Today the House passed HR 2419, the Food, Conservation, and Energy Act of 2008, better known as the Farm Bill.  I was one of 106 who voted against the bill, I want to take a moment to let you know exactly what this bill does….all 673 pages of it.

Since 1933, Congress has passed some version of a Farm Bill every couple of years.  Unfortunately, all too often U.S. Farm Bills fail to consider the real needs of a responsible Agriculture policy.  The real problem impacting farmers is not persistent poverty, but rather normal yearly income fluctuations.  Below you will find several reasons why this is the wrong direction for Farm policy in America.

• This bill continues to subsidize wealthy farmers.  All farmer income tests are rejected by this farm bill and affluent will still remain eligible for permanent subsidies.  Most of these subsidies will go into large agribusiness interests.
• This Farm Bill waives the Democrat PAYGO rule, which requires any bill affecting mandatory spending or revenue to be deficit neutral. This conference agreement increases spending by $10 billion over the next decade, and $10 billion in gimmicks are also included.  Not to mention, this Farm Bill uses the spending from 2007, which allows for more spending than that of the 2008.
• The measure ignores the plight of consumers facing skyrocketing food prices by making a bad sugar program worse. Due to the current policy, sugar prices in the U.S. are twice the worldwide average and cost consumers nearly $1.8 billion last year, according to the GAO]. This Farm Bill will worsen this situation by increasing the sugar loan rate, and by creating a new sugar-to-ethanol mandate that will purchase sugar at inflated prices and sell it to ethanol producers at a substantial discount. This sweet deal for sugar producers will leave a sour taste in the mouths of American taxpayers.
• This Farm Bill creates a new, $3.8-billion Permanent Disaster Relief Program that disproportionately assists those with political clout, not real needs. This duplicates at least three existing crop insurance programs, along with other subsidy programs. This new program also creates incentives for the use of marginal lands that would otherwise not be farmed. To make matters worse, the cost of the program is likely to be double this amount due to a funding cliff that makes a “permanent” program disappear after only 5 years.
• The Farm Bill contains numerous wasteful earmarks. These include a $250-million earmark for land in Montana, an earmark that requires the USDA Forest Service to sell land to a ski resort, and a $170-million earmark for the salmon industry in San Francisco.
• The true cost of the Farm Bill is much higher than the advertised by the conferees. PAYGO gimmickry and special interest tax breaks and earmarks not contemplated within the advertized $10-billion framework push the overall cost to $23 billion over what the current Farm Bill pays for. 

BLITZER: Now, your great friend and supporter Congressman Charlie Rangel said and I’m quoting now. "It’s the dumbest thing you could have said."
 
CLINTON: Well, he’s probably right.

Awww: Just because they're cute doesn't make them endangered.

The Secretary was compelled to make a listing he clearly didn't want to make and that comes with all sorts of foreseeable detrimental consequences of exactly the sort I describe in my book.  In an effort to obviate those consequences, the Secretary has attempted to erect some barriers that will have all the legislative strength of tissue paper.  It will take just a few seconds of a new administration to blow through them and bring about the dire consequences Sec. Kempthorne has obviously foreseen.  The ESA needs to be reformed for all sorts of reasons that I discuss in the book, but this is perhaps the most urgent now. 

Kempthorne said, “Listing the polar bear as threatened can reduce avoidable losses of polar bears. But it should not open the door to use of the ESA to regulate greenhouse gas emissions from automobiles, power plants, and other sources.”

To prevent the environmental lobby from using this listing as a means to prevent domestic energy development Kempthorne proposed a rule to allow this type of activity in the area if it is permissible under standards dictated by the Mammal Protection Act.

This rule has not been adopted.

The first is the possible wide geographic reach of the global warming argument. The snail darter almost killed a single dam. The polar bear could, in theory at least, stop everything.

Suppose someone wants to build a coal-burning power plant in Florida. Environmentalists might challenge the construction on the grounds that the plant will emit greenhouse gases leading to global warming and an increased threat to polar bears.

An October 2007 NASA study concluded that changing wind patterns are responsible for sea ice loss. New wind patterns have compressed sea ice and moved it into the Transpolar Drift Stream which has taken the ice to lower latitudes where it has melted.

The classification would open the door for environmentalists to challenge any new forms of energy production -- including oil exploration in the Arctic National Wildlife Refuge (ANWR) or new power plants and factories that emit fossil fuels. It also would jeopardize a highly promising arrangement in Alaska’s Chukchi Sea, which contains an estimated 15 billion barrels of oil and 76 trillion cubic feet of natural gas.

Now is not the time to cut back on domestic oil production. With gas prices soaring to nearly $4 per gallon in some parts of the country, there’s hardly been a better time to embark on energy exploration in the United States to reduce our dependence on foreign oil.

At present, polar bear populations are robust and, according to native people, are considerably larger than they were in previous decades.[29] Predictions of polar bear endangerment are based on two sets of computer models: one set predicts how much Arctic sea ice will melt as a result of global warming, and the other predicts how polar bear populations will respond. But computer models of climate are known to be fraught with problems, and the ecological models used to predict polar bear response are equally limited.

If you think John McCain gets a free pass in the media, check out this local media interview with Barack Obama by the Willamette Week.

Questions ranged from “What’s the difference between you and Hillary Clinton on an Oregon-specific issue” to “What’s the nicest thing you can say about Sen. Gordon Smith.” The reporter also used his valuable time to ask Obama about this stance on medial marijuana. That's Oregon for you, I guess.

 And then there was this real hard-hitting question: “If you had a tattoo, what would it be and where would you put it?” Obama answers, “If a gun was put to my head?..Then I suppose I’d have to have Michelle’s name tattooed somewhere very discreet.”

Colin Finnerty, center in green, poses with former teammates after scoring three goals on Duke in a NCAA tournament game at Duke's home field. (Photo courtesy of the Duke Men's Lacrosse Parents Group)

He scored three goals, receiving a hearty ovation from the home fans after each one.

"It was a great feeling to be back with the playoff atmosphere," Finnerty said. "It felt great to be scoring. I was happy to be stepping up for my team.

"It was a lot of emotion with the fans from Duke supporting me. I'm not surprised by their character."

After the game, Finnerty posed with several of his former teammates for a photograph near midfield.

"They're great guys, all of them," he said. "There's nothing but good vibes between us."

Said Toomey: "I hope it's a little bit of closure coming down here. I think there's a piece of his heart that's still at Duke."

Duke defenseman Tony McDevitt said his teammates have special feelings toward Finnerty.

"He played awesome," McDevitt said. "We would like him to not score so much."

All five fifth-year seniors are elite players, led by Danowski’s son, Matt, who won the Tewaaraton Trophy last year as the best men’s player in college lacrosse. He is a finalist again this season, leading Division I with 84 points (36 goals, 48 assists). He is also only 3 points from tying the N.C.A.A.’s career record of 343.

Along with Danowski, the Blue Devils have two defensemen, McDevitt and Nick O’Hara, who were preseason first-team all-Americans. They join midfielder Michael Ward, a preseason second-team all-American, and goalie Dan Loftus, a preseason third-team all-American, as the fifth-year seniors who make the Blue Devils one of the most productive teams ever.

“They’re the best team out there, I don’t think there’s any question about that,” Starsia said. “I don’t mean to discredit anyone else. They’re the best team in the field, and part of it is certainly because of their unusual experience.”