Gary Crooks: Smart bombs

It’s fascinating to watch the alliance between the Farm Bureau and libertarians on Initiative 933, the property rights measure. Libertarian groups, such as the Reason Foundation, have provided much of the intellectual firepower behind the initiative. Indeed, Leonard Gilroy of Reason held forth on the benefits of I-933 at a University of Washington panel discussion on Friday. Gilroy is the author of a strategy paper written in 2005 that was designed to spread the success of Measure 37 in Oregon to other states.

What’s interesting is that libertarians are also adamantly opposed to that bit of government intervention known as farm payments, which keep many farmers in business. For instance, Jesse Walker wrote the following in the July 28 issue of Reason’s online magazine:

“It’s considered almost impossible to eliminate farm welfare, thanks to the same problem that usually bedevils efforts to rein in government intervention. The benefits are concentrated in one strongly motivated, politically active segment of society, while the injuries, though greater in total, are spread throughout the population. Such a program is tough to kill – at least until another strongly motivated, politically active segment of society decides it’s a problem.”

Maybe libertarians should float an initiative that calls for taxpayers to be compensated for this “taking”? Or is it a “giving”? Anyway, I’m pretty sure that wouldn’t please the Farm Bureau, whose national president, Bob Stallman, offers this take at the American Farm Bureau’s Web site:

“There is no question that the existing farm bill is popular with farmers and ranchers throughout the country. Like a dependable pair of work boots, it helps keep us on solid footing. Maintaining the farm bill’s structure and funding is a high priority for Farm Bureau.”

Come to think of it, land-use laws provide that kind of solid footing for society, too.

Give and take. One of the Farm Bureau’s complaints with government control of private property is that farmers aren’t allowed to do anything with acreage that the feds deem critical to environmental protections. For instance, if there’s a wetland on a farmer’s property, he has to leave it alone. Farmers say they should be compensated for that.

But the government isn’t always the big, bad wolf when it comes to fallow land. The feds pay farmers not to grow crops on 40 million acres a year. Farmers agree to this in order to raise the price of their crop, which, when you think about, it is a double tax on taxpayers.

No, I don’t have an answer to the conundrum farmers face in trying to keep their businesses alive; nor am I necessarily against farm payments. Just looking at the big picture and how we’re all interconnected.

Whiplash. Mike McGavick says if he were to become a senator and voted with the Republican Party 90 percent of the time, Washington state voters should boot him out for lack of independence.

Meanwhile, U.S. Rep. Cathy McMorris, R-Wash., has voted with her party 93.7 percent of the time over the past two years, according to a Washington Post database. Plus, as a member of the House Whip Team, her job is to make sure her colleagues do the same.

That, in a nutshell, is the difference between running statewide and running in a safe district.