Direct from the candidate

Here is a guest editorial from Doug Sposito, legislative candidate for House of Representatives from LD 30*.

Gabby Giffords, a New Farm Bill and the Slow Bleed of Capitalism

Doug Sposito

Republican Candidate LD 30 State House

Newly elected Congress woman Gabriel Giffords (D) has been recently, touring District 8 touting congress’ new Farm bill. The Congresswoman’s support for the bill is largely, she claims, a support for the small organic rural farmer.

Until recently a farmer with an adjusted income of $2.5 million per year was eligible for farm subsidies. A House amendment to the bill has lowered the cap to $1 million. The Bush administration and Farm subsidy reformers want to end farm subsidy payments to any farmer earning an adjusted income above $200,000 per year.

Specifically, some 358,057 individuals received $9.8 billion in crop subsidy benefits alone between 2003 and 2005 and $34.8 billion in commodity program payments were made for those same program years. Arizona received less than 0.80% of the available commodity program payments. 

Montana Sen. Max Baucus (D) stated his committee will find an extra $8 billion to $10 billion for new social programs funded through the Farm Bill, by creating new agriculture-related tax proposals. This would be added to the bill’s baseline spending, estimated to be more than $280 billion over the next five years.

And how necessary are these subsidies to small organic farmers. Surveys have shown the organic food market is the fastest growing segment of agriculture in America with 63% of Americans stating they like to buy the organic label. The Organic Trade Association estimates that total organic sales in 2006 to be near $13.8 billion. Furthermore they expect to see an increase in sales of 70% by 2011. 

All commodity crop exports have increased — to a record $68.7 billion in 2006 — and are expected to reach $77 billion in 2007. In fact it is said that the current subsidy programs only encourage overproduction, with the surplus dumped on the international market making our southern neighbors economies even more vulnerable.

Ms. Giffords support for the bill and its millionaire cap seems a little curious. According to a USGS study of water consumption, 80% of all ground water pumped in our state is for agricultural irrigation. By the same study domestic residential use is only 0.8% of the total ground water.

This is apparently a contradictory position for a politician who champions its citizens to do more water conservation while handing out billions in federal welfare dollars that will only increase overall water use in the state.

A better explanation of Gabby’s support may be the litany of government expansion written in to the budget of the bill. 

There is expansion of the food stamp program, the free school lunch and now, breakfast programs. There are grants for free internet service and hundreds of millions of tax dollars earmarked for new start up and “Socially Disadvantaged Farmers”.

The top abusers of the farm welfare program can be found here. But what is most disturbing is how Congresswoman Giffords hides behind the hardworking small farmer disregarding our very real, ground water issues while her real support is for bill intended to expand the role of government and continue the slow bleed of capitalism

*Publication of this editorial is not meant as an endorsement of the author but rather an opportunity for candidates to directly reach our audience.


Comments

  1. Oh Lord, we’re running op-eds for the most liberal candidate in the race now? The only pro-choice protege of McClure? How about doing a little research before we give away webtime to candidates? This guy ran four years ago down here and he went from a solid conservative to a screaming liberal in the course of one single campaign. By the end, nobody trusted him and he came in last.

    So now he wants to curry favor by whacking Giffords? No thanks. Antenori and Gowan are solid conservatives and they’re each equally up to the task of whacking Democrats. Better still, after they’re elected, they won’t vote like Democrats. Another improvement over Sposito.

  2. Sonoran Alliance says

    Tim S.

    We ran it because he took the time to send it to us. We are waiting to publish an op-ed from Antenori and Gowan, as soon as they take the intiative to write something and send it to us (a little shorter would be nice.) It is very clear that we are not endorsing Sposito and thank you for filling in the history for our readers.

    To submit your work, send it to sonoranalliance@cox.net. 400 words or less please and include a short statement granting us permission to publish. Tell us the address of your web site if you and one. If you are running for office and do not have a web site please explain.

  3. Tim S. might do a little research himself before he speaks. My web site has many opinions,in writing, none of them liberal. I have been pro-life my entire life as those who know me will tell you. My daughter attends Grace Christian Academy as I believe strongly in a postive Christian upbringing for her. I have owned my own small business for nearly 18 years and have fought for lower taxes during all of them. I serve as President of our local chamber of commerce. I have advocated for school choice long before it was ever popular to due so as a Republican. I live near the border and was the only candidate to openly endorese prop 200 in 2004. I understand that the politics of America these days is the politics of lying and cheating, but good grief Tim S. you’ve really out done yourself.

  4. Though I am supporting Gowan, I met Doug Sposito in January during a 1200 Club meeting. He seems like a very knowledgeable fellow. I am curious as to his pro-life position.

    I do like a candidate doing some bottom up critiques on Gabby. Where is Tim Bee? Where is the contrast between him and Gabby?

    Mr. Sposito is right to criticize this 300 billion dollar budget. Isn’t the defense budget about $ 600 billion?

  5. Can’t say for sure whether Tim is right about Doug Sposito going from right to left during the 2004 campaign, but he appears to be right about the 4th place finishing according to the Secretary of State’s campaign. If Doug is back to conservative, we’ll take it!

    Not true about Prop 200 though Doug. Both Graf and Gowan were very vocal, not only in support of, but in organizing for Prop 200 in 2004.

  6. Oops, my bad. Graf was running for Congress, so Gowan was the state leg candidate pushing for Prop 200.

  7. Doug,

    according to this website, we have an 18 cent gas tax. Do you favor its repeal? If not, how can you justify taxing a good that mulitplies the cost of all other goods?

    http://www.gaspricewatch.com/usgastaxes.asp

  8. James,
    I strongly favor reducing all taxes. It is now an established certainty that taxes and regulation erode prosperity and it is prosperity (not taxing) that generates the revenues that government uses to fund its programs. The issue now is whether we allow government to use every taxing gimmick it can imagine in order to fulfill the Big-Government re-distributionist ideology of our leftist opponents or do we stand up for the fundimental Republican values of limited government which mandates limited taxes.

  9. James Bretney, you’ve been fooled. Sposito is not as knowledgeable as you think. Nor as honest as you may hope.

Leave a Reply