On the recordJune 20, 2013
I'm not out to punish anyone's success. In fact, I celebrate it. A $250,000 subsidy is a lot of money to come directly from the government. I think many Americans would agree. We put caps and limits on virtually every other program, so why not this one? What I'm saying is that amount of money should be sufficient. I would like to offer another example regarding direct engagement in farming that helps clarify the issue that my colleague just raised. A farm in the Deep South recently received $440,000--again, none of it to someone actually working the farm, but to six general partners and five spouses, all of whom claim to be providing the management needed to running the farm. What this bill does, in addition to capping payments, it provides a more enforceable working definition for those actively engaged in farm management, and that's an important reform as well. Again, this has been worked out in the other legislative body from Members who represent diverse agricultural districts all over this country. I think this is a reasonable reform that, again, is fair to the taxpayers, fair to the farm family, and consistent with good governing principles. It's a balanced, reasonable approach. Mr. Chairman, I yield back the balance of my time.
Source
govinfo.gov




