<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?>
<rss version="2.0"
  xmlns:wfw="http://wellformedweb.org/CommentAPI/"
  xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/"
  >

<channel>
  <title>Green Options &#187; food stamp program</title>
  <link>http://greenoptions.com/tag/food-stamp-program</link>
  <description>Posts tagged 'food stamp program'</description>
  <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:23:36 +0000</pubDate>
  <generator>http://wordpress.org/?v=2.5.1</generator>
  <language>en</language>
  <item>
    <title>Farm Bill Redux: A Second Change at Real Reform</title>
    <link>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/14/farm-bill-redux-a-second-change-at-real-reform/</link>
    <comments>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/14/farm-bill-redux-a-second-change-at-real-reform/#comments</comments>
    <pubDate>Thu, 14 Feb 2008 17:23:36 +0000</pubDate>
    <dc:creator>Beth Bader</dc:creator>
    
		<category><![CDATA[Planetsave]]></category>

    <guid isPermaLink="false">http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/14/farm-bill-redux-a-second-change-at-real-reform/</guid>
    <description><![CDATA[<p>I thought it was over. Like a modern day Don Quixote, I tilted away at the windmill, blogging and firing emails off to my representatives in Washington, rallying for Farm Bill reform. I was not alone. <a href="http://www.mulchblog.com/2008/02/farm_bill_all_over_the_map.php">Over 350 pro-reform farm bill editorials</a> hit the mainstream press. The calls for subsidy reform fell on deaf ears at Congress, however, as the 2007 versions of the Farm Bill failed to adequately address the issue.</p>
<p>As the great hope for a better Farm Bill that included <a href="http://www.cfra.org/node/961">subsidy reform amendment Dorgan-Grassley died</a>, the final proposed bill was just left with some <a href="http://gristmill.grist.org/story/2007/12/14/101015/26">token nods to food program assistance</a> and limited support for specialty farmers. Real reform slipped away into the night along with 2007.</p>
<p><strong>With the new year comes a glimmer of hope.</strong><br />
And, that hope comes from a most unlikely source. It seems that the Bush administration, in a fervor to slash all non-Iraq spending, has promised a veto if Congress does not come up with a farm bill that doesn’t feature additional spending. As a result, the <a href="http://www.reuters.com/article/politicsNews/idUSN1228194020080212?pageNumber=1&#38;virtualBrandChannel=0">subsidy reforms are being revisited</a>, particularly the income cap for eligibility.</p>
<p>The revised plan would call for a lower cap on income for subsidies, but the amount of that cap is a point that has yet to be agreed upon. The house places the cap at a $1 million &#8220;hard&#8221; cap and a $500,000 &#8220;soft&#8221; cap that would not apply to people with at least two-thirds of their income from farming. The Senate proposed a $750,000 &#8220;soft&#8221; cap.</p>
<p>The White House has called for a much lower $200,000 &#8220;hard&#8221; cap, saying that this cap would end subsidies to roughly 40,000 people.</p>
<p>Opponents of the approach advise that none of these measures will be effective. There are <a href="http://www.cfra.org/blog/2008/02/11/use-your-illusion">loopholes large enough to drive a combine through</a>, which would allow the larger producers to evade the subsidy caps. As a result, reform activist group, <a href="http://www.cfra.org/">The Center for Rural Affairs</a>, is calling for voters to again urge Congress to consider better approaches to real subsidy reform, such as those offered by Dorgan-Grassley.
<p><a href="http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/14/farm-bill-redux-a-second-change-at-real-reform/" class="more-link">Read more of this story &#187;</a></p>
]]></description>
    <wfw:commentRss>http://planetsave.com/blog/2008/02/14/farm-bill-redux-a-second-change-at-real-reform/feed/</wfw:commentRss>
  </item>
</channel>
</rss>

<!-- 48 queries in 0.401 seconds. -->