Coburn (R-OK): "Congress has produced a bill that is bad for American agriculture, consumers and taxpayers." "As food and gas prices reach record highs and families are feeling the strain on their budgets, this bill does nothing to help improve the quality of life for farmers and hard-working families. Rather, this bill gives billions to huge conglomerates, special interest groups and inefficient nutrition programs." (Sen. Tom Coburn, "Dr. Coburn Rejects $300 Billion Giveaway To Bureaucrats And Lobbyists Masked As A Farm Bill," 5/15/08)