by Frank James
There are a probably a few wealthy recipients of farm subsidies today saying to themselves that it was nice while it lasted.
That's because in talking today about his plans to cut spending, President-elect Barack Obama cited a news report about wealthy farmers receiving government subsidies they weren't eligible for as an example of the kind of expenditure that could be ended.
It's safe to guess that now that Obama has mentioned this in such a high profile way, this will be a priority for whomever is the next Agriculture Secretary.
McClatchey's Michael Doyle wrote a piece based on the Government Accountability Office report that revealed the unnecessary spending.
An excerpt:
WASHINGTON -- Millionaire farmers continue to pluck crop subsidies they don't deserve, federal investigators say.
At least 2,702 farmers nationwide received subsidies between 2003 and 2006 even through they were making more than the $2.5 million gross income cutoff. The unwarranted payments totaled $49 million and exposed enduring Agriculture Department management problems, investigators concluded.
"USDA cannot be assured that millions of dollars in farm program payments it made are proper," the Government Accountability Office investigators noted in the report issued Monday.
In one case, investigators noted, "an individual with ownership interest in a professional sports franchise received a total of more than $200,000 in farm program payments for 2003, 2004, 2005 and 2006."
Other rich and unjustified crop subsidy recipients identified by investigators included "a top executive of a major financial services firm," a "founder and former executive of an insurance company" and a "former executive of a technology company."
The department's Farm Services Agency stated in its official audit response that it "made the best use of the resources available" and further stressed that the reported improper payments amounted to less than 1 percent of total crop subsidy payments.
To make the kind of budget cuts that would really offset the new spending Obama has said he's seeking to "jolt," (Obama's word) the economy, he needs to find hundreds of billions of dollars. Finding $49 million here and $49 million there doesn't get you there, though it's always a good idea not to waste money if you can help it.
Comments
I heard last year on C-SPAN that some wealthy family in Manhattan is getting a subsidy for land in Central Park they don't even own...they got grandfathered into something a dead relative owned. I was always taught that a dollar is a dollar. How many more wasteful expenditures are out there in other government departments?
Posted by: lochnessmonster | November 25, 2008 3:56 PM
Presumably Senator Obama was too busy running for president the last couple years to notice this, although as senator his job was to approve and oversee this spending.
But the bigger question is: what job does this guy Obama have with the incoming Clinton administration?
Posted by: Change You Can Believe In | November 25, 2008 5:46 PM
Yes, 'Change you can believe in"--assume you are correct.
SO WHAT?
Even if he's not as 'deserving' for having hit his head against a wall for years and years---as if that would make him more deserving of a great marketing camnpaign that (wait for it)
WON the election---SO WHAT?
He's doing things gradually so the economy doesn't tank until we can gradually reform a rotten economic system. He's calling back some of the military who quit in disgust. And he's hired the bill was too cautious in professional matters.
Posted by: And about the rest I DON'T CARE! | November 25, 2008 8:49 PM
Obama needs to take gov't subsidies away from millionaire oil execs and millionaire bankers and traders. The farmers are small potatos, and just an attempted diversion from Wall Street and big oil's plundering.
Posted by: Vivian | November 26, 2008 12:41 PM
"I don't care", you have a very appropriate moniker!
Facts you can't get around--Obama's been one of those in charge of the government the last 4 years. He's done nothing, introduced nothing, been a force for nothing in the senate. Except to promote himself for president.
Posted by: Change | November 27, 2008 10:10 AM