I was reading about the under-the-table tactics used to pass the House farm bill. Why, specifically, the usual tactic of ‘logrolling’ didn’t work as it has before. The best explanation comes from this quote.
The failure of the farm-bill charade, even if a temporary setback for the big spenders, is encouraging. Some 62 Republicans were willing to buck their leadership and reject business as usual, which must change. House leaders can start by coming back with two bills to be considered individually on their own merits. — The Washington Times.
Another problem is that some members of the House Agriculture committee have conflicts of interest. Some of those committee members, like our own Vicky Hartzler (R, MO-4), have family farms that would directly benefit from the crop subsidies. In any other endeavor, such a conflict would bar her from being a member on the committee. But…we’re talking government, here, where peonage and corruption afflicts both parties equally.
The Washington Times article does point out one interesting facet of the maneuvering to pass the bill. Old, well used and familiar tactics failed.
The blame for out-of-control federal spending belongs mostly on logrolling, the practice of congressmen trading positions on controversial issues to pass a bill. Sometimes it doesn’t work. The farm bill crashed Thursday in the House by 195 votes for, 234 against.
Other than the fact that farmers grow food, it doesn’t make sense to have food stamps and related welfare programs lumped in with, for example, dairy subsidies. Rep. Marlin Stutzman, Indiana Republican and a fourth-generation farmer, tried unsuccessfully to sever the two components into separate bills, where each could get the legislative scrutiny it deserves.
Mr. Stutzman made his case to the House Rules Committee on Tuesday. “The American people deserve an open and honest debate about farm and nutrition policy in this country,” said the congressman. “The only way that will happen is if we separate farm policy from nutrition policy.”
The panel decided not to let the House vote whether to divide the bill, as the pairing of the farm and food stamp bills was thought to be the key to final passage. Republicans from rural districts would vote for the farm subsidies to benefit their constituents, and liberal Democrats would vote for more food stamps. Logrolling requires maintaining spending high to keep both sides happy, which is a very bad thing for the taxpayers who pay for the compromise, usually through the nose. — The Washington Times.
So the Ag Committee relied on ‘business-as-usual’ to pass the bloated monstrosity. They failed to consider the opposition of the real ‘Pub conservatives and of the rabid “Spend! Spend! Spend!” dems who want to bribe constituents to continue to vote for their party. Whether the committee members passed a bill that would line their own pockets or if they voted to pass a bill to continue and expand welfare dependency, none of the committee members had the best interest of the country in mind.
We can thank those 62 ‘Pub conservatives who were willing to buck their party leadership for the failure of this piece of legislative trash.
Good on ya!