It's still not true. Read the text of the bill -- it's available on
thomas.loc.gov. It's S.1246 (the House bill was H.R. 2213). Add up the
numbers and see how much goes to food subsidies v. conservation. Observe
which crops are supported and tell us if you think that if the subsidies
increase prices, that will take food out of the mouths of poor people.
You seem to ignore the fact that there is strong *Republican* support for
this bill at $5.5 billion. The fight was over the *size* of the subsidies.
Thus, by your logic, all members of Congress think food prices are too cheap
and we must take food out of the mouths of the poor. It's just that the
Democrats want to take *more* food out of the mouths of the poor,
apparently.
Ideology without underlying facts is just propaganda.
Nick
> -----Original Message-----
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of John D. Giorgis
> Sent: Saturday, August 04, 2001 1:08 PM
> To: Brin-L
> Subject: RE: No Money In the Cupboards
>
>
> At 10:21 PM 8/3/01 -0700 Nick Arnett wrote:
> >The remainder is for specialty crops. Softening "food is too cheap"
> >to "agriculture prices are too low" still isn't true.
>
> Food = Agriculture
> Too Cheap = Too Low.
>
> JDG - Who notes that in the face of a threatened veto, the Democrats
> abandoned their plans for additional spending yesterday.
> __________________________________________________________
> John D. Giorgis - [EMAIL PROTECTED] -
> ICQ #3527685
> We are products of the same history, reaching from Jerusalem and
> Athens to Warsaw and Washington. We share more than an alliance.
> We share a civilization. - George W. Bush, Warsaw, 06/15/01
>
