Quote:
|
Originally Posted by aceventura3
DC,
You put yourself in the position of defending the indefensible.
Now you say government policy of artificially keeping the prices of some farm commodities low has no impact on consumption patterns. Just for the record, it does. On top of that poor people are more responsive than the wealthy would be. If "government cheese" is free, poor people will be more inclined to eat "government cheese". If "government oranges" were free, poor people will be more inclined to eat "government oranges".
If after researching it, you admit the Farm bill is bad for American's no one will think less of you. I think the real problem is that people don't give this issue much or any thought, including our leaders in Washington.
|
ace. I am quite comfortable with my defense of accepting the bill as the best possible means of providing a critcally necessary increase in funding for food stamps and related nutrition programs in order to provide aid to more than 10 million Americans in need.
The additional changes in the bill of signficantly decreasing the $$ amount provided to wealthy farmers in the form of support subsidies, along with new limits and restrictions on recipients of those subsidies, make it even more acceptable.
As I noted...this was the only way to get an increase in essential programs to suport more than 10 million urban and rural poor and working class Americans.
You suggested a free standing bill would be better but there is no evidence or past record that Republicans would support such a bill.
The Republicans did not support a free standing bill to raise the minimum wage. It had to be added to an emegency supplement bill in order to be enacted.
They did not support a veto-proof extension of the State Childrens Health Program at any increased level of funding, beyond inflationary adjustments, which resulted in fewer children of working class families served.
They opposed a free-standing bill to extend the Family Medical Leave Act to enable workers to provide longer term caring for a wounded vet returning from Iraq.
They have stalled in committee a free standing bill to provide emergency unemployment compensation in states with chronically high and long-term unemployment...
So...I am comfortable with my defense of the only bill that would have increased food stamps and nutrition programs this year.
It would not have been my first choice to achieve that goal...but there are times when the political reality requires that compromises and accommodations be made to achieve the same goal.
But thanks for your concern with my reputation.
One final thought....
For someone who puts himself in the position of "defending the indefensible" invasion and occupation of Iraq...at a cost of over $1/2 TRILLION (to date), 4,000+ American casualties, 25,000+ American wounded, nearly 100,000 Iraqi dead, more than 4 millions Iraqis displaced from their homes and NO END IN SIGHT....I find it it is just a tad arrogant and condescencing to question what others believe is defensible.
I would prefer to suggest that we have honestly held policy differences.