Farm Subsidies Fuel Debate In Congress Payments May Be Reduced To Offset Middle-Class Tax Cut

Next to taxes, ag subsidies appear to be one of the favorite things to cut as the redesigned Congress prepares for the 1995 session.

The nomination last week of Rep. Dan Glickman, D.-Kan., as the next Secretary of Agriculture set off another round of discussions about farm subsidies.

Incoming Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind., said Wednesday that cutting subsidies paid to farmers would be one “responsible” way to pay for a middle-class tax cut.

“My own views on this … is that probably we should be doing much less governmental (farm) subsidies,” Lugar said at a news conference called to unveil his plans for Glickman’s confirmation hearings.

“I think that the amount of money spent in this area is not well spent,” Lugar said. “In a time in which there is a calling for a middleclass tax cut, for example, and responsible ways to pay for that … (cutting farm programs) is one of the ways to do that.”

Glickman, who lost his bid for reelection in agriculture-dependent Kansas, was less precise in his comments.

“Agriculture is not, and should not, be immune to change,” he said.

At the same time, he hinted he would resist some changes, saying “it is important that we not overlook agriculture’s many, many successes, its unique contributions to our economy and our culture.”

Congressional aides said it was still unclear how far Glickman would push for agency reform, noting that over the years the Kansan has pushed for some changes but resisted others.

Similarly, incoming Rep. George Nethercutt of Spokane, who unseated House Speaker Tom Foley in part because of strong farmcounty support, is hedging his bets.

“I want to use a scalpel and not an ax when looking at agriculture,” Nethercutt, R-Wash., said in a phone interview with the Lewiston Morning Tribune.

Nethercutt will be on the agriculture subcommittee of the House Appropriations Committee, which oversees spending proposals.

Lugar acknowledged that the debate over agriculture spending could be contentious.

At the end of the upcoming 1995 farm bill debate, it could be “the will of the committee and the Congress will be to simply do what we’ve always been doing and add 5 percent more,” Lugar said. “That could very well be it.”

“But I’m saying this time,” members are “going to have to vote for that, straight up” on a program-byprogram basis for the various commodities that Agriculture Department subsidizes, Lugar said.

In that regard, Glickman’s confirmation hearings will be a warm-up to the farm bill debate, Lugar said.