Demmer’s $75k in farm subsidies not part of ‘dependency’ culture he opposes
Thursday, December 03, 2009 at 11:51 am
- 12 Comments
When he announced his bid to unseat U.S. Rep. Tim Walz on Tuesday, state Rep. Randy Demmer told the Minnesota Independent he opposed Walz’s support for a “culture of dependency” and entitlement. But according to the Environmental Working Group, the Hayfield Republican has received nearly $75,000 in one form of government help — farm subsidies. But Demmer says it’s not a fair comparison.
In his MnIndy interview on Tuesday, Demmer said he rejected the “idea that government is supposed to provide for everybody,” a notion he says Democrats support.
The Environmental Working Group’s Farm Subsidy Database shows that Demmer received $74,707 in subsidies between 1995 and 2006. Demmer, who is no longer farming, raised corn and soybeans on 1,800 acres. (Other Hayfield Demmers are listed in EWG’s databases but with smaller subsidy amounts.)
Reached this morning, he said it’s an “apples and oranges” comparison. Because the government is involved with food policy, from trade rules to pricing, he says farming is a public/private partnership. Therefore, agriculture isn’t part of a strictly free market and subsidies are warranted.
“The farm budget is part of Human Services, for crying out loud, if I’m not mistaken,” he said. “So when you have that much intertwinement — entanglement is maybe a better word — it’s been decided that at some point that we need a safe, plentiful and, quite frankly, cheap food supply. As a result it affects the market.”
As for words he used in his announcement interview, he adds that he was neither “entitled” to be a farmer nor was he “dependent” on the government funds.
“There aren’t too many farmers ‘dependent’ on that… Do we farm because we have that? No,” he said. “I don’t think anyone gets into agriculture because they have a right to do it or because of subsidies.”
He says his comments about big government and entitlement programs are more about government attempts to “micromanage” American businesses through health care reform requirements and had nothing to do with farm subsidies.
He characterizes the question of his farm funds — which several MnIndy commenters have raised – as a politically motivated attack.
“I think they’re trying to find something to talk about,” he said. “They’re trying to cover up what [Walz and Democrats are] doing to the American people: saying that everyday citizens can’t make their own health care decisions, that they have to report to some national czars…”
He predicted, “There will be more attempts to take cheapshots.”
12 Comments
Comment posted December 3, 2009 @ 12:13 pm
Of course his comments aren’t about HIS entitlements and subsidies. It’s about OTHER PEOPLE’S entitlements and subsidies.
If a woman is working two jobs, one as a waitress and one as a hotel room cleaner, she shouldn’t get any “subsidies” if she can’t afford health insurance. But if you own 1800 acres of farmland, you should get subsidies from “Human Services, for crying out loud”.
Why does Demmer continue to claim government entitlement money for “conservation”? Is that “entitlement”, it’s available so he’ll take it even if he doesn’t need it?
No double standard here, folks. Nosiree.
Comment posted December 3, 2009 @ 1:38 pm
I wonder if Demmer gets subsidies through CRP? That program which pays farmers to NOT plant crops in certain areas to keep supplies down so that prices stay artificially high so that farmers can actually get more money for their crops.
Not saying its a bad program by any means, but when he talks about them being necessary for a “cheap” food supply, the CRP is designed to boost prices to a livable amount for farms, not cheapen them for consumers.
Comment posted December 4, 2009 @ 12:22 am
Of course he didn’t contradict himself! That would mean that his argument is invalid!
“As for words he used in his announcement interview, he adds that he was neither “entitled” to be a farmer nor was he “dependent” on the government funds.”
According to Demmer, it is ok to accept swaths of government money as long as you are not “dependent” on it. Basically, if you are wealthy and well off, it isn’t bad to take government handouts. He is also suggesting that it isn’t an entitlement because no one is entitled to be a farmer. To quote Dr. Strangelove “Well I’ve been to one world fair a picnic and a rodeo and that’s the stupidest thing I ever heard”. Sure Demmer, it isn’t an entitlement, but that didn’t stop you from “entitling” yourself to it.
I don’t think calling the congressman out on his double standard is a political cheapshot, since the guy is making strong judgments of others, yet lacks the moral authority to do so. This is the caliber of our politicians, when college students can find gaping holes in their arguments. Right now, America definitely needs leaders, not politicians.
Comment posted December 4, 2009 @ 9:46 am
There’s an old rule of hypocrisy in politics and certain other endevours, “What I say applies to thee and thine, not mine”.
Comment posted December 4, 2009 @ 10:22 am
Since Demmer’s excuse is agriculture isn’t purely a free market, and Republicans complain government interference prevents free markets, doesn’t that mean his subsidies are the reason there isn’t a free market? Or couldn’t we extend his excuse and say that since there are no truly free markets, all of us are justified in taking and subsidies or tax breaks or anything else we can get?
Notice how conservatives always depart from ideology when they’re personally affected? The they see an exception. But only then.
Comment posted December 4, 2009 @ 11:41 am
Rep. Demmer, I agree with you that “we need a safe, plentiful and, quite frankly, cheap food supply.”
But don’t you think that we ALSO need safe, plentiful and, quite frankly, cheap health insurance?
My wife and I are small business owners with two children. In our “consumer driven” high-deductible plan that Republicans tout as the savior of health care reform, we pay $18,000 a year before our health insurance company even pays a dime. We are perfect candidates to take advantage of a public plan. And there will be NO government “czars” making decisions for us. The government will just be the PAYER (like Medicare), not the PROVIDER (like the Veteran’s Administration).
Comment posted December 4, 2009 @ 12:01 pm
I understand and defend the need for farm programs and subsidies but you gotta love the EWG, smoking hypocrites like Demmer out.
I love the smell of flaming campaigns in the morning!
Comment posted December 4, 2009 @ 4:43 pm
How can anybody say I don’t like big government or taxes and then take a huge check from the same government.
What kind of person voted for this guy?
Comment posted December 9, 2009 @ 9:28 pm
Bet I know where he gets his health insurance, too. Is he going to give that up because it’s GOVERNMENT health insurance? I’m not holding my breath waiting for that one.
Comment posted December 10, 2009 @ 11:13 am
If he’s not dependent on the money (i.e. doesn’t really need it), how come Demmer doesn’t give back the $75k? It’s not like the government has oodles of extra money laying around.
Comment posted December 10, 2009 @ 9:44 pm
Get rid of farm subsidies, it’s welfare for the rich.
Comment posted December 23, 2009 @ 1:07 pm
In fairness to State Representative Demmer, he is lagging one of his competitors …. Allen Quist has received $566,488 in subsidies. Quist has a family farm with his son … who has received $41,791.
Representative Bachmann has received $251,973 in subsidies.
Has anyone reviewed John Kline’s family farm if it has received any funds ?
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
