23 Members of Congress Receive Farm Subsidies: GOP Members take 10 Times More than Democrats

Here's an interesting fact. Most of us are familiar with how the federal government has taken control of the agriculture industry by creating farm subsidies. They pay farmers to grow crops. They pay farmers not to grow crops. It's a corrupt system that doesn't practice free market principles, since the government works to control prices and have to pay farmers to grow different crops that yield no profit to the farmer.

Did you know a few members of Congress take or have taken these government handouts? Believe it or not, a new report out shows more Republicans serving in Congress are taking farm subsidies than are Democrats. Oh, but they want to cut government spending, don't they? (I am not convinced since they couldn't even get the $100 billion done.)


That some members of Congress are farmers is hardly new. Many of the Founding Fathers worked the land. But as the industrial age transformed America’s agrarian society and technology made it possible for fewer farmers to grow more crops on more land, the number of lawmakers actively engaged in agriculture dropped sharply.

We don’t have a firm count of how many farmers are serving in the current Congress, but we do know, based on a recent analysis of the Environmental Working Group’s Farm Subsidy Database, that 23 of them, or their family members, signed up for taxpayer-funded farm subsidy payments between 1995 and 2009.

This would be a good place to point out that just five crops – corn, cotton, rice wheat and soybeans – account for 90 percent of all farm subsidies. Sixty-two percent of American farmers do not receive any direct payments from the federal farm subsidy system, and that group includes most livestock producers and fruit and vegetable growers.

Among the members of the 112th Congress who collect payments from USDA are six Democrats and 17 Republicans. The disparity between the parties is even greater in terms of dollar amounts: $489,856 went to Democrats, but more than 10 times as much, $5,334,565, to Republicans.

Like I said, Republicans are always interested in cutting spending until they are affected by the spending cuts directly or within their districts.