Submitted April 1, 2010 to the San Francisco Chronicle

Dear Editor:

Amidst America's bulging deficit, one policy has excelled while coming in under budget: agriculture.

Considering farm policy has saved taxpayers $30 billion since 2002 and was already trimmed by another $7.4 billion in the 2008 farm bill, I was surprised at the Chronicle's March 25 article attacking agriculture ("School lunch boosts mean painful cuts").

The fact is that farm policy and crop insurance have sustained repeated cuts and represent just 0.17 percent of federal spending—far less than nutrition, which received another $10 billion bump in funding in 2008.

Farmers are by nature the greatest stewards of the land, and the various USDA conservation programs help them do even more. But these programs do little good if the family farming enterprises cannot stay in business—the goal of farm policy and crop insurance.

In summary, policy to promote healthier snacks for kids, cleaner water and air, and a safe and affordable food supply are all good things—and they all merit funding in the appropriate balance. It is my view that Senator Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) and her colleagues on the Agriculture Committee have achieved a reasonable balance.

Sincerely,

Larry Combest
Lubbock, TX
Former House Agriculture Committee Chairman
Spokesman, The Hand That Feeds U.S.