> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of J.D. Giorgis

[snip]

> According to today's Washington Post, in a "52 to 48
> vote, which split mostly along party lines", the
> Democrats voted down the Republicans' agriculture
> spending bill.
>
> Why?  Because the agriculture bill didn't spend enough
> money.  In particular, it turns out that food is
> becoming *too cheap* in this country, so our Federal
> Government is needed to step in and make food more
> expensive.

Who says food becoming too cheap is the reason for the vote?  Certainly not
the Washington Post.

The article is here:
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A13194-2001Jul31.html

It says nothing about food being too cheap.  Democrats are arguing for
greater agricultural subsidies, which are aimed at supporting farmers
*without* the market having to bear the cost.  John's suggestion is
illogical, since he would have us believe that higher farm subsidies would
make food more expensive.  The whole philosophy behind farm subsidies is
that it keeps the farmers producing crops that would otherwise become
scarce, leading to long-term prices rises.

As the article clearly states, this debate reflects philosophical
differences between the parties, not a Democratic attempt to make food more
expensive -- a characterization that is disgustingly partisan.  Democrats
argue that the market doesn't do a sufficient job of ensuring a reliable
food supply, while Republicans take the position that it does.  But John
chooses to make it about a political power game -- who is winning in
Congress -- not about the fundamental issue at hand, which is making sure
that we have a reliable food supply and disagreeing about how to go about.

Shame on anyone who makes political power more important than the issues
that politics aims to address.  That's just the kind of cynicism the media
usually feeds us and we don't need the Washington Post re-interpreted to be
even more cynical than it already is, especially when the issue as is
critical to our lives as the food supply.

Nick


Reply via email to