House Votes Down Pork-Filled Senate Version of Farm Bill

The House version of the farm bill includes cuts (well, "Washington Cuts," at least). The restrictions on the food stamp program are the Administration's chief (stated) objection to the House bill.

The White House is threatening to veto the House version of a massive, five-year farm bill, saying food stamp cuts included in the legislation could leave some Americans hungry.

The House is preparing to consider the bill this week. The legislation would cut $2 billion annually, or around 3 percent, from food stamps and make it harder for some people to qualify for the program. Food stamps, now called the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, or SNAP, cost almost $80 billion last year, twice the amount it cost five years ago.

The Senate passed its version of the farm bill last week with only a fifth of the amount of those cuts, or about $400 million a year, with the support of the administration.

But the House bill would cut other boondoggles:

The bill, which costs nearly $100 billion a year, would save a total of about $4 billion annually, including the food stamp cuts. It would eliminate some subsidies while creating others, raising subsidy levels for several crops. It would expand the current crop insurance program and also create a new type of crop insurance that would kick in sooner than the paid insurance farmers have now.

I don't like the "creating other subsidies" part but cheaper is cheaper.

The porkier Senate bill, supported by the White House, was just voted down in the House 195-234.

More: The Hill writes this up as a blow to Boehner, who I guess let it proceed to a vote.

Interestingly -- I didn't guess this when I first put up the story -- a lot of Democrats voted against the bill, because they don't like even the pittance of cuts in the Senate version. The Republican caucus actually split, I would imagine among the typical farm-subsidy-state and non-farm-subsidy-state lines.

posted by Ace at 02:02 PM

| Access Comments