Rep. Kristi Noem’s husband Bryon makes a living selling federally subsidized crop insurance. South Dakota’s lone Congresswoman worked to boost spending on crop insurance in the overdue 2014 Farm Bill.
Donald Trump’s budget threatens the Noem cash cow by capping crop insurance premium subsidies at $40K, limiting eligibility for such subsidies to farmers making $500K or less (really? You make half a million, and you still need government assistance?), and eliminating the harvest price option for crop insurance. Those crop insurance cuts produce over $28 billion of the $38 billion the Trump budget cuts from the Farm Bill over ten years.
But even this threat to Bryon and Kristi’s livelihood isn’t enough to get Noem to forcefully and explicitly reject her Führer‘s fiscal priorities:
“I am eager to work with President Trump to dramatically reduce the federal government’s size, scope, and cost. Still, I don’t agree with every choice made in this proposal, especially when it comes to cutting ag programs, which were heavily reformed and optimized for efficiency during the 2014 Farm Bill process. As Congress works on its own budget, I will be fighting to maintain critical South Dakota priorities while also putting America on track to balance the budget,” Rep. Noem said [Brady Mallory, “Farmers, SD Congressional Delegation React to Trump’s Budget Cuts,” KELO-TV, 2017.05.24].
Maintain critical South Dakota priorities—that’s code for the Communism that butters Kristi’s bread.
North Dakota Senator Heidi Heitkamp, who is not beholden to Trump to get her through a tough primary race, manages to criticize Trump’s cuts more directly:
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D.-N.D., said in a statement that the Trump administration is turning its back on farmers by slashing critical safety net programs that they count on to plan for the future.
“By limiting crop insurance eligibility by one-third and introducing a cap of $40,000 on crop insurance premium subsidies, the president’s budget would severally undermine farmer safety net programs and provide much uncertainty in an already volatile commodity market,” she said. “Farmers and ranchers rely heavily on crop and livestock insurance programs to help mitigate risk and ensure that their farms and ranches survive tough times during unpredictable weather events and increasingly low commodity prices…” [Dale Hildebrandt, “Trump Ag Budget Draws Heavy Criticism,” Farm & Ranch Guide, 2017.05.24].
Farm advocates on both sides of the ideological aisle also find more straightforward language to criticize the Trump attack on crop insurance:
The White House would cut $38 billion in farm subsidies, the biggest chunk of which would come from crop insurance, which protects farmers from times of drought and market fluctuation.
“This president is just not in touch with the people that elected him,” said Doug Sombke, president of the South Dakota Farmer’s Union.
Scott VanderWal, president of the conservative-leaning South Dakota Farm Bureau, said the cuts have national security implications and put the country at-risk of greater reliance on foreign food sources.
“It’s a program that has personal responsibly built into it, because farmers pay part of the premiums for their insurance,” VanderWal said [Patrick Anderson, “What Trump’s Budget Mean for South Dakota,” that Sioux Falls paper, updates 2017.05.24].
But hold on: is cutting crop insurance that bad? The conservatives at the American Enterprise Institute note that the $40K subsidy cap, which saves over $16 billion over ten years, would only affect 4% of farms:
That proposal would affect less than 4 percent of all farms — and those farms are large operations. How large? In terms of revenues from crop sales alone, the smallest farms that would be affected by the cap typically have annual sales of insured crops in excess of $720,000 a year, average household incomes in the hundreds of thousands of dollars, and own assets worth multiple millions of dollars. Most of the farms affected by the $40,000 cut off in crop insurance subsidies have much larger revenues from their farm operations, are much wealthier, carry little debt relative to their sales and assets, and would still receive $40,000 every year in taxpayer subsidies to buy crop insurance coverage [Vincent H. Smith, “Trump’s Budget Gets One Thing Right: Crop Insurance Reform,” American Enterprise Institute, 2017.05.25].
All this arguing is for naught, of course, since we know that the Trump budget is just a joke, an unworkable sham that is dead on arrival in a Republican Congress. Kristi Noem and other big industry exploiters will keep all sorts of handouts for rich farmers and insurance agents like Bryon Noem in the budget, and her Führer will never notice.
Very good points for sure. Both of these republican contenders are already hitting the airways with how great they are. So one would think that the race for governor has already been decided and that there will be no further competition. From the lack of what I am seeing, I would agree with that. Anyone know who is going to actually be a candidate for the Democrats? I hope that it is not a last minute deal with someone taking the job of candidacy as more or less “well if no one else wants to do it”, kind of climate. GOTV for sure, but try to generate some excitement on why you need to vote! How about “Stop Putin” or “Keep Russia in Russia, not in South Dakota”? Both of the republican candidates are deeply flawed with either russia or lining their pockets with a Farm Bill or both.
Nothing wrong with disagreement, btw I’m all for the cuts. It’s turned into corporate welfare full of fraud, abuse and gaming the system. I have no problem bearing more of the risk vs shoving it off to the taxpayers.
Corey,
Take a field trip to the Brown County USDA/FSA office and have them explain to you the hows and whys of farm subsidies as well as the ramifications of budget cuts to the agency.
Then people like Noem and company get upset over a low wage worker getting some food stamps for their family, or if that person working their ass off for low wage happens to be a cigarette smoker (god forbid) on top of getting the food stamps. Go figure.
A person making half a million dollars gets $40000 in welfare is abusing the system more versus the low wage worker getting food stamps.
Self-proclaimed conservatives as Noem, Thune and Rounds are are being inconsistent here . It goes against everything conservatives stand for to support a wasteful program where most of the money goes to the nation’s wealthiest farmers and ranchers. We all know it’s not really helping farmers just starting out.
Come on SD, how about that Free Market y’all talk about that can just fix it. Why, Free Market is supposed to fix everything you claim so subsidies shouldn’t be needed.
Don’t worry about Trump’s subsidy cuts for the top 4%. Trump’s budget takes a nickel away from them and hands them a dollar. They will still get $40,000 of crop subsidy welfare. And Trump wants to cut their income taxes, eliminate environmental enforcement, and eliminate the estate tax. These rich folks will be much richer if Trump gets his way.
Nick Nemec, how many people you know get over $40,000 annually in crop insurance subsidies? If the last $5,000 or $10,000 in subsidies gets lopped off the top is this going to break them?
Has anyone read the stuff about Rubbelborg running for AG on the Dakotawarcollege site. this stuff is hilarious. The biggest farce in SD.
Ravnsborg seems to be hugging Trump even more tightly than Noem. As an A.G. candidate, Ravnsborg doesn’t have to worry too much about crop insurance and farm policy.
Bet Noem has no problem cutting more SNAP which in turns affects farmers and the poor, disabled, elderly, military, but those leeches don’t contribute to candidates much so to hell with them.
Perhaps, President Trump has identified Representative Noem to be a member of the “Swamp?”
Ah, the true core of political thought: don’t cut my pork; cut the other guy’s. Money might be the issue that supersedes partisanship.
Oh please, grab ’em by the nethers; give it to them hard and fast and often – they voted for this – do not disappoint them.
Farm Bill shafting, Medicaid robbery http://www.aarp.org/politics-society/advocacy/info-2017/aarp-reacts-president-trump-budget-fd.html?cmp=EMC-DSO-NLC-WBLTR—MCTRL-052617-F1-2153599&ET_CID=2153599&ET_RID=25419266&encparam=FLJJ6ZgIO/oiPIkgxJvd/5tVEssZUY37ByDIpJQecC8= Tribalism politics for all to witness. When will the rubes figure it out that they done been screwed by lying liars like NOem, Can’Tell Krebs, Thune, Jackboot and the other fella, the EB5 guy? Now that I think of it, Democrats would be smart to name their candidate, sooner than later, before watching it all implode.
CH,
Pick a lane. You criticize Noem for voting for bill good for crop insurance and criticize her when she doesn’t.
Well, I think it is time a farmer weighed in on this topic. First of all I don’t think these cuts are all that bad and really don’t disagree with them. We have been pushing farmers off the land for at least 75 years at an unbelievable rate. That is the primary reason every small town in South Dakota is nearly a ghost town. The flaw in this is that it doesn’t give more to small operators.. The big guys can do like the rest of business and invest elsewhere
Those of you that are still for the “Great and Glorious FREEE Market” bandwagon had better put your thinking caps on. There are country’s around the world with a FREEE market. Those are the country’s with SUBSISTENCE farming. The same country’s where the people in the cities are no better off than the farmers. It all goes together folks.
Finally, you folks that are so blown away by the $500,000 cap need to learn something about business. I’m quite sure they are talking GROSS income. That is how much you make before you subtract your expenses. In the current scheme of things those expenses eat up one h**l of a lot of it.
Anyway you can get off the horse of getting government out of farming because the first cost’s we would cut would be the ridiculous cost of inputs from the likes of Monsanto, Du-Pont, Bayer and the rest. Those are the big multinationals that pull the strings of government in this country and they would make sure they keep their markets!
I read an article not long ago that claimed there were only 75,000 farmer’s left in the country that derived all their income from agriculture. I know my neighborhood and looking around me….I can’t dispute that!
It is true that the farm bills have done the exact opposite of what they have intended. They have helped artificially drive up the cost of rent, land and indirectly all the rest of the inputs associated with it. The system, yields & preventive planting are all gamed at great cost to the taxpayers and other farmers who don’t rig the system.
Bottom line is if more operators/lenders had to put more of their own skin in the game these crazy rents, land prices, seed, machinery would all start to get in line when the market does not support the levels they currently are at. Then the $$ capital entry barrier for smaller or younger operators may not be as big.
This may not stop the trend of consolidation and small towns drying up, but more subsidies and government management of the farm have not in any way helped the problem they have had the opposite effect.
Also what you are seeing is these Republican state candidates employing “muscle memory” trying to win votes. Talk a conservative game, but when politics is local make sure they fill the coffer. The farm bill will end up bigger than before, which I don’t even know why it is called a “farm bill” because the vast amount of the dollars is food stamps anyway.
https://www.washingtonpost.com/news/wonk/wp/2014/01/28/the-950-billion-farm-bill-in-one-chart/
Clyde knows what he is talking about!!
My thoughts about fraud: Crop insurance agents get repeat sales if they provide great customer service. Customer service mostly means assistance during times of crop failure. Exaggerated losses mean bigger payouts – in which case I will be happy to do business with you again…..if your office is creative enough.
It’s a nice theory, Caroline. But agents don’t calculate losses. Insurance companies send out adjusters for that.
The cap on $500k is not famers making that much, it is on farmers with a gross revenue of 500k. They still have expenses and employees to pay for their operations, as well as taxes. Take home pay for these farmers is far less than 500k.
There is way to much reporting on farm programs from people who don’t have all the facts correct.
Right now, the cap is at $900K adjusted gross income. As I noted above, the Trump budget (if it stood a chance in knickerbockers of being enacted) would lower that cap to $500K AGI.
Funny: on my 1040, AGI comes on Line 37. That’s well after Line 12, where I enter my business income or loss, with all my business expenses calculated on Schedule C. It’s also well after Line 18, where one enters farm income or loss and which is based on Schedule F, where farmers subtract their expenses like equipment, labor hired, and other inputs. It’s even after Line 27, the deduction for self-employment tax.
So, gee whiz, Adam, maybe you could help me understand what other farm expenses Trump and I aren’t counting in that $500K AGI when we say, “Golly, that’s an awful lot of money to make to need further government assistance.”
There appears to be way to much commenting about taxes from people who don’t have their 1040 facts straight.
Me pick a lane, Troy? Far more important that Kristi Noem pick one. Is she a socialist or a capitalist? Is she for Trump or for South Dakota? Each dichotomy is mutually exclusive.
Sorry, Cory, I went off half cocked with an assumption that gross income was what was being talked about. Should have known since I’m asked what my annual net income is every time I sign up. As Greg mentioned the farm programs haven’t done agriculture any good over time but as I asked: What would happen without them? The law of supply and demand demands that the capacity to overproduce for the market be adjusted. In the end I think that means virtually all productive capacity would become drastically devalued. We got a glimpse of that in the 1980’s on our way to that FREEE market. If all the labor reducing machinery is worn out and the value of land is next to nothing what would happen in this country?
Well, if I was living in a slum giving all my government assistance money to a slum lord I think moving to some free land and building a shack might look pretty appealing. In other words without the scheme we now have what would this country look like. Our land taxes go a long way toward paying for schools and roads like they always have.
I think the day will come when there will be no government subsidies to farmers or the big insurance company’s that we are now subsidizing to keep us going. That day will come when one or two multinational oligopolies owns it all and can control their production so that it is very profitable for them. That is really the way we have been moving since we started subsidizing ag. As of now I can’t produce a chicken broiler or a hog without being a slave to a multinational. Pretty much the same thing with everything else I might produce other than beef.
Personally, to be finished with this FREEE market stuff that keeps getting bandied around I’d like to see a farm program for a few years that just sent out enough money for a decently capitalized farmer to feed his family for a year and lets see what happen’s! No cropping requirement and no payments to big insurance or bigger payments for bigger farmer’s.
USA needs big government and USA needs farm subsidies. Remember fuel shortages and fuel rationing? Imagine how violent the social conservative gun huggers would get if they were hungry as well as teed off, all the time.
Also would like to enlighten folks on the scheme ag is working under right now. The only game now is crop insurance. What you are covered for on natural disasters and revenue assistance if prices go too low is dependent on the cropping history. The higher the yield the more you are covered for. Sooo, since prices are dropping like a rock and insurance pays more for more production the only game is to produce more. Buuutt, the prices are dropping because of excess grain stock’s!! Anyone notice a catch 22 in there that no one is interested in doing anything about right now?
Of course our revenue assurance guarantee witch really isn’t enough to survive on right now anyway use’s a target price for our crops that is a average of past history. Constantly declining price’s mean constantly declining guarantee! Please tell me where we are heading with this scheme. Big insurance underwriters that are in the crop insurance game are, or at least were, guaranteed a profit by the US taxpayer. Read that “us”. As to a guarantee to us farmer’s??
It is written in stone when crop prices drop, Farmers plant more to make up for lost revenue further flooding a saturated market and driving prices down even more. That appears to be the nature of the beast.
Then smaller farmers can’t hang on the wealthier, better compensated with subsidy guys buy up that extra land , thereby increasing their commodities in the future.
Toss in a handful of land speculators and the price of land goes sky high the small and medium size owner/operators can’t afford to bid and expand.