Here is part of the farm bill.  I read it and said that the farmers are getting rich off this and needs to be cut back.  Is this true?  Where are all the rich farmers?  I need to have my daughter marry one.  I do not know much about the Farm Bill but it seems good for the country. 

More information:

Senate vote overrides Bush veto of farm bill

WASHINGTON — With an 82-13 vote, the Senate Thursday completed the override of President Bush's veto of a comprehensive farm bill, shrugging off Republican concerns about an embarrassing legislative glitch and making the $290 billion bill the law of the land.

House GOP leaders continued to grumble that Democrats had violated the Constitution by pressing forward with the veto override after they discovered a section of the bill on trade policy had been inadvertently dropped from the version vetoed Wednesday.

But Democratic leaders said they had court precedent and constitutional scholars on their side.

"The veto override will have the force of law," said House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif.

Washington Sens. Patty Murray and Maria Cantwell, both Democrats, voted to override the veto.

Lawmakers said they would take up the farm law's trade section as a separate bill and pass it after their Memorial Day break.

About two-thirds of the law would pay for nutrition programs such as food stamps. About $40 billion is for farm subsidies and almost $30 billion would go to farmers to idle their land and for other environmental programs.

Question:  What does idle their land mean and if means not to work the land. Why would they do this?  Is that why food prices are also going up? 

Much of agri-business is NOT into crop rotation, so they go the fallow route and have gotten Congress to pay for it...

Crop rotation avoids a decrease in soil fertility, as growing the same crop repeated in the same place eventually depletes the soil of various nutrients. A crop that leaches the soil of one kind of nutrient is followed during the next growing season by a dissimilar crop that returns that nutrient to the soil or draws a different ratio of nutrients, for example, rices followed by cottons. By crop rotation farmers can keep their fields under continuous production, without the need to let them lie fallow, and reducing the need for artificial fertilizers, both of which can be expensive. Rotating crops add nutrients to the soils.

But in general, food prices are going up because fuel prices are going up, fertilizer prices have spiked, and seed prices have also increased in cost...as have all of the trucking activities that are related to getting the crops moved to the processors and then moved to retail stores...

For example, my cousin has more than $1million invested after planting 26 square miles i ND...now he has to wait to see if everything goes right...that's what I call a HIGH STAKES game...

Much of agri-business is NOT into crop rotation, so they go the fallow route and have gotten Congress to pay for it...

Crop rotation avoids a decrease in soil fertility, as growing the same crop repeated in the same place eventually depletes the soil of various nutrients. A crop that leaches the soil of one kind of nutrient is followed during the next growing season by a dissimilar crop that returns that nutrient to the soil or draws a different ratio of nutrients, for example, rices followed by cottons. By crop rotation farmers can keep their fields under continuous production, without the need to let them lie fallow, and reducing the need for artificial fertilizers, both of which can be expensive. Rotating crops add nutrients to the soils."

Crop rotation can mean leaving fallow land as well, here in Montana there are areas that cannot be in continual rotation (year to year crop) due to lack of moisure!  The idle land which is paid by federal gov't is namely CRP programs and programs that they are paid not to use the land.  We are NOT paid to leave our land fallow for rotation purposes, that is the only way we can have enough moisture left in the ground to have a crop the following year! Every area is different but I can only say what is happening here.  Yes, some very large farmers are getting wealthy with the farm programs, but for the small family operations there is no other way to keep ahead.  Even with the high prices our income/expense ratio is actually worse now than it was at $4 wheat. 

Crop rotation also aids in preventing some insects and soil diseases from spreading from one crop to another. Even the larger agricultural farms will practice a rotation since in increases yields signifigantly.

The farm bill is nothing more than an election year give away. Once again, congrss has seen fit to take YOUR money and give it someone else for no other reason than it helps re-election efforts. Farm incomes are at a all time high, granted that imputs are also high, thats still a poor reason to steal from one taxpayer ( you the guy who earned the money) and give to someone else (who didn't) President Bush was right to veto the bill but leave to the in your pocket politicians who are pretty free and easy with YOUR money.This is always bad for the country.

I think the part that is flawed is where the media comes into this equation showing farmers that make millions of dollars in subsidies.  Granted, there are those individuals that will do just that.  However, in my part of the country, the Farm Bill is helping many of these smaller producers to stay in business.  Agriculture is a vital part of our economy.  When local farmers are having a rough year, a big part of our local economy will feel the downfall.  The farmers in our area that are getting these subsidies are only making ends meet in most years.  Granted, right now we are seeing record prices.  At this point, we have a good supply of rain so far.  However, compared to last year with a late season freeze and then drought, it is time that the prices have increased to help bring them back out of the deficit the prior years has left them.  It is a shame to see that so many will go and talk badly about a bill that in the long run will help them.  When you look at the cost of our food in this country, it is considerably less than what others pay in other nations.  Also, look even closer to see that a big part of the farm bill is going toward food programs that have no ties with the American farmer that is outside producing a crop.  Personally, we have several government programs that are paying out to different groups each and every day.  However, I would rather see my tax dollars go to a group of individuals that get up before the sun and work into the night get a portion of my dollars than someone that does nothing but sit at home and draw unemployment.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080527/ap_on_bi_ge/food_inflation_winners

I am from Arkansas and we farm 1000 acres of rice/soybeans.This has been a long time coming.If our subsidies are cut,then,everyone else's should be,also.We're trying to make a profit,not go under doing so,and feeding the world in the process.(Not doing a good job of that,either.) I for one don't give a rat's hoot in hell what any of you think about "us rich farmers" and how government should eliminate subsidies.Maybe to the big boys Cargill,Bungee,and Monsanto,the god of agriculature.But to small farmers left over out of the '80's shakeout that lost a lot,and the recent loss of so many in our area when fuel took it's jump? Struggling around for years,and we can't even grow and keep back our own seed to plant,we have to do as we're told by Monsanto and others if we want to keep farming,and that includes the USDA.Go ahead and pop  off about it all you want to,but,I say it's about time.This is an extremely touchy topic with me so that is all I am going to say to anybody about it.I have to wonder what it is even doing on here to begin with.

"Nothing ever gets done unless it's done by a fanatic."Martin Sheen

CRG and Robdnorm.....As usual you all are on target. The Media is simply looking for "big splash" stories. Just watch the news "tease" lines...they seem to have very little to do with the actual story, and to me, it seems to be getting worse.

And maybe the yappers should take a lesson from the airlines who planned to make zillions after de-regulation.....and now the airlines have awakened to the fact that regulation was not such a bad thing.  Just like acreage allotments served a purpose.....if there were no subsidies and no fsa and no regulations at all, we might all be eating cotton fibre.....when market forces are allowed to rule unfettered, there would be shortages, excesses and prices would be wild......just my op which with $5 will get you a cup of coffee.....

when market forces are allowed to work...it just simply works.Nobody will starve, thats puff and nonsense ( vegetables and fruits are in plentiful supply and yet have no growing subsidy.Image that) Farming is like any other business,if you can't make enough money then you go out of business. Subsidies are usually allowing inefficent operation to continue. I can say this without malice as we are farmers. We do not take subsidies, we have to make our money the old fashioned way. Being dairy farmers, the price of milk has always had a floor to prevent from going lower than $9 per wt however in the past several years it has been above support mainly due to market demands which is what it ought to be. Allowing the market demand to dictate the price will result in higher prices in the long run and a healthier farming ecomony. ecomonies are always healthier when people are making money not being given money someone else has earned.

here is the thing- its taking money earned from one segment of the ecomony and giving it..I mean giving it...to someone else. Its bad business folks.

Unfortunately, with current economic conditions, including higher food costs, soaring energy prices and tumultuous transportation issues, this old adage is appropriate now more so than ever.

A Corn Flake’s Worth

There have been a lot of media coverage and opinion editorials in the past several months placing blame on various factors purportedly causing food prices to increase. Some of these news reports even go so far as to point the finger at farmers and ranchers for supposedly reaping the benefits of higher retail prices for food products.

In reality, transporting, processing and packaging farm products cost significantly more today compared to the past several years. Meanwhile, the farmer’s share of the retail food dollar has continued to hover around 25 percent since the 1970s.

One must only look at the cost of raw agricultural products compared to food that has been processed. For example, today, farmers receive $5.50 per bushel of corn, while the value of corn in each box of corn flakes averages 7.9 cents. When corn flakes cost approximately $3.30 for an 18-oz. box at the grocery store, that translates into the farmer getting less than 2 percent of the retail price.

The same can be seen with a loaf of bread that costs $1.78. As of the end of the first quarter of 2008, farmers received 16 cents for the wheat used to produce a typical 20-ounce loaf of bread, which translates into the farmer receiving 9 percent of the retail price for that loaf.

Past the Farm Gate

So, what is really driving the increase in food prices? For starters, runaway energy prices are a major contributor behind the higher retail cost of food. After many commodities leave the farm gate, high costs for energy, fuel and transportation are added and passed onto the consumer. Increased retail prices can especially be seen on highly processed foods.

Further, market demand for wheat and cheese remains strong both here at home and overseas, which has played a role in the recent increase in food prices. Such demand for these commodities is typically a significant contributing factor to the overall retail cost of food.

Farmers are price takers, not makers. This reality, coupled with higher production and transportation costs, has producers also feeling the deep economic impact of the present downturn.

Despite what the critics might say, farmers are still getting wholesale prices in a retail world.

I found this article from Farm Bureau and thought it was a good summation for most small farmers. 

This is one reason that you don't need subsidies.This has not been the case for the majority of grain farmers,however,and it costs us a bundle more because unlike us,your herd you isn't using fertilizer,they  are producing it.Grain/row crop farming is considerably more   cost-extensive than dairy/beef farming. Your price supports are more than what ours have been,also,the country uses a great deal of dairy products and doesn't import as we do grain and grain products.Can you imagine a country that IMPORTS rice,soybeans,ect when we've had piles of it lying on the ground in years past?

Well,that is going to change,and change soon.The American farmer is finally going to be revered as an important member of this country's economy,and the majority of people don't see us as being "takers" or welfare riders. Sorry you don't know what you're talking about but that's the way it is.

And maybe the yappers should take a lesson from the airlines who planned to make zillions after de-regulation.....and now the airlines have awakened to the fact that regulation was not such a bad thing.

Deregulation certainly worked on the energy bill that was "pork barreled" into law in 2000 by our illustrious Republican representatives in Texas - Tom DeLay and Phil Gramm who attached it in a late night 11,000 page submittal for law without debate nor even a vote.  And Enron was one of the largest supporters because they realized that they could manipulate energy futures just like they did in California to make HUGE profit.  Today the futures market is still making HUGE profits, except this time it's on the unregulated commodities market for OIL.

It's not "welfare." Welfare is for folks that don't work,and most farmers I know work their asses off from dark to dark.It is called price supports,and is  the difference between what farmers can sell their varying products for and a set price ceiling that the USDA determines.And it's not much,either.It is for those times,which are usually every year,that crop prices don't meet up with the current standards that someone else that doesn't have to spend the input has determined.(again,the USDA.) We who work don't consider it welfare or a handout.It's the difference between being able to continue on a family farm or being put out of business,THEN having to go on welfare.

If you consider what is spent in this country on welfare,food stamps,government housing,ect.for illegals and folks that are capable but won't work,having price supports that help farmers meet their expenses and stay in business is a small,small drop in the bucket in comparison.

It's nice to eat cheap food,isn't it? It's nice to be able to go to the store and pick out pretty much anything you would like to buy to eat.I personally like that .

Food stamp programs are one thing.....

Farming is another, entirely....the two should not be on the same bill....

If farmers go out of business....everybody is in immediate, soul searching trouble.

If food stamps go out of business.... a bunch of people are going to find a job, however uncomfortable, minimum wage it is .... maybe even working for a farmer..who does not even make minimum wage most days....

And, yep, I have taken food to people I knew could use the help... now if being a good neighbor goes out the window too... lots of heartache..

What I was trying to say is that why should they give food stamps out, and to me around where I live that is welfare. Why give to them and I was not trying to make a comparison by saying that giving to the farmers/ranchers is welfare. What I was trying to say was no food, what are the people who use welfare to take advantage of gonna do with all those stamps and no food if we the farmers/ranchers can't supply it. That's what I was trying to say, guess it didn't come out right..........I felt it was stupid for them to supply more to welfare to those who make it a generation after generation thing than support the nation's farmers/rancher that supply the food............

Also I was also trying to say, yes, it's there, the subsidiaries and there are lots of folks around here that abuse the subsides (sp) ,during hard times, that is out there to use when they need it. We have needed it tons of times, but don't ask for it we just take a hard year and go on to the next................

Food stamp programs are one thing.....

Farming is another, entirely....the two should not be on the same bill....

If farmers go out of business....everybody is in immediate, soul searching trouble.

If food stamps go out of business.... a bunch of people are going to find a job, however uncomfortable, minimum wage it is .... maybe even working for a farmer..who does not even make minimum wage most days....

And, yep, I have taken food to people I knew could use the help... now if being a good neighbor goes out the window too... lots of heartache..

Flyinghfarm,

This is kind of what I was trying to say, and you said it perfectly, guess Crowleyridge took it out of content to what I was saying. Just speaking my peace and backing myself up,   I know what it takes and how it feels to work my life to the bone, shoot, I run our ranch and take care of our cattle while my husband also works a full time job, a good hard job, the cattle has been in the family for years, something alot of families are throwing away with the next generation that comes in, don't want the ground or don't want to farm, sell it off to the next highest development company. Why would I say I myself am "welfare" or call subsidaries "welfare", like I said guess it was read or taken the wrong way......

Not a big deal.Like I said,I was wound up pretty much over another deal and the word "welfare" kinda jumped out at me,so,didn't read it well enough.Sorry for jumping to conclusions.You know that us farmers/ranchers can get pretty testy at times over things involving gov.programs.

hey,once several yrs ago,they were going to make us all repay money over some ridiculous thing,and had it not been for congressman Bill Alexander from our area,it would have happened! We'd been broke and out of business,too.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/afp/20080602/wl_afp/unfoodfaosummit http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080602/ap_on_bi_ge/commodities_review_1;_ylt=AgDKAzxxJycrzAfaev0OWXyROrgF

This is an old thread and I'm not trying to resurrect it or get another conflict going over the "farm bill." I received a letter from Riceland Foods and here is a quote from that letter:

Although critics of American agriculture still call it the "farm bill" only 12% of the projected cost of the bill goes to commodity programs.More than 2/3 of the $289 billion goes to nutrition and feeding programs.Conservation programs took 9% and crop insurance took 8%,leaving 3% for other programs.

Hey Crowley,

So if I"m understanding this correct, they are saying then that the farmers really don't get much of that money at all? LIke I feel it should. Help me out on this, if I read it and took it in correctly.

Love the info. you sent me on Crowley Ridge. I would love to come back there and explore your area on Josie of course. See if she can keep up with yalls horses! They sure are some true to breed animals!

CRG  I am glad to see this thread resurrected as this is one (imo) of the most important issues facing this Country, that is, crops and agriculture.  It finally rained here today.  Some of the corn was starting to hurt and part of the corn crop may be short anyway as a result.  Maybe next year those farmers will raise a couple of acres of tomatoes and just forget about corn.....seeing as how those are all rich farmers.  FSA has a limit on how many $$ any one farmer can collect per year.  Since the government controls much of the agriculture including how much one has to pay farm workers, is it really "welfare?"  If farm workers are unavailable and equipment say $250,000 for a cotton picker is unavailable due to lack of credit or money,  then what are you all going to eat?  What are you going to feed your horses?  Maybe we will be eating the horses......If there were a completely free and open market in agriculture, then there would be no way to ensure adequate supplies of commodities.  Just so you know, I was running the night shift of a cotton gin the year that cotton allotments came off.  Whole bunches of farmers planted every inch in cotton.  There was a record crop, prices went to the basement and a bunch of farmers were auctioned off by their creditors.....land, equipment, everything went on the block.  I guess those were the rich farmers the media keeps yapping about.

It is illegal for farmers to get together and plan what to plant;  this is conspiracy to fix prices. 

Food stamps were created so as to provide a market for farm products;  that is why they are under the USDA. 

Regulation can be a good thing.  Subsidies also can be a good thing.  Every good thing can be abused by some knot-head.  Remember that airlines do not pay the full cost of airports;  the federal government pays for and regulates air traffic control.  Amtrak has to pay the railroads over whose tracks they run for the right to use those rails and the rail traffic controllers who are not paid for by the fed.  Perhaps trucks should provide their own roads.  That would make them equal with the railroads who are responsible 100% for their rail.

So I recommend that everyone get ready to raise their own fuel, food and fiber.....a free market will not set you free;  it will enslave you.

End of sermon.

That's true,Rose.Food being a commodity that is traded just like oil,ect supply/demand determines what a farmer,rich or poor,is able to get for his products regardless of the costs of his input cost.Increase  of commodities pricing also translates into the increase of anything else that a farmer might use to plant crops with ESPECIALLY gas/diesel,which trickles down to fertilizer costs,ect.So  it's no free ride here by any means.

Cowpony,this has always been the case with the commodities programs in agriculture.Those percentages are and have been in place for a long time and it is only a fraction of the farm bill allocation that goes to counter-cyclical payments and the like for farmers.

BTW-anytime you are in the mood for a travel trip,you and Josie are more than welcome to come here and we'll show you a great time riding the Buffalo regions,ect of Arkansas! I'm sure Josie will be more than up to the task of keeping up with our bunch! (seeing as to how ours stay in the pasture most of the time.)