Farm Subsidies and Political Contributions

By Leigh Pomeroy
Tuesday, March 20, 2007 at 8:49 pm

Giving to your congressman does pay off, but measuring the results is not that simple

It stands to reason that those politicians whose districts most benefit from agriculture receive the most political contributions from the agribusiness sector. But how can we prove that?

Thanks to the Environmental Working Group and opensecrets.org, Minnesota Monitor has been able to draw a few cautious conclusions. What we found indicates that political contributions to representatives of districts that rely heavily on agriculture do yield farm subsidies returned to those districts. But it’s not that simple.

more insideMinnesota has eight congressional districts. Two are mostly urban (4 and 5), three mostly suburban (2, 3 and 6), and three mostly rural (1, 7 and 8). Districts 3, 4 and 5 have virtually no agriculture. Districts 2, 6 & 8 have some agriculture. And districts 1 and 7 have strong agricultural-based economies, with district 7 relying almost entirely on agriculture for its economic base.

From the table below it is clear that districts 1 and 7 receive by far the lion’s share of agricultural subsidies, commanding fully $8.1 billion of the $9.3 billion doled out to Minnesota farmers between 1995 and 2005

Categories & Tags: | |

Comments

18 Comments

MinnesotaCentral
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 8:40 am

The analysis conclusion is correct – It’s not that simple. The analysis conclusion is correct


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 9:55 am

Year of Farm Bill The “farm bill of 2006″? 


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 10:02 am

Earlier representation Also, DFL-er David Minge represented the old 2nd district during half of the period under study untril he was edged out of office by Kennedy in 2000. Parts of the 2nd went into 1st (Southwest MN), the 2nd (Carver and Scott) the 6th (Wright), and the 7th ( too many to summarize). 

As Minnesota Central points out, there are other important geographic shifts from redistricting.

You  may want a mulligan on this one.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 12:30 pm

Farm bill date correction Thanks. The new farm bill will be 2007, unless they delay a year.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 12:43 pm

You’re absolutely correct That’s why I included the caveat “While this chart gives an indication of where agribusiness money is going and what results it achieves, it is hardly conclusive.”

opensecrets.org tracks donations to the candidate, not the congressional district. I was trying to strike a balance between simplifying a complex issue  and including too much detail.

I can look at how much difference Kennedy’s switch from the old 2nd to the new 6th in terms of agribusiness contributions made. I doubt very much.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 12:50 pm

Thanks for the input, MinnesotaCentral These are factors to further look into. What I did here was indeed a starting point. For those reading this discussion, I strongly recommend MinnesotaCentral’s eponymous blog, Minnesota Central.


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 8:14 pm

Bluestem Prairie is not a news aggregator Bluestem Prairie is written without the help of a news aggregator, or “software that periodically reads a set of news sources, in one of several XML-based formats, finds the new bits, and displays them in reverse-chronological order on a single page.” 

  Some blog critics and readers have even been know to suggest that readers can find original reporting, analysis and opinion at Bluestem Prairie.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 9:44 pm

“Aggregator” is not my word From an email to me from Ollie Ox 9?4/06:

“BSP isn’t about the writing or the blog but about the race. We’re trying to avoid being the focus of any of our posts–and in fact, link and talk more about other blogs and sources. It’s a glorified aggregator.”


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 22, 2007 @ 3:34 am

Well, that settles it A private email from a time when the blog had been published less than two months.

Since the world is to be fixed in place at that time point last summer, perhaps you’d like to convince the national media that Anna Nicole Smith is among the living and they can stop reporting about her death and funeral.

That would truly be a service.


MinnesotaCentral
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 3:40 am

The analysis conclusion is correct – It’s not that simple. The analysis conclusion is correct


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 4:55 am

Year of Farm Bill The “farm bill of 2006″? 


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 5:02 am

Earlier representation Also, DFL-er David Minge represented the old 2nd district during half of the period under study untril he was edged out of office by Kennedy in 2000. Parts of the 2nd went into 1st (Southwest MN), the 2nd (Carver and Scott) the 6th (Wright), and the 7th ( too many to summarize). 

As Minnesota Central points out, there are other important geographic shifts from redistricting.

You  may want a mulligan on this one.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 7:30 am

Farm bill date correction Thanks. The new farm bill will be 2007, unless they delay a year.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 7:43 am

You're absolutely correct That's why I included the caveat “While this chart gives an indication of where agribusiness money is going and what results it achieves, it is hardly conclusive.”

opensecrets.org tracks donations to the candidate, not the congressional district. I was trying to strike a balance between simplifying a complex issue  and including too much detail.

I can look at how much difference Kennedy's switch from the old 2nd to the new 6th in terms of agribusiness contributions made. I doubt very much.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 7:50 am

Thanks for the input, MinnesotaCentral These are factors to further look into. What I did here was indeed a starting point. For those reading this discussion, I strongly recommend MinnesotaCentral's eponymous blog, Minnesota Central.


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 3:14 pm

Bluestem Prairie is not a news aggregator Bluestem Prairie is written without the help of a news aggregator, or “software that periodically reads a set of news sources, in one of several XML-based formats, finds the new bits, and displays them in reverse-chronological order on a single page.” 

  Some blog critics and readers have even been know to suggest that readers can find original reporting, analysis and opinion at Bluestem Prairie.


Leigh Pomeroy
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 4:44 pm

“Aggregator” is not my word From an email to me from Ollie Ox 9?4/06:

“BSP isn't about the writing or the blog but about the race. We're trying to avoid being the focus of any of our posts–and in fact, link and talk more about other blogs and sources. It's a glorified aggregator.”


Ollie Ox
Comment posted March 21, 2007 @ 10:34 pm

Well, that settles it A private email from a time when the blog had been published less than two months.

Since the world is to be fixed in place at that time point last summer, perhaps you'd like to convince the national media that Anna Nicole Smith is among the living and they can stop reporting about her death and funeral.

That would truly be a service.


RSS feed for comments on this post.

Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.