Thread: Bush vetoes farm bill (which looks like it'll pass anyway)

Scroll down to Pelosi's comment---isn't that the approximate number of IA's here?


http://ap.google.com/article/ALeqM5j6fC ... gD90Q5FQ00

Bush vetoes farm bill, saying it is irresponsible
By DEB RIECHMANN – 59 minutes ago

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Bush vetoed the $300 billion farm bill on Wednesday, calling it a tax increase on regular Americans at a time of high food prices in the face of a near-certain override by Congress.

It was the 10th veto of Bush's presidency. But since it passed both houses of Congress with veto-proof majorities, his action will likely be overridden.

The president believes the legislation is fiscally irresponsible and gives away too much money to wealthy farmers, yet his criticism rang hollow with lawmakers from both parties who voted for increased crop subsidies, food stamps for the poor and other goodies to help their districts in an election year.

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino said lawmakers should think twice before they override Bush's veto.

"Members are going to have to think about how they will explain these votes back in their districts at a time when prices are on the rise," she said. "People are not going to want to see their taxes increase."

Perino said the bill is $20 billion over the current baseline — "way too much to ask taxpayers right now."

"This bill is bloated," she said. "When grocery bills are on the rise, Congress is asking families to pay more in subsidies to wealthy farmers at a time of record farm profits."

In announcing Bush's veto, White House budget director Jim Nussle said Bush rejected it because it increases federal spending. He said Americans are frustrated with wasteful government spending and the funneling of taxpayer funds to pet projects. "This only worsens the frustration that they will feel," Nussle said, adding that Congress should extend the current farm bill.

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

House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., has said that the measure will drastically increase nutrition initiatives that will help 38 million U.S. families put food on their tables. She made it clear she would have preferred smaller farm subsidies, but deferred to some Democratic colleagues looking ahead to the fall campaign.

Some Republicans criticized the mostly bipartisan and popular bill because a few home-state pet causes, including tax breaks for Kentucky racehorse owners and additional aid for salmon fishermen in the Pacific Northwest.

The bill also would:

_Boost nutrition programs, including food stamps and emergency domestic food aid, by more than $10 billion over 10 years. It would expand a program to provide fresh fruits and vegetables to schoolchildren.

_Increase subsidies for certain crops, including fruits and vegetables excluded from previous farm bills.

_Extend dairy programs.

_Increase loan rates for sugar producers.

_Urge the government to buy surplus sugar and sell it to ethanol producers for use in a mixture with corn.

_Cut a per-gallon ethanol tax credit for refiners from 51 cents to 45 cents. The credit supports the blending of fuel with the corn-based additive. More money would go to cellulosic ethanol, made from plant matter.

_Require that meats and other fresh foods carry labels with their country of origin.

_Stop allowing farmers to collect subsidies for multiple farm businesses.

_Reopen a major discrimination case against the Agriculture Department. Thousands of black farmers who missed a deadline would get a chance to file claims alleging they were denied loans or other subsidies.

_Pay farmers for weather-related farm losses from a new $3.8 billion disaster relief fund

The president believes the legislation is fiscally irresponsible and gives away too much money to wealthy farmers, yet his criticism rang hollow with lawmakers from both parties who voted for increased crop subsidies, food stamps for the poor and other goodies to help their districts in an election year.

Believe it or not, even Bush is right on occasion. This proves beyond a doubt that a blind pig can find an acorn.

America does not have 300 Billion dollars in taxes to spare and this expenditure will only throw us deeper into generational debt, slavery, and economic chaos!

W

They can't override this veto without significant Republican support. Sigh. That's the sad part about the "it will pass anyway."

help 38 million U.S. families put food on their tables

Hmmmmmmmm...that damn near the number of illegal aliens here.

An additional $40 billion is for farm subsidies while almost $30 billion would go to farmers to idle their land and to other environmental programs.

What the heck are farm subsidies?
What is to idle your land? To do nothing?

Require that meats and other fresh foods carry labels with their country of origin.

I agree with this on everything sold. That way I could try to NEVER buy from China!

Originally Posted by WorriedAmerican

[quote:n95skcao]Require that meats and other fresh foods carry labels with their country of origin.

[/quote:n95skcao]

I believe that a law has been on the books for a number of years regarding this already but the USDA/FDA refuses to enforce it.

Mix-up throws House veto override in doubt

Action stalled, however, after the discovery that Congress had omitted a 34-page section of the bill when lawmakers sent the massive measure to the White House. That means Bush vetoed a different bill from the one Congress passed, leaving leaders scrambling to figure out whether it could become law.

Democrats hoped to pass the entire bill, again, on Thursday under expedited rules usually reserved for unopposed legislation. The correct version would then be sent to Bush for another expected veto.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_ ... _farm_bill

Action stalled, however, after the discovery that Congress had omitted a 34-page section of the bill when lawmakers sent the massive measure to the White House. That means Bush vetoed a different bill from the one Congress passed, leaving leaders scrambling to figure out whether it could become law.

Democrats hoped to pass the entire bill, again, on Thursday under expedited rules usually reserved for unopposed legislation. The correct version would then be sent to Bush for another expected veto.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20080522/ap_ ... _farm_bill

So, is this good for us here, or bad for us, if the one passed, goes into law without the 34 other pages? I'm confused ...