truthiness

In blow to GOP, House fails to pass massive farm bill in face of conservative Republican showdown
By Erica Werner and Mike DeBonis May 18 at 12:49 PM Email the author

House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) on Wednesday expresses support for the House Agriculture Committee’s work on the farm bill. (J. Scott Applewhite/AP)
A sweeping farm bill failed in the House on Friday in a blow to GOP leaders who were unable to placate conservative lawmakers demanding commitments on immigration.
The House leadership put the bill on the floor gambling it would pass despite unanimous Democratic opposition. They negotiated with members of the conservative House Freedom Caucus up to the last minutes.
But their gamble failed. The vote was 213 to 198, with 30 Republicans joining 183 Democrats in defeating the bill.
The outcome exposed what is becoming an all-out war within the House GOP over immigration, a divisive fight the Republicans did not want to have heading into midterm elections in November that will decide control of Congress.
The bill’s collapse also highlight the splits within the GOP conference that have bedeviled House Speaker Paul D. Ryan (R-Wis.) and will be certain to dog the top lieutenants in line to replace him, Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy (R-Calif.) and Majority Whip Steve Scalise (R-La.).
With moderate Republicans maneuvering to force a vote on legislation offering citizenship to some younger immigrants who arrived in the country as children, conservatives revolted. The farm bill became a bargaining chip as they lobbied leadership for a vote on a hard-line immigration bill.
Leaders tried to come up with a compromise, but 11th-hour negotiations, offers and counteroffers failed. McCarthy and Scalise will face a share of the blame for the failure, and their fortunes in the race to replace Ryan next year could suffer accordingly.
The farm bill itself became practically a sideshow, despite its importance to agriculture and the significant changes it would institute to food stamp programs.
[Six things to watch for in the House farm bill, from food-stamp work requirements to school lunch]
On immigration, Scalise described a deal that would ensure a vote on a conservative immigration bill from Reps. Bob Goodlatte (R-Va.) and Michael McCaul (R-Tex.), while also allowing moderate Republicans the opportunity to negotiate on legislation that could win the support of President Trump and resolve the status of immigrants who face losing protections offered by the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals program, or DACA.
“We came to an agreement that I think gives everybody what they want,” Scalise said ahead of the farm-bill vote. “That’s a vote on Goodlatte-McCaul as well as an opportunity to try to work with the president on an alternative that can pass on DACA. We want to solve the DACA problem and secure the border, and I still think there’s a path to get there working with the president.”
The solution may eventually emerge, but it did not do so in time to save the farm bill Friday.
Goodlatte-McCaul bill authorizes construction of a border wall, cracks down on “sanctuary cities” that protect immigrants against federal immigration authorities and provides for three-year temporary guest work permits that do not offer a chance at citizenship. Leaders and conservatives agree that it does not have the votes to pass the House, but nonetheless conservatives want to vote on it.
The farm bill itself broke open partisan House divisions as Democrats abandoned negotiations with Republicans over the food stamp changes, which would require adults to spend 20 hours per week working or participating in a state-run training program as a condition to receive benefits. Democrats argue that a million or more people would end up losing benefits, because most states do not have the capacity to set up the training programs required.
House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi (D-Calif.) described the legislation as “cruel” and argued that with the proposed changes to food stamps, “Republicans are taking food out of the mouths of families struggling to make ends meet.”
Republicans contend the food stamp changes are a reasonable approach that would help move able-bodied adults from poverty to work. “Our bill goes shoulder to shoulder with recipients to help get them the training and education they need to attain a job that can provide for them and their families,” said Agriculture Committee Chairman K. Michael Conaway (R-Tex.).
[They’re the think tank pushing for welfare work requirements. Republicans say they’re experts. Economists call it ‘junk science.’]
The House farm bill would have been a non-starter anyway in the Senate, which is writing its own farm bill. Any legislation that ultimately makes it to Trump’s desk will have to look more like the version in the Senate, where bipartisan support will be necessary for anything to pass and there is not sufficient support for the food-stamp changes.
Trump had tweeted his support for the House bill late Thursday, writing: “Tomorrow, the House will vote on a strong Farm Bill, which includes work requirements. We must support our Nation’s great farmers!”
The current farm bill expires Sept. 30, and the legislation would have reauthorized numerous programs and policies. In addition to food stamps, flash points included an extension of supports for the sugar program, which a coalition of conservative lawmakers, backed by outside free-market groups, tried unsuccessfully to get rid of in an amendment defeated Thursday.
The legislation also would have extended the Agriculture Department’s subsidy program that compensates farmers when average crop prices fall below certain levels — and expanded it by widening who counts as a “farmer,” for subsidy purposes.
Conaway pleaded for the legislation before the vote. “Times are not good right now in the heartland. Many of our nation’s farmers and ranchers, who have been struggling under the weight of a five-year recession, are just one bad year away from being forced out of business,” he said. “And in the face of these serious challenges, the last thing they need is the uncertainty of a prolonged debate over the 2018 farm bill.”

Maybe Ryan "retired" a bit early. Trump closes soybean and other commodity markets that the Midwest farmers need and now the farm bill sinks--with friends like Trump, Midwest farmers need no enemies. Now Trump's immigration friends in the House seem to be on the other side of the loyalty divide.
Well, the Midwest farmers elected Trump, and Trump is keeping his promise that there might be a "little pain" in his efforts to save the few steel and aluminum worker jobs with his steel/aluminum tariffs. Who will be buying new steel tractors next year? Maybe Trump's new friends in China? Cool negotiations, Don--will it be a huge farm economy and a few DACA kids or will it be The Wall: Pragmatism or Idealism? Or is it just a matter of votes? Votes in the House now or votes in the Midwest in 2018 and 2020?

Richard Rowland

Just another example of some Republican's lack of cooperation within the party. Those Republican's that seem more on the side of the Democrats need to be primaried and tossed out. Regarding the farmer's vote, I think if farmer's keep the faith, things will turn favorable for agriculture.

As for China threating not to buy America's agriculture products: I think that's a lot of hot air. With China's population, they need every bushel of everything they can get their hands on.

Loki Loc: Georgia

The GOP campaigned on immigration reform. Then the RINOs, (as expected) sold out as soon as they got their snouts back in the hog trough. These are the lying bastards who never had any intention of living up to their campaign rhetoric. These are the same sellouts who won't give a veteran the time of day until they need his vote, at which point they can't wait to kiss his ass with promises of VA reform.
Had Lyin' Ryan, (closet Democrat) and Mitch "the Bitch" McConnell lived up to their empty promises, there would be no problem with the farm bill, because solid action would have already been taken in immigration. The problem is that so many RINOs are in the pocket of the US Chamber of Commerce, which organization never saw an amnesty they didn't just love.

Richard Rowland

Ya nailed it. Loki.

poor Richard

This childish behavior will cost them in NOV. They are as bad as the dem, PUT AMERICA FIRST not the party.

vernon

They like to talk about the poor farmer,but most of those billions go to giant corp-rate giants not

the little family farmer.They use this as a vote against farmers for propaganda when the times come too vote but it dosen't do the little guy much good.As far as the corp-rate owned farms i don't see any reason to give them anything.

lpnmajor Loc: Arkansas

Remember Trump and the GOP accusing the Democrats of holding military personnel hostage over a bill? The GOP are holding farmers and poor families hostage.

Richard Rowland

In our part of the country, there isn't such a thing as the little guy, but neither is there any big agriculture corporations. If people are farming as their main livelihood, thousands of acres are required. Also, most farmers rent those large numbers of acres, most own very few acres of their own.

Floyd Brown Loc: Milwaukee WI

We need to stop playing political games.
We don't need any more i will vote for your bad bill if you will vote cfor my bad bill.
Just bring the votes up & vote on each one in it's own light.

Maybe insted of two bad out cones. We might get one good outcome.

Morgan

One thing to consider, if farmers go under and sell, it can lead to foreign buyers, which is already presently happening.

buffalo Loc: Texas

Have to agree with you on this one, vern. A farm bill that is nothing but a bunch of corporate welfare for big ag corporations and BILLIONAIRE farmers.

Come on folks. A bill that compensates "farmers" with taxpayer money if the price of a crop falls below a "predetermined reference"? I assume that means if the price of wheat falls below a certain arbitrary high level, then the taxpayers make up the difference.

A bill in which the federal government both controls the amount of foreign and domestic sugar on the U.S. market and also guarantee a minimum price for producers if sugar prices drop. One family controls most of the sugar production and refining in the US--The Fanjul brothers. They inject millions into both parties and in return get subsidies and price protection worth some $2 BILLION annually. So consumers end up paying 2-3 times the average world price for sugar and food and candy manufacturers have to pay more so food cost are higher.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/alan-farago/big-sugar-and-corporate-w_b_8553564.html

http://promarket.org/sugar-industry-buys-academia-politicians/

http://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2018/05/18/6-things-to-watch-in-the-house-farm-bill-from-food-stamp-work-requirements-to-school-lunch/?utm_term=.bdf83d67a25f

What the rethuglicans and dems want is really not to make work a requirement for food stamps but to push MILLIONS off the rolls.

Another farm bill with massive welfare for billionaires and big ag corporations with taxpayer money while kicking more poor and elderly to the curb. It needed to fail!

Kevyn

Of the 435 members of the house there is a group of 33 hard core crackpot tea bagging right wing fascist nutters who laughingly call themselves the freedom caucus. They routinely hold the republicans hostage attempting to leverage reactionary policy by holding up must pass legislation. In the end they likely will force republicans to join forces with democrats to pass legislation rendering the tea bagging nutters just as I impotent and powerless as they are stupid.

Loki Loc: Georgia

No Kevin. They are refusing support until the lying bastards who campaigned on immigration reform stop jerking off and start keeping their word. Democrats and RINOs who will say anything and promise anything to get their snouts back in the hog trough. The ones you call "nutters" are demanding that the rest of the lameass dipshits keep their word for a change.
Which brings me to another point....anyone who didn't vote, and increasingly, anyone who voted for a f*cking incumbent of either party should not bitch because nothing has changed.
I will not vote to re-elect an incumbent more than once. Some say that's throwing out the baby with the bathwater, but there's a hell of a lot more bathwater than baby.

truthiness

Try Brazil
https://www.reuters.com/article/us-china-soybean-imports/supply-woes-brazil-cuts-into-u-s-soybean-market-share-in-china-idUSKBN1D30GC
Why China Is Hungry For Brazilian Soy
Stratfor , CONTRIBUTOR Opinions expressed by Forbes Contributors are their own.
This article was originally published at Stratfor.com.
• Brazil's poor infrastructure has long hurt the competitiveness of its soybean exports, but the country's producers will benefit greatly as new rail and port projects come online in the Amazon region.
• Problems for its main soybean export rivals, the United States and Argentina, will strengthen Brazil's trade relations with China this year.
• Brazil's soybean exports to China will increase further because the South American country has an abundance of land suitable for producing soybeans with higher protein levels.
It's a long way from the southern reaches of the Brazilian Amazon to China, but it's a path that many more are set to tread. In the early 2000s, China didn't even figure among Brazil's top five export markets, but in every year since 2009, Beijing has been Brasilia's main trade partner. Today, China is a major market for Brazil's soybean exports, which account for over 40 percent of its total exports to the Asian country. And because of Beijing's trade spat with the United States and ambitious infrastructure investments in Brazil, Brazilian soybean exports to China are poised to keep growing.
From Iowa:
There are repercussions for the entire rural economy'
"Farmers are feeling a real pinch," said Heisdorffer, president of the American Soybean Association. "If we can't get these commodity prices up ... we are going to start losing farmers. There's no way of getting around it.
This year's U.S. farm income is forecast to be half of what it was in 2013, primarily driven by falling corn and soybean prices.
China's latest tariffs on $50 billion of U.S. products came hours after President Donald Trump announced tariffs on a similar number of Chinese products.
Looking at soybeans alone, the U.S. economy could lose $3 billion annually within a couple years, due to lost export markets, a Purdue University analysis shows.
China, with a population of more than 1.4 billion, imports about 60 percent of global soybean production.
About 40 percent of China’s soybean imports come from the U.S. and were valued at $14 billion last year.
Initially, China would still look to the U.S. for soybeans, said Wallace Tyner, a Purdue agricultural economist.
But Brazil and other countries soon would take advantage of the 25 percent tariff to undercut U.S. producers.
"Brazil has the capability to expand substantially," Tyner said. "Over time, we'd lose global market share, because other countries would take advantage of the 25 percent wedge that the tariff represents."
The U.S. could lose 40 percent of its global market for soybeans, Tyner said. That would cut the need for soybean acres by about 16 percent. "Those are big numbers," he said.
"There'd be a lot of adjustment in U.S. agriculture," Tyner said, adding that falling soybean prices would depress corn prices as well, with growers switching acres.
"There are repercussions for the entire rural economy," he said.
Kirk Leeds, CEO of the Iowa Soybean Association, said tariffs will create "a lot of market disruption at a time when farmers can't afford any disruptions."
"If we go into a long, sustained period of low prices, it will impact some farmers' ability to stay on the farm," he said.
"For farmers on the edge, this could be very detrimental," Leeds said.

Radiance3

=================
I want to end those ANCHOR BABIES. No more of that. Perhaps many of those kids who've been here for many years are anchor babies.