Our Twisted Farm Policy: Tobacco Farmers Thrive After Subsidies Cut

If this doesn't demonstrate that our farm subsidy program is doing more harm than good I don't know what does. The Wall Street Journal on Sept. 18, 2007, ran a front page article about how tobacco farmers are absolutely thriving since subsidies for the crop were ended three years ago.

How is that? Apparently what has happened is that farmers who never grew tobacco now find that they can be competitive, now that the other guys don't have us giving them loads of cash. Here's part of the article:

Since 2005, U.S. tobacco acreage has risen 20%. Fields are now filled with it in places like southern Illinois, which hasn't grown any substantial amounts since the end of World War I.

The fellow they use to illustrate the article, Martin Barbre, says he is making $1,800 per acre on tobacco, while he can only make $250 per acre on corn. That's in spite of corn hitting all-time highs due to the demand for use in ethanol.

So tell me again, why are we subsidizing other farmers to grow other things? Is that money all being wasted? Would our farmers be more profitable if we stopped throwing tax dollars at them?

I don't know the answers to these questions, and I'm not sure I even know what factors you'd need to consider to find the answers. But I think it is an absolute truth that these questions need to be asked and answered before Congress again votes a single dollar more for farm subsidies.