“Small government conservative” lawmakers who directly benefit from farm subsidies

 “Stephen brings his personal experience as a successful businessman running a large agriculture operation to Washington D.C. and understands, firsthand, that jobs are not created by Washington bureaucrats, but rather by hard-working folks in Tennessee.  He is committed to taking every possible step to empower people to invest and create jobs, cut government spending and make Washington more accountable to taxpayers.

– This is from the website of Representative Stephen Fincher of Tennessee who according to the attached article received the most agriculture subsidies of any member of Congress in 2012, $70,574.

If he really wanted to reduce the burden to taxpayers he could give that $70K back I suppose.

pigs cc cc

Many a rural Republican will go on and on about our need to reduce the size of government, and why we need to end waste and abuse in the District of Columbia. Some even talk about how crony capitalism is wrong.

Many of these same lawmakers however pony right up to the taxpayer funded trough when it comes time to hand out corn, sugar, or milk subsidies. These subsidies cost billions and billions of dollars.

Most of the lawmakers only benefit from the “Washington pork glow” which hangs over them like a pink halo as they kick dirt and cow paddies at county fairs. Others however, and a good number of them are supposedly “small government conservatives,” benefit directly, as in money in their pockets, from such subsidies. Bloomberg.com has pointed some out.

Aside from a couple, the payments for 2012 weren’t staggering. But over the lifetime of a farm they add up.

Regardless, if one is going to talk about small government one should not accept direct payments from the taxpayer.

Click here for the article.