Votes for farm subsidies weren't enough to save Democratic lawmakers, subsidy skeptics note

Support for continued farm subsidies in the 2008 Farm Bill wasn't enough to save many rural Democratic representatives in last week's elections. The Environmental Working Group notes that 46 seats switched to Republican "in rural districts that rank in the top half in EWG’s farm subsidy database," writes David DeGennaro, an agricultural analyst for EWG, which has made a name for itself by tracking farm subsidies. "In every single one of those races, incumbent Democrats who were in office in 2008 supported the last Farm Bill and the generous subsidy structure that brought billions of dollars home to their districts."

"Conventional wisdom dictates that House members from rural, agricultural areas – and particularly those who sit on the all-important committee – had better support a Farm Bill that maximizes these subsidy payouts or risk losing their seats," DeGennaro writes. "Tuesday’s results, however, clearly refute the notion that blind service to agribusiness guarantees re-election. If anything, they are a loud signal that there is negligible political benefit to toeing the agribusiness and subsidy lobby line." DeGennaro argues that the Democratic caucus has a chance to advocate for a more progressive agriculture agenda when replacing the outgoing Democrats on the Agriculture Committee.

 Rep. Frank Lucas of Oklahoma is expected to become committee chairman. "Lucas has made clear that direct payments – billions every year in farm subsidies that go out automatically to the largest farm operations regardless of need – are untouchable," DeGennaro writes. EWG wants the GOP to carry its cut-spending mantra to agriculture, arguing that "Voters, it seems, will thank them." (Read more)

Click here for large version of EWG graphic.