 |
||||||||
 |
||||||||
|
||||||||
|
Putnam wrestles with subsidy supportBy JOHN BALZ
© St. Petersburg Times, WASHINGTON -- Reps. Jerry Moran and Adam Putnam are both self-proclaimed free-market conservatives, but that makes little or no difference when it comes to protecting the farmers in their districts. It's clear why Moran favors federal farm supports. He represents wheat and corn farmers in Kansas' 1st District, who take home almost $270-million a year in federal crop subsidies -- more than any other district in America. Putnam's support for subsidies is harder to explain. He represents orange growers in Polk County, who don't get the same guarantees as their Midwest counterparts. But Putnam says he must support them to gain the backing of Midwestern members of Congress such as Moran for federal funds that go to Florida orange growers under a variety of other Agriculture Department programs. "It's a fragile coalition and there's a lot of folks who I've gone to asking for help for citrus and they don't have a stick of orangewood in their district," Putman said. "It's a vicious cycle." The result is that these two free marketers modify their philosophy whenever it comes to agriculture issues. And their conservative constituents do not object. Unlike most political debates, agriculture issues in Congress do not precipitate the classic clash between Democrats and Republicans. Regional conflicts rule, instead, and the deepest divisions are between those who would like to keep commodity crop subsidies -- like Moran -- and those who would like to see them curtailed -- like Putnam. Both Putnam and Moran voted yes when the House Agriculture Committee recently approved a farm bill that doubled limits on subsidies to grain, soybean and cotton producers in comparison to the last farm bill. Sugar, honey, wool and mohair supporters have kept or restored their subsidies. New ones have been added for cattle and hogs. Only one member voted against a bill that sends two-thirds of its budget to farmers in the form of direct payments or loan supports. While acknowledging his voting record in favor of subsidies for the Midwestern farmers, Putnam talks about the "fundamental unfairness" of current farm policy. "It does bother me, as a farmer, how much money we are putting into direct payments," Putnam said. "If you keep any one industry on life support for too long eventually somebody's going to come along and unplug it." Now there's talk, mostly from Midwestern states, about expanding free-trade agreements that Putnam says would wipe out his producers. This is where he draws the line. Putnam notes that Florida's orange producers are vulnerable to competition from Brazilian orange juice and that Florida tomato farmers have been decimated by imports of cheap Mexican imports. "If I knew the government was going to guarantee my mortgage was paid and I was guaranteed a target price and no matter how much over-production there was in our country, I would have been interested in opening up new markets too. But don't talk to Florida agriculture about the free market. We're the ones who have people go out of business when it freezes; there's no crop insurance."
 © 2006 • All Rights Reserved • Tampa Bay Times
490 First Avenue South • St. Petersburg, FL 33701 • 727-893-8111 
|
From the Times wire desk
From the AP |
