Thankfully, something coming out of Washington is good news.

This aspect of income for farmers, should have been studied more carefully,by those who approved this legislation, prior to this date.

Our farmers deserve fair prices for their production, and helped when there is a diaster in certain areas, but it should be studied on an individual basis.

Thank you!

Thankfully, something coming out of Washington is good news.

This aspect of income for farmers, should have been studied more carefully,by those who approved this legislation, prior to this date.

Our farmers deserve fair prices for their production, and helped when there is a diaster in certain areas, but it should be studied on an individual basis.

Thank you!

The true family farm should benefit from farm subsidies not the larger famers or the corporate farmers. We are family farmers, I came from a farm and married a farmer. Our people came to Kansas in 1867 and we are still farming. Do not blame the inflated food and fuel prices on the farmers. Our greatest competition to purchase land is the corporate farm, doctors and other professionals.

I would like to respond to some of the comments on your website. Am I approved?

My husband is a 4th generation farmer in Knox County Tx. This site lists him as having colleced over a million dollars in the past decade. I can tell you that million dollars is NOT in my pocket. Our overhead costs are in 2007 prices while the prices our crops earn are the same as they were 50 years ago. There is no way to balance out with out susidies. If minimum wage and fuel prices go up, I don't know what will happen next year. It's not as if these guys are Corporate CEO's getting multimillion dollar stock options and retirement and benefits all onthe backs of their workers and stockholders. There is very little profit at the end of the year, if any, and when there is profit it goes back into the farm towards equipment and operational costs. The farmer isn't the bad guy, he's just trying to make an honest living on the land. You're focused in the wrong area.

ANDI HARRIS: Thanks for your comment. Here's an earlier post by me that discusses some of the point you raise--COOK
http://www.mulchblog.com/2007/05/farm_subsidies_just_passing_th.php

thank you for letting the public know how the poor farmers have been ripping off the american tax payer for years. yes you the family farm. Billions of tax dollars going to subsidies farmers who don't make a profit. Lets subsidies all small business and be fair or cut them all out. I really don't have much use for soybeans, tobacco, etc., most of my food stuff seems to come from foriegn countries.

Why is it that all of the farmer payments are on here, but the people on welfare come out of the same ag budget and are not recognized. This isn't right, its a two way street all the info should be released!! Lets be fair here

CHASE:

I responded to this very point in an earlier blog entry, "Why Doesn't EWG Publish The Names Of Food Stamp Recipients?". It's here:

http://www.mulchblog.com/2007/03/why_dont_we_publish_the_names.php

--COOK

I think it is well and good that these farmers are getting help, but how about the chicken growers that feed a multitude of people and get no help whatsoever???

We are being put out of business by the USDA while our neighbors are getting rich!

The USDA corruption is very apparent when you veiw
your web site.

While I agree that there needs to be some changes made in the forthcoming Farm Bill... those changes need to be expansion of crops that are eligible to receive subsidies, or frankly going back to the market system used by England in the 16th Century where no middlemen or storage of grain to hold out for higher priced were allowed until all the "common folk" bought from the farmers. They removed most governement controls and just monitored weights and measures and actually had a fair market.

My problem with the information on your database is that it really is somewhat misleading. If you just do some simple research on Balmoral Farming Partnership, the #1 receipient with $7,959,777 over 2003 - 2005, you will see that they average $750,000 in sales each year, not income. The way your information is presented you think that these people are just pocketing money and doing nothing... what about the costs associated, rising fuel prices, the cost of irrigation. Louisiana needs the nearly $1Billion in agriculture a year to survive... if nearly $8Million over two years halped bring in $2 Billion I would say that is a pretty solid ROI. From what I can see through simple web research is that Balmoral is a partnership that was created to help leverage the costs and productivity of farming from each individual to a larger entity. It really is a functioning family farm or at least a group of functional family farms. I fully expected to see ADM or some entity like that at the top of the list. While this information is good, it takes some due diligence to really get the whole truth.

No Farms No Food!

How can a husband and wife recieve benefits when only one is farming while the other works at a public job all day???

OPAL: If they register with USDA as a couple for the farm, each is entitled to a share of the benefits the farm can receive. --COOK

How can I get these benifits we raise registered angus cattle I have not received any checks in the mail but acording to you web site all my neighbors have

DENNIS: Paul Cook and Edward Cook, my late uncle and cousin, asked the same question, as they also raised black angus in a cow-calf operatoin around Roselle, Missouri.

The answer is: the commodity subsidies only benefit crop farmers, and 90 percent of the money goes to just 5 crops: corn, cotton, wheat, rice, and soybeans.

You could qualify for conservation programs, like EQIP. But there's never enough money left over to fund all the applications because it all goes to the commodity crops.

Thanks for your post.

Well I wish you all would get to the real point of the problem. Benifits should only be for true family farms and there needs to be a income cap. If you are over the cap you don't get help. But folks I hope you relize that if we don't have a way of helping family farms we as a country will be in a world of hurt. I hear people complaining about the high cost of fuel but we keep burning it. I wonder what will happen when subsidies for the farms stop and a loaf of bread costs $10.00 or when a package of hamberger costs $15.00 a pound. I noticed one comment about getting all of our food imported. Do you really want to trust other countrys to feed you? Do you want to trust the safty of our food to China, Mexico, South America, or even worse the middle east? Start wakeing up folks, Yes our present system is screwed up but you had better think long and hard before you jump to other systems. We as a country are spoiled. Well guess what sometimes you can't have perfect. If you want to really help the farms and ranches of this country get off your ass and go out and meet these people. Build relationships with your local farmers and ranchers. Buy directly from them and get quit doing business with the corprate giants. Learn how to buy and process your own meat, and veggies with out all the pretty packageing. A lot of farm folks would help you if you gave them the chance. Go out and see the issues on the ground and quit trusting groups that are trying to tear down good folks that just want to make a good living just like you. Intead of spending who knows how much on video games and computers go out and help a farmer harvest the crops. Go out and lend a hand with fenceing, irrigation, weed control, terrace maintenance. Go out and walk in a true farmer and ranchers boots and see what the real world is about. Try makeing a living off the land again. Untill you have been in those shoes most of you don't have a right to complain. Start being a part of the solution instead of the problem.

Thanks for the Database.

We own a small farm and have never received a penny from the Taxpayers.

I have just spent the morning checking out how much money my friends & neighbors have made in farm & milk subsidies.

My neighbors would be completely mortified to to find out that this is readily available Public Information.

I'm looking at your database and wondering how so many people in my county that do not farm (but own small rural acreages) can be collecting subsidies. Several of my neighbors who I KNOW do not farm crops or livestock are collecting $, as well as many individuals who live in the city limits. How can this be?

The fundamental truth is that a free capitalist economy should have as few subsidies as possible. A subsidy is an economic tool to tilt the "level playing field" and make it crooked. What this does in the case of commodity crops is to force the economy to OVERPRODUCE. This is inefficient in several ways, but to put it plainly, the taxpayers pay big farms to overproduce corn and soy, which ADM and other corporations turn into high-fructose corn syrup and hydrogenated soybean oil. Coca cola, Frito Lay, and McDonalds turn those into junk food, which is aggressively marketed to our kids. We (some of whom use food stamps) buy this stuff and get obesity, diabetes, and heart disease.

This is INSANITY. But as long as corporations, big farms, and lobbyists can get congress to shovel our money to them, it will not stop.

Would seem that if you have subsidies then you have too much of something,can't reach profit. What happened to supply and demand, many farms in fact should go out of business. Who subsides the shoe store?,restaurant?, and many more businesses. Bush was going to resolve this problem, yes he sure did!

Is the subsidy paid so that nothing will be planted on that land? Is the land used for something else? Like farming another type of crop? This seems to be a waste of the land.

LEON: It depends on the subsidy. For the category called direct payments (or "fixed direct payments") there is no requirement to plant the land at all in order to receive payments, which total $5.2 billion per year. These payments are made regardless of market prices or incomes. --COOK

Believe it or not the Farm Subsidy protects the small farmer most. If subsidies were eliminated large corporate farms would be much more efficient and be able to squash other small farmers who currently rent out their small farms to others who can collect a larger subsidy by farming larger areas. I know many farmers on the list and I think its silly to be to envious when the rest of our nation is prospering so much in so many areas. Maybe the subsidy could be curtailed to so much a year such as 100,000, but just remember if it goes away completely many small farmers may be forced to sell out.

As a country we need to make sure that we are supporting LOCAL farming in all states. As a country we must have an ample, safe, and nutrious food supply. We must stop supporting tobacco and other crops that do not meet this goal. The 2007 farm bill must support and encourage organic farming in order to produce safe and nutrious foods that do not pollute our water and depleat our soils - they can not be passed our in this bill. We must provide our LOCAL farmers in all states with income levels that will allow them to live through tough times and allow them to hold their heads high in their community.

I would like to comment that I am included on your list although it's toward the bottom of the list. I have very mixed emotions about the farm bill as I have about all federal government programs. Before farmers are asked to fall on the sword to balance the budget, I think some things should be brought up. I believe that monies spent on ag this year are about 16 billion. If I'm not mistaken we are spending 1 billion + per DAY on the war in Iraq. I'd rather spend my money at home. On the other hand, I have experienced the effects of the farm program i.e. increased cash rents, loss of community among others. The American public has so far chosen to subsidize ag so that they can have the lowest prices for their food in the world. I know that vegetable producers receive no subsidy but what is the effect of cheap corn on meat production? What about federal subsidies for ethanol? For the oil industry? I think before making 1 segment of our economy a whipping boy, all subsidies should be put on the table. I'd venture that when all subsidies are considered especially oil and defense people will find that what is spent on agriculture, right or wrong, pales in comparison.

MR. BROWN: Well said--fair points all. We don't propose that only farm subsidies come under scrutiny. We've challenged others--like royalty-free hardrock mining, nuclear energy, and many others. But we still think there is merit in taking a hard look at how we subsidize, and who, within agriculture. Society can surely have a smarter, fairer, more productive investment portfolio in farmers and rural America than the list you see on our Web site. Thanks for the post.--COOK

This site has provided some interesting information over the last two years. As a small vegetable farmer in the middle of a large dairy are I find things very interesting. If farming is a business then why are there subsidies? I mean the capitalistic way is either you make a profit or go out of business. At least thats what I suppose they teach you in ag school. Oddly the real world doesn't operate that way. I find the statement "no farmers, no food", in light of US farmers is rather out of date. If you look at the USDA import/export site you will see that there is virtually no product produced in the USA that cannot be purchased somewhere else in the world. If anybody has been paying attention our food import are steadily rising as are Canadas and other places. As to cheap food, we really don't have what you think we do. The Leopold Center in Iowa did a study some time ago and when you factor in the cost to move food both in terms of money and energy it is no longer cheap. Food now moves an average of 1500 miles from producer to retailer. That is not cheap from todays energy costs. This country needs to forget subsidies and people need to understand the real cost of food. We need to understand that if you pay the real price of food it will equal your mortgage payment. OK that is a bit of exageration but you get the point. Instead consumers need to understand that what you pay in the store AND what comes out of your tax dollar is the real cost of food! I am also amazed that congresional representatives can make it sound like half the nation must be farmers. Farmers make up only about 1% of the population yet they are the only group I know that can get this much money from congress with so few people. I could be wrong. In looking at my own County, (Jefferson,NY), I was amazed to see how many people are recieving subsidies that no longer farm their land or raise the crop they are being paid for but rent it to some of the larger farmers listed. Well this could go on and on but I'll quit here.

I haven't entirely covered this issue on this website therefore this might be a dumb question but what are the solutions? It's pretty easy to identify a problem but how does this one get solved? Specifics please.

I would like to know how a farmer becomes eligible for the farm subsdiy programs, and what the requqirements are.

Thank you

Carol Killday

It seems like all the ground that can be farmed should be. Ground not fit for farming put into wildlife conservation. U.S. has not had any problem selling crops to foreign nations, therefore farm as much ground as can be farmed. Paying for ground not to be farmed is ridiculous. Especially when I see many of these farmers living exceptionally well. There is no comparison to families who have children, and parents are not making a decent living wage.Many of these farmers wives do not work outside the home, nor do they drive a tractor. Most homes with working parents don't have that luxury. If they want a home and they want their kids to go to college, they both must work. Granted there are welfare loafers and that system needs better policing also but this subsidy system is outrageous!

My husband is a 4th generation farmer in Gilroy, CA. This site lists him as having colleced over 700,000 dollars in the past decade. I can tell you that money is NOT in my pocket. Our overhead costs are in 2007 prices while the prices our crops earn are the same as they were 50 years ago. There is no way to balance out with out susidies. Fuel prices, as well as PGE prices are continuously going and I don't know how we will be able to keep farming. In my area, the people want to keep farm land and not allow us to sell to developers, but how else can we survive. There is very little profit at the end of the year, if any, and when there is profit it goes back into the farm towards equipment and operational costs. The farmer isn't the bad guy, he's just trying to make an honest living on the land. You're focused in the wrong area.

MARY: Good comment.

We don't think of farmers as "the bad guy" but we do disagree with the subsidy policy that puts so much of the support in the hands of so few. I don't think the subsidy levels you describe above don't fall into that category. We do, however, think that direct payments in times of high prices are unfair and unnecessary and wasteful of taxpayers' money. That may not be the case for the crops you grow, but it is the case now for corn and soybeans. We should not be giving corn farmers $2 billion this year on top of the $40+ billion they'll earn in the market. Not when we have so many other needs in rural areas.

The fact that subsidies are "not in your pocket" or do not represent profits, etcetera, does change the fact that they are government payments to offset business expenses. We don't do that for other businesses and it is fair to ask why we do it in such an uneven way for farmers--including the 90 percent in CA who collect no farm bill subsidy payments.--COOK

We are cattle producers and have not received subsidies. However we have received almost $100,000 from USDA for various disasters and conservation improvements. I am a taxpayer and I plan on getting every dime I'm entitled to receive. The government helped me cross fence land for better grazing, the government helped me clean up pasture after the devistation of Hurricane Katrina, the government helped improve soil conditions by footing the bill on lime, the government helped with loss of hay production from drought....NOTICE I said helped. We did endure some of the financial burden but the majority was paid for by USDA.

Do I feel needy, no. Do I feel it benefits society? Not sure but I do know that our family, including 2 children ages 16 and 4, work our behinds off to remain a very small family farm.

I wish there were a beef subsidy. When you pay the high prices in the grocery store, you aren't giving all that to farmers. I WISH I got half the price that's marked even on ground beef. We'd be rich and I woundn't need USDA money. I wouldn't be searching for any crumb that's available to help our family.

Oh while rambling...I agree that there are people making a killing on subsidies. However when rich people get the fat cut it always trickles down to the little man. The little man isn't lining the pockets of politicians. So...Let the greedy be greedy and I'll just settle for their crumbs.

I have an idea, instead of posting just the commodity subsidies amount. Why don't you post the individual w2 statment next to it. You can't. Why because it will disprove your point. Another interesting point.. At first glance most don't realize that many of your top paided on your database are not indiviuals but groups (family or associates that have pulled thier resources). Instead of going after the farm and ranch, go after the middle men, thats where the true mark up and miss use is. Better idea, go buy three hundred acres and try to make it pay for its self and support your family. After two years report back and let me know how it works out.

what ever happen to "free market"or "capitalism".if these farmer want to live off the system and be controlled by the government then maybe they should move to russia and let the good ole' U.S.A be free!

how can the small farmer keep going we need all the help that can be provided just to survive GREED IN THE USA IS ALIVE AND WELL! AMERICA SHOULD NOT 1 PERSON BE POOR IN AMERICA THERE IS ENOUGH MONEY WASTED, STOLEN FROM THE HONEST WORKING TAX-PAYERS FOR EVERY ONE TO LIVE ON
COUNT UP ALL THE REVENUE THE US GOV'T HAS RECEIVED IN THE LAST 10 YEARS I CAN GUARANTEE THAT EVERY LIVING USA CITIZEN/DIVIDED AMONG US ALL WOULD PUT US ON EASY STREET UNTIL THE LORD'S RETURN AND WE DON'T KNOW WHEN THAT IS

How much does President Bush, Vice president Cheney & Rumsfeld get for their farms.

MR. SKEEN: We know of no subsidies for them--but you may know more about their properties and therefore be in a better position to look them up on our Website.--COOK

Are you saying my father (who works longer and harder hours than any of you desk jockeys) doesn't deserve his $5,900 per year disaster payment? Don't gripe too loudly with your mouth full.

Stars and Strips: EWG has supported weather-related disaster aid for the past two years, but we think the system is broken. Here's what we said last year:

As we did earlier this year, EWG supports reasonable disaster aid for farmers and ranchers with proven, weather-related losses, unless provision of that assistance entails offsetting cuts to conservation, nutrition, rural development or other non-commodity program funds that have been repeatedly slashed by Congress for years.

EWG continues to oppose proposals to include additional funds for subsidy crop farmers-and only subsidy crop farmers-in the form of a 30 percent increase in their fixed direct crop subsidy payments, for the supposed purpose of reimbursing them for elevated energy costs in 2005 and 2006. This energy aid is patently unfair to the vast majority of American farmers and ranchers who not only would not qualify for it, but who do not receive the underlying subsidies to which this "energy assistance" would be added.

That said, let me assure you, Stars and Strips, that we all know that the only people in America whose work is worthy, and farmers are the only people who work hard. In a perfect world, U.S. taxpayers would just shut up and send you money. In the real world, there are two words taxpayers will never hear from a subsidized farmer: Thank you.

It wouldn't be so bad, but the farmers lie about what they are getting. This site sets the record straight. Go up to a farmer in your communtiy driving a Ford 500 or 1 of 3 new pickups bought in the last year, and ask him how his business is. He will tell you he is about to go broke. One look at this website will tell you that he is a liar. Plain and simple. All that us honest hard working tax paying Americans want is an honest answer out of someone. 75% of the farmland is in CRP, yet they claim they are still farmers. I guess being a farmer is constituted by looking in the mailbox every October for your yearly lottery check. Here is my idea of inequity. Make all of the farmers who receive these handouts to go to a public money mangement course to see how they can operate on what they make vs what is given to them. I also would like to see each media outlet in each communtiy publish a list of what each farmer in its area receives each year. That way, when the schools and other non-profit organizations are looking for support, they can go to where the money is. Not the business man who is trying to meet payroll, but to the farmer who got his subsidy check for the published amount. As for bitching with our mouth full, if we had to eat what was raised in our county, we would go hungry. CRP grass and wheat that is plowed under every year will not go far on anyone's table.

Are there any sucessful farmers? Do all farmers think their job is too hard and low paying or do some farmers still enjoy their choice of job? The subsides are paid by me and I deserve to know who is getting my money and how it is spent.

Quoting the above article.
"These 1,112,668 individuals (72 percent of individual beneficiaries) have received $19.8 billion in subsidy payments (57 percent of crop subsidies), averaging $17,777 apiece over the three years ($5,900 per year)." This is the part of the subsidy that is going to the real farmers. The other part is just thinly disquised bribery to keep the Rich rich and the rest of us struggling to pay for it. Don't blame the hard working farmers because we are stupid enough to pay people not to work.

AMEN! I couldn't believe that my so much of my tax dollars were going to my neighboring farmers who always cry how POOR they are. Some have gotten a million $ in 10 years. I'd sure like subsidies to cut hair when I'm slow. People always need haircuts! Congress better wake up & smell the scam.

First of all, I haven't seen you list the definition of "farmer" or "rancher" that you are using on this website. Are you using the Bureau of Ag Statistics definition? Are you using the Internal Revenue Service's definition? Someone else's or have you made up your own, and if so, what is it? Being a "farmer" or "rancher" and not being one can be split by a very gray line. If an individual owns farmable land, are they a farmer? Then everyone who owns an acreage and works in town is a farmer. If an individual owns livestock, are they a farmer? Then every city dweller who owns a horse that is boarded in the country and they go out and ride it once a month is a farmer. Is every one who raises and generates income from the sale of their raised farm commodities a farmer? Then every Mom and Pop that sells extra garden produce at the local farmer's market is a farmer. Thus, I am not sure everyone would be happy with your mission statement of "spreading the wealth of government subsidies among all farmers." Let's take a look at what you may be calling a "small farmer." Several comments have been made that fruit and vegetable farmers don't get subsidies. Educate me, but I am willing to bet that a fruit or vegetable producer's gross per acre is much greater than a "staple" crop farmer and although your crop is probably more labor intense (thus the inability for a "family" farm to be as large as a "staple" crop farm) and you probably have more preproductive expense or other expenses that "staple" crop farmers have, I'm guessing that your margins are not as narrow as a "staple" crop farmer. For clarification, I am calling "staple" crops corn, beans, wheat, barley, oats, and other subsidized crops. If your margins are as narrow, and in your crop industry as a whole, then by all means something should be done. A few livestock producers (I assume solely feeding livestock producers, the cow-calf producer noted how he received some payments) stated that they don't receive a subsidy. Well, the cheaper feed you bought and put in the feedbunk was cheaper because of a subsidy, so subsidies do positively affect your bottom line. It is interesting reading these replies. There are some posts from farmers who are trying to educate their nonfarm neighbors that 'No, the amount posted here isn't the amount in my checkbook!' Many of the posts from the non agriculture sector we need to understand (but educate) that they aren't aware of the situation and what it takes to farm and the capital it requires. If a crop is subsidized, it is because the vast majority of the farmers who produce that crop can't produce it at the price the farmer is 'offered' for it. It is a whole lot cheaper for the government to subsidize the farmer and enable him/her to survive with lower prices for their commodity than to allow the grain elevator to pay more for the crop. Remember the rule of thumb, many manufacturers/processors take their cost of what is coming in the back door and double the price going out the front door. Well, it is cheaper subsidizing the source of the commodity than continuing to double the price of an originally higher priced raw commodity. Note that one of the responses states how much more is paid on the food stamp program in comparison to farm subsidies. If the government allowed the grain to be sold at the price the farmer needs to be profitable, the food stamp program would not only be astronomically higher because of a much higher cost of food for those already on the program, but more people would qualify for the program as well. There are a couple of posts I read that I do need to flat out rebuke. One is the individual who believes there is enough grain grown in other parts of the world and that the USA does not need to produce any farm commodities to feed this country or the world. O.K., it appears that there are some people out there who know nothing about the agricultural world or population. The other is the individual who compared the purchase of a [used] $180,000 combine to purchasing a condo. Bless his/her heart for coming up with an item they might purchase with a cost comparison to one piece of machinery a farmer uses in his operation 2-4 weeks out of the year, but that's about as far as the comparison goes! If it is taken care of, 5-6 years down the road that $180,000 combine is worth $30-40,000 (maybe). The combine is only going to provide a roof over the farmer's head in redneck jokes on the internet. The $200,000 inner city condo will provide the individual with a roof over their head for 30 years and then if he/she sells in an up market, it will sell for $400,000. There is just no comparison.

Let me clarify who I am and where I am coming from. I am not a farmer. I do not buy farm commodities from farmers or sell inputs or equipment to farmers. I live in a farming community in the Midwest and am well aware of the financial spot the farmer is in.

I would like to share an experience with my fellow city dwellers who believe it is unfair for farmers to receive subsidies when their lifestyle is apparently unsubsidized. In the past few months I visited one of this country's large cities. Not wanting to experience the cost of taxifares (I assume 20 bucks won't go very far in a taxi!) I chose to purchase a week long metro fare pass. I believe it cost $21.50 or $22.50. It amazed me every time I took the subway, the cost it must have been digging all those tunnels, the cost of all that concrete, and the operational cost. There had to be 5 or 6 employees at every stop(that I could see), and I hope there was someone running each one of those trains! The thought of the length and weight of all those trains, and how much torque (i.e. electricity) it must take each time each one of those trains goes from a complete stop to cruising speed. Not to mention the lights and ventilation. Now it's crowded at rush hour, but I was there when there wasn't two dozen people waiting to get on the train as well. Do people really believe it only costs mass transit systems a couple of dollars to transport an individual across the city? Do they really believe that their lives are not subsidized by the government, not only by inner city mass transportation as I have mentioned here, but all the roads and railroads to transport the agricultural goods from the grower to the inner city? Be careful before you cry wolf!

if it was not for this site my husband wouldn't have found out he was part of a corporation. for sixteen years he has been receiving money in his name to benefit someone else. the fsa office is to blame. i'm for farmers having help, i just believe procedures set in place should be followed excuse me enforced.

I think it is time for the farmers to play catch up with the current american economy. I am from Wisconsin and know alot of farmers and respect there hard working ethicacy and determination, but lets face it folks its a dog eat dog world and government hand outs are only hurting us. These hand outs are a great place for the crooked politicician to hind out and take his share its an out rage. Why should it be fair to give money to large cooperate farmers when they are the ones setting the bar for efficient farming and making it harder and harder for the small farmer to compete, who recieves little or no halp, its simply gone way to far. All other cooperations are either u keep up with technology and become efficient or ur done. If farming would have been treated the same way without the government sticking there brainless nose in it the same thing would have happened, there would be a large group of efficeint low cost producing farmers and the rest would be done, I know it sounds cruel and mean but its the truth. My stepdad is a self employed mechanic and would it make any sense at all if he could not effitiantly move cars through the shop that the government should reward and try to keep him floating by, think about this people STOP GIVING AWAY MONEY TOO THE RICH FARMER AND THE INEFFICEINT FARMER there is an equiliberium that needs to be reached.

Farmers are engaged in the biggest welfare racket in our history. How can they even sleep at night. The only disaster that the farmer has experienced this year, is not being able to get the new Z-71 chevrolet truck in tobacco green. Listen all you poor mouth farmers, if you can't run your farm and make a profit then change you lifestyle or get out of business. Why is it everytime a farmer looses a dollar they go crying to their congressman about we can't make it. The taxpayers have been keeping your sorry tails up all these years with subsidies and grants and bail out money. Find another JOB because you suck at farming. I'm tired of paying for your bills. And cigarettes kills how many people a day? Um !!! (400,000 per day).

If taxpayer subsidies are in fact allowing smaller, "less efficient" farmers to stay in business and remain competitive with larger corporations who can offer those commodities at lower prices, would we really be better off without them? I don't think so. Most food travels thousands of miles between the farm where it's grown and the home where it's eaten, and between the farm equipment, petroleum-based fertilizers, packaging and transporting it now takes about 10 Calories of fossil fuel to produce 1 Calorie of food. With oil at more than $92 a barrel and worldwide production having pretty much definitely peaked by now, it's not hard to imagine that whole system falling apart to the point where 20 years from now it will be a huge luxury to eat anything grown more than 50 miles or so from your home. Can't get orange juice in Kansas, or potatoes in Florida? too bad. We need small farms throughout the country to prosper more than just about anything right now -- and above all we need to learn to grow our own food. Not everyone needs to go out and get 20 acres and a mule so they can empathize with the plight of the misaligned modern farmer, but tearing up your front lawn to grow some lettuce and tomatoes would be a good start.

Thank you for this. I hope that government will finally do what is right, but am not holding my breath. We do try to buy local as much as possible and belong to a CSA, which is a fantastic program and I would readily encourage it.

I'm trying my best to understand this whole "farm subsidy" issue.Are you claiming that all those listed in your database are dishonest? Is there any finnancial aid available to livestock producers that isn't so controversial?

Like it or not folks, these subsidies support the most economical, safe, plentiful food supply in the world. Every one of us benefits from these subsidies when we check out at the grocery store. If farm commodity prices had kept up with inflation, just since the early 1970's, wheat would be $25.00-$26.00 per bushel instead of the current "all time high record prices of $9.00 per bushel." Think that would have any effect on the price of bread? We all benefit from these subsidies with every meal.
"He who has plenty to eat has many problems. He who has nothing to eat has but one problem."

In regard to the Oct.26-2007 article.Farmers are not crying,we deserve decent prices for our products we grow .You must not eat anything that is grown on a farm,no Milk,Meat,Vegetalbes or Fruit-cause if you did you wont slam those that feed you and keep you ALIVE.Just how STUPID are you.What do you do for aliving or dont you Work.

My family grew up on a small dairy farm in massachusetts, started by grandfarther in 1939. He raised brown swiss, jersey ,guernsey,ayshire and holstein-friesian cows. All were lean healthy low feed high milk fat producing cattle. MY whole family drank raw milk,cream and ice cream. Neighbors all had a choice of which cows milk they enjoyed best. Government intervention would end this way of life. Subsidies allowed large corporate farms to waste and still make large profits,this effect would drive the price of milk down to the extent that small farms would go under .This also changed the dairy herd ,no longer were efficent cattle needed. With intervention of subsidies , a new cow would replace diverse efficent cattle with a large fat unhealthy animal that produced a large quanity of poor quality milk. Thus the american holstien was born. The subsidy in fact detaches the consumer from the market, allowing government created monopolies to decide the price of milk, not the consumer. the free market allows small farms to thrive,receiving a high milk price for quality over quantity.it alows the consumer freedom of choice, and keeps waste to a minimum. sumsidies are the tools of fascism and communism nothing more.the family farm is gone now carved up by emanate domain. a new highway and power lines gave no choice but get out. the education on the farm is immeasurable when comes economics and free market choice. I now live in new hampshire (live free or die)

To everyone who thinks that we farmers are just 'scamming' the system, I have a solution:

DEREGULATION.

It is illegal for dairy farmers in most states to sell milk right out of their bulk tanks, unpasteurized, even though people want to buy it.

It is illegal in all states, as far as I know, to sell cuts of beef or pork, etc. out of your freezer to your neighbor, without having a government-inspected freezer and license, even though your neighbor wants to buy it.

If you want to stop paying farmers subsidies - and as a farmer, I want to stop receiving subsidies - work for a real solution. And that is, let us farmers make our own money. The current system, and the laws that govern it (thanks to Big Ag), force farmers to sell their milk and meat to a middle man, who is the one, along with the government (thanks to Big Ag), who controls the price the farmers get. And since they pay the farmers little to nothing, the need for, and justification of, farm subsidies.

WORK FOR DEREGULATION, let us farmers make our own money - THAT'S the free market system we want.

if prices were up to date instead of the sixties,we would not need subsidies from the goverment,fertlizer,chemicals,and labor gone up ,but what we get hasnt very little,the goverment should be ashamed of calling it self the richest country what a joke

IT TAKES WHAT LITTLE MONEY WE GET TO COMPLY WITH ALL THE GOVERNMENT REGULATIONS WE HAVE TO COMPLY WITH. WE HAVE TO GET PERMISSION TO USE OUR OWN LAND.

Does a farmer's credit standing get considered before dollars are distributed? I know of a couple in Louisa County in Iowa who has tried to file bankrupcy multiple times and still received between between $200,000 and $300,000 during 2001 alone. Total they have received $1,376,000 from 1995 to 2005. Talk about the fleecing of America!!! Throwing good money after bad is poor business and poor government policy.

To quote a previous comment, "Listen all you poor mouth farmers, if you can't run your farm and make a profit then change you lifestyle or get out of business."

If farmers received a decent price for their product, they would not need to get a subsidy. The United States has a "cheap food policy".

You state that farmers should get out of the business if they can't make a profit? Where would your food come from? Are you willing to pay the higher prices that other countries have to pay for their food? The average US citizen pays approximately 10% of their income on food other countries pay as much as 60%.

The income shown on this database does not mean that money goes into a farmers pocket. To be fair, it should also show what the expenses are that come out of that subsidy. And yes, I do drive a 4 wheel drive. Where I live it is over 40 miles to town and 30 of those miles are a gravel road that is not kept up that well. I prefer to pay the cost of the 4 wheel drive rather than be stuck in the mud or snow along the road.

I never want to hear about oh my farm is going broke. if you are farm with 6 trucks 3 big tractors ect... sell out and get a new job. if the farm gets subsidies any tax payer should be able to hunt or fish on the farm.

You have my fathers name and what he recieved for the last 10 years which was around 1100.00. What you don't have posted is his feet were so badly frostbitten in WW2 that he could have claimed disability but he didn't. And all the children that received an education because he cared, and a lot more that he should be honored for- not a name on a list.. He passed away one day prior to your list being released . I find this offensive as i think the numbers are evident no abuse occured.
Apparently due to this list, farm and stock magazines (marketing) are now coming to my home, which he never received before.
Where is the advocacy for the individual being protected from being included in a list as this and the whole story not being told and just numbers?

Caroline,

None of the numbers we post for any individual, including your late father, or for any business, indicate or suggest any abuse of federal farm subsidies. The database simply lists the amount(s) disbursed by USDA for the programs and periods indicated, and no dishonor is intended or implied for anyone on the list.

We know nothing of the personal circumstances of any recipient in our database, including the condition of your father’s feet resulting from frostbite in World War II, his decision to forgo disability benefits thereafter, or the education he provided to children. He certainly sounds like he was a man of honor, and I am sorry to learn of your loss.

As you can see from the database, we do not publish mailing (street) addresses for recipients that we receive from USDA, nor do we make those mailing addresses available in any form to anyone, including magazine publishers. However, many companies do use the Freedom of Information Act to obtain the same list we receive from USDA, including mailing addresses. It is entirely possible that the magazines you are now receiving are the result of commercial firms obtaining, and using, mailing addresses to send farm and stock magazines, but those businesses did not get that information from us. If you don’t want the magazines, you should contact the companies who are sending them to you.

USDA raised the question of mailings in judicial proceedings arising from a Freedom of Information Act request filed by The Washington Post for cotton subsidy recipients’ names and addresses. USDA denied the request and the Post sued. In 1996, U.S. District Judge for the District of Columbia Paul Friedman ruled against USDA and ordered the information disclosed; the government did not appeal. We describe the case and provide it in pdf format at this link: http://farm.ewg.org/sites/farm_2004/faq_legal.php.

Here is what Judge Friedman said in response to the USDA argument that revelation of names might lead to an unwarranted invasion of privacy in the form of mailings. While this ruling is specific to cotton subsidy recipients, it would apply equally to recipients of any USDA program payments listed in our database:

"More specifically. . . the government's theory that cotton subsidy recipients would be overwhelmed by mailings or solicitations is implausible. Everyone on the USDA list is engaged in the business of cotton growing, and cotton farmers can be expected to handle solicitations from farm machine manufacturers, fertilizer and seed companies, and whatever other commercial venture might seek to use the list, with equanimity. While in theory any person or entity could use the list, the Court is not obliged to consider the effect of any hypothetical mailing no matter how farfetched. Rather, the Court must assess the effects of those mailings that are likely to occur as a result of the nature of the list and the characteristics it reveals, which are, in this case, mailings aimed at cotton growers. See NARFE v. Horner, 879 F.2d at 875-76. To state the point more generally, Exemption 6 is designed to protect against unwarranted invasions of personal privacy and not typically to protect businesspeople from commercial mailings directed at their business needs."

--Ken Cook

Why isn't farming run like any other business? When I experience a weather disaster (hail storm) I need to have insurance to take care of my loss. I can't look to the Gov't. to take care of every little problem.

There was a real need back in the '30s but now these hand-outs are rediculous.

Our politicians hold American farmers and ranchers in high regard when it comes to legislation that protects them. There is little reason why they do so, as many of the politicians were and still are farmers and ranchers. Locally, they legislate themselves out of their fair share of county real estate and equipment property tax, commercial drivers licenses programs, overtime and minimum wage for their workers, let alone the food stamps and farm subsidies. The list goes on and on.
All this said the fact still remains that it’s impossible to stay in business without making a profit. However, many factors are involved as to the reasons for failure. Commodity prices could be good and still there would be farms failing because of flawed farming practices, bad financial decisions, lack of organization, and greed. It’s not the taxpayers fault that all farmers can’t earn a living.
How about limiting food stamps to fresh fruit, vegetables and meat. It seems to me that most of the food stamp money goes to the processor and the middlemen plus it has to be healthier way to eat.
In short, it’s time for the farmer to make some money so they can pay their own way.

This is such a touchy subject and I don’t think people realize how emotional this subject is to people. I personally am on the fence about “staple crop” farm subsidies. I personally have the benefit of looking at this problem from both sides of the fence, which it doesn’t seem like any of these previous posters have. Every post I have read has come from either the farmer side or the “tax-payer” side.

I personally grew up on a farm, my father farmed cotton and corn in a small West Texas town until 2000 when he changed careers. We still own the land, but we now currently run cattle on it and do not farm, except for a 2 acre patch of sweet corn we eat and give out to the farm widows in our community. I left the farm life and attended college and received a Bachelor of Science in Agricultural Economics. I had a foreign (from India) Economics professor that had a very strong argument against U.S. farm subsides. I spent most of my class time disagreeing with his views because I was bias and knew how much the subsidies meant to the small town where I grew up and the people I knew. Then one day he talked about his childhood and his family growing up in India and it really changed my views on U.S. Farm subsidies.

There are no subsides in India or any 3rd world country around the world. My professor grew up in India and his father was a rice farmer. He had something like 7 brothers and 2 sisters and all worked on the rice farm and were literally had live hand to mouth most of his childhood. He fortunately got out, moved to America, and received an education. He taught us about the U.S. farm subsidy program and how it is literally starving the 3rd world country farmer. They can produce crops so much cheaper and their supply far outweighs their demand, so they cannot get a fair price for their crop.

I realize the majority of the U.S. “small family” farms could not make it without a subsidy to offset the ever rising cost of day-to-day expenses it takes to run the farm. I do want the U.S. farmers to think about the 3rd world country farmers who works just as hard as US farmers. They wake up early, they work hard all day, and go to bed tired and probably hungrier than you. They don’t get fair prices for their crop and they don’t get subsides. If the US didn’t have subsides the 3rd world farmer could get a good “market fair” price for their crop and actually feed their families a decent meal.

I have read all of your arguments, but I haven’t seen anyone talk about what the US subsidy program does to the foreign farmer. And how the lack of free-trade is starving some of these people. Now I know a lot of hard working good people in my community and was absolutely floored to know how much money they received in 2005. Our next door neighbors work very hard, he is out to the farm at 6:00 a.m. and doesn’t come home till 9:00p.m. every night. I looked them up on the list, in 2005 alone the Husband received a check for $300,000 and the wife received a check for $300,000 in cotton payments alone. I was absolutely shocked, I know they don’t have that much because most of it goes back into the farm but it was still hard to believe.

I don’t think farmers think about what their subsidy check they get in the mail does to a farmer who is trying to make it just like them half way across the world. I just want to open people’s eyes up to this. I don’t have a solution and I don’t want to see American farmers have to leave and sell everything they know and have worked hard for. But the only right thing is free-trade and if you look outside of your own little world I think you would have a different view on farm subsidies all together.

God Bless

Since corn and wheat prices have risen very high. What is needed for the public to see is a list information in this 2007 & 2008 reports of how much is being and to who.

I and my daughter own 345 acres farmed to rice. We receive 25% of the subsidies allocated for our land. The tenants receive the other 75%. There is an income limit; I think it is a million. I have taxable income of 146K and my daughter far less so we qualify as small farmers and should not receive your criticism. We pay the taxes on the land to the rural county - Sutter County - where the farm is located. All of the tenants and the workmen they employ live in Sutter so their incomes are spent within that county. We are not paid if we do not farm. The subsidies are paid on 85% of a base acreage. This base was established long ago when some land was left out of production . Therefore our subsidies are on 85% of 330 acres, not the 350 we own. We would be rich many times over if we sold to developers. The pressures to sell are enormous, and in our county ranchettes are readily approved. These are a further hazard to farming, as those who buy ranchettes object to the farming practises going on around them - dust, noise, spraying, etc. - and this leads to restrictions on good farming practises. How can Ken Cook and his city fan clubs believe that mine and my daughter's subsidies, which enable us to hold onto the land and benefit the local county as well as the whole country, are evil? When agriculture is driven out and there is only imported food, perhaps this crusade will re-think its position although too late for us smaller family farmers. Joan Wood

I am not a farmer and really never new much about farming. I always wondered however how I have always heard that farmers are 'poor' etc. I moved to a farming community and I have yet to meet a poor farmer! Everything is brand new! I see why! The government subsidies are huge. SOme farmers have recieved 1/2 million $$$ in last 10 years. How can that be? God Bless the farmers but it appears our gov. 'has their backs!' Maybe that is how they survive. I hope they are able to have health insurance.

Comments posted April 26, 2008 should help to reduce the need for fertilizer if we could only find a way to spread it. I am a farmer and I resent government sticking their nose in private enterprises. But it doesn't matter how many loans are forgiven by FHA , by the way these amounts dwarf subsidies, these farmers who buy all this new equipment, help flood the country with illegal Mexicans (when through with them ,they are released into the welfare system or prison system, you all should be aware 5000 Americans are killed by illegal aliens EVERY YEAR) can not even begin to pay for all these items that you see on their opps I mean on the bank owed farms. The guys with these fancy operations are a bunch of child like pick-up jockeys. There are very few J.G. Boswells and then they are not farmers in the real sense of the term.

Can a person receive federal subsidies for not farming land, but having a cattle feed lot on the same land?

I know 2 brothers (not mine) who only got into RICE farming themselves for the subsidies. They have now left the "beloved farming business" after 9 years because the subsidies were getting harder to get. The government is starting to realize that small farmers of at least the some, rented all the land they could, divided the land with every family member they could trust, so that every "owner" of the max 300 acres, including 4-7 year old children got the maximum subsidy. It has been going on in this County for some time. How about "??" who had hard times making a living with the rest of us. I found on your site they have received 2.7 mil over 9 years From bankruptcy to now living in very big homes on big acreage. Where do I sign up? Nah, I can't cheat people that way.I scream for reform. Find print and show the local taxpayers the truth about these very non needy recipients in your local newspaper.