{"id":13515,"date":"2019-04-29T14:23:52","date_gmt":"2019-04-29T18:23:52","guid":{"rendered":"http:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/?p=13515"},"modified":"2019-04-29T15:53:55","modified_gmt":"2019-04-29T19:53:55","slug":"sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/","title":{"rendered":"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P."},"content":{"rendered":"

\"\"<\/a>Former senator Richard Lugar died yesterday a<\/a>t age 87.\u00a0\u00a0 He was from Indiana and he understood farm policy far better than most members of Congress.\u00a0 I briefly met him a time or two; he and I were both speakers at a farm credit conference in Nashville in the early 1990s. (My other memory of that conference: a single puff on a cigar was sufficient to trigger the smoke alarms in the smoking rooms in the hotel.) Lugar seemed like a decent fellow without the swagger and venality that trademarks so many congressmen.<\/p>\n

In 1990,\u00a0 the George. H.W. Bush administration held budget talks at the White House.\u00a0 Politicians and aides sought suggestions on reducing the federal deficit (sounds like a notion from an antediluvian age but it was only last century). One of his top aides told me that Lugar held up a copy of my 1989 book, The Farm Fiasco<\/a><\/strong>, during one session and cited its recommendations for slashing farm spending. There was no evidence the gesture made any converts. Instead, Bush broke his “no new taxes” pledge and paved the way for the election of Bill Clinton as president in 1992.<\/p>\n

Lugar was a responsible man so he didn’t embrace my call to abolish farm subsidies across the board. But he did call for effectively ending export subsidies, peanut subsidies, the sugar program, and other four-star boondoggles.\u00a0\u00a0 He was also outspoken criticizing disastrous farm credit subsidies which produced bumper crops of bankruptcies in rural America.<\/p>\n

In The Bush Betrayal<\/strong><\/a> (2004), I quoted Lugar’s condemnation of the 2002 farm bill (which provided subsidies for the next 5 years). Lugar declared that the bill creates \u201ca huge transfer payment from a majority of Americans to very few\u201d and also warned that the lavish new subsidies would result \u201calmost inevitably\u201d in \u201cvast oversupply and lower prices.\u201d<\/p>\n

Here are a few ag policy articles in which I quoted Lugar.<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal<\/strong><\/p>\n

Tuesday, May 21, 1996
\nFarm Loans: Only Bad Risks Need Apply
\nBy James Bovard<\/p>\n

For the last 57 days, federal agents and a group consisting largely of disgruntled farmers have
\nbeen in a standoff outside Jordan, Mont. While the stranger aspects of the self-proclaimed
\nFreemen’s ideology have been widely reported, little attention has been paid to the role of the
\nAgriculture Department in paving the way to this confrontation. Regrettably, federal farm subsidy
\npolicies have been even loonier than the Freemen themselves.<\/p>\n

Ralph Clark, an illiterate grade-school dropout, is the mastermind of the Freemen. He and his
\npartners have received more than $650,000 in farm subsidy payments since 1985, according to the
\nEnvironmental Working Group, a Washington advocacy organization. In addition, Mr. Clark has
\npersonally received almost $2 million in federal farm loans since the late 1970s. Most generously,
\nthe federal government kept sending him annual payments of almost $50,000 to reward him for
\nnot growing on the land he bought with government loans — long after he effectively defaulted on
\nthose loans.<\/p>\n

\"\"<\/a>Why did Mr. Clark receive so many government loans? Because he was uncreditworthy.
\nAccording to the Farmers Home Administration, this alone entitled him to a windfall. And, since
\nhe kept losing money time and again, that proved that he needed — and deserved — new loans.<\/p>\n

In fact, Mr. Clark symbolizes the type of farmer favored by the Farmers Home Administration: big
\n— with a 7,000-acre government-paid spread — and incompetent. Mr. Clark was a poster boy for
\nfarm aid lobbyists in the 1980s, portrayed sympathetically in Life magazine, with Geraldo Rivera
\non ABC’s “20\/20” and elsewhere. But, since then, his racism and raving anti-Semitism have
\nbecome overt, and his appeal with the Willie Nelson crowd has suffered.<\/p>\n

For many farmers, the road to hell has been paved with cheap government credit. “If you want to
\nincrease efficiency of a farm enterprise, give them a low-interest loan and they’ll be an efficient
\nfarmer,” Rep. Steve Gunderson (R., Wis.) declared in 1986. FmHA has encouraged many
\nstruggling farmers to continue farming until they destroy themselves financially. According to the
\nagency’s own records, by far the most frequent cause of bankruptcy among its borrowers is “poor
\nfarming practices.” The General Accounting Office estimated that a quarter of FmHA
\nbankruptcies occurred because the farmers received too much subsidized credit. “In some cases,
\ncontinued FmHA assistance has actually worsened the financial condition of farmers who have
\nentered the program,” the GAO noted in 1992.<\/p>\n

Since 1989, the FmHA has been hit by more than $12 billion in loan defaults and other losses. In
\n1994, the Clinton administration forgave $138 million in losses from 74 farm borrowers — almost
\n$2 million per farmer. In many cases, federal officials made scant effort to collect on the loans, or
\nto compel borrowers to surrender other assets to cover the government’s financial bloodbath. The
\nGAO reported in 1995 that FmHA in recent years gave $500 million in new loans to farmers who
\npreviously defaulted on government loans. The GAO estimated in 1992 that almost three-quarters
\nof FmHA’s $20 billion in outstanding farm loans could default.<\/p>\n

Uncle Sam has long believed that uncreditworthy farmers deserve capital on much better terms
\nthan their more competent, experienced neighbors. One current federal program reduces the
\ninterest rate for uncreditworthy borrowers by four percentage points; this gives them a huge
\nadvantage over unsubsidized farmers. Besides, FmHA loans have long been treated as gifts. “I
\nbelieve that the USDA has created a system that actually provides an incentive to not repay the
\nloans it makes,” Rep. Bob Wise, (D., W.Va.) complained in 1992.<\/p>\n

In 1994, Sen. Richard Lugar<\/strong> (R., Ind.) challenged Clinton administration officials over the
\nprofusion of million-dollar-plus loans to FmHA borrowers. Though the administration promised
\nspeedy reform, the problem has worsened: In the most recent survey, almost 40% of farmers with
\ndirect FmHA loans were delinquent — a delinquency rate more than 10 times higher than that of
\nthe average private bank.<\/p>\n

Thanks to Sen. Lugar’s efforts, some of the worst absurdities of farm lending have been curbed;
\nunfortunately, the government will remain heavily involved in providing loans to uncreditworthy
\nfarmers. Under the recently passed farm bill, the Agriculture Department is authorized to make
\nmore than $20 billion in direct and guaranteed loans to farmers in the next six years; further multi-
\nbillion-dollar losses are likely. While congressmen brag about how farm programs are being
\nphased out, subsidized lending to farmers is actually scheduled to increase between now and
\n2002. And Midwest Senate Democrats are on the warpath, pushing a bill to defend every farmer’s
\nsacred right to further loans after defaulting on the government.<\/p>\n

But the Clinton administration has learned from the recent farm lending debacle. The name of the
\nFarmers Home Administration was changed in 1994 to the Consolidated Farm Service Agency.
\nThe Clintonites thereby upheld a hallowed tradition: FmHA’s predecessor agency, the
\nResettlement Agency, generated so much bad press that in 1946 it was rechristened the FmHA.
\nAnd now, after FmHA has worn out a legion of auditors, its name has also been retired to the
\nAgricultural Boondoggle Hall of Fame.<\/p>\n

Hopefully the Freeman standoff will end peacefully and that a federal jury will pass judgment on
\nMr. Clark and his cronies. Unfortunately, taxpayers will never get a chance to pass judgment
\ndirectly on the congressmen and bureaucrats who masterminded the deluge of bad farm loans —
\nthereby proving once again that, in Washington, it is safer to squander tens of billions rather than
\nto steal a few million.<\/p>\n

—<\/p>\n

Mr. Bovard writes often on farm issues.<\/p>\n

********************<\/p>\n

The Wall Street Journal<\/strong>
\nMonday, July 29, 1985
\nWe Shell Out a Peck for This Nutty Program
\nBy James Bovard<\/p>\n

Amazingly, consumers may soon get a break on the 1985 farm
\nbill. When the Senate considers the agricultural bill this
\nweek, Sen. Richard Lugar<\/strong> (R., Ind.) intends to offer an
\namendment to terminate the current peanut program. If Sen.
\nLugar’s amendment passes, the farm lobby’s phalanx will be
\nbroken, and other farm programs might be defeated.<\/p>\n

Sen. Lugar is targeting perhaps the most obnoxious farm
\nprogram around. It slashes productivity, boosts costs,
\ninflates prices, and sacrifices some farmers to other
\nfarmers. If consumers are ever to make a stand in the farm
\nbill fight, the peanut program is a good place to begin.<\/p>\n

Farmers cannot grow peanuts for their fellow citizens
\nwithout a federal license. Thirty-six years ago, to reduce
\nbudget outlays under a generous price-support program,
\nCongress closed off the peanut industry, distributing
\nlicenses to grow peanuts to existing farmers and prohibiting
\nanyone else from entering the business. Feudalism still
\nreigns, and the farmer who violates the peanut proscription
\nis subject to heavy fines and ensnarement in the Agriculture
\nDepartment bureaucracy.<\/p>\n

The peanut program is particularly perverse because
\nCongress has piled on one restriction after another over the
\nyears. In 1977, Congress, in an attempt to reduce budget
\noutlays caused by peanut surpluses, began restricting the
\namount of peanuts to be sold in the U.S. The domestic peanut
\nsupply has been nearly halved since 1975. This has created an
\nartificial shortage and shifted the cost of the peanut
\nprogram from the government to consumers.<\/p>\n

The peanut program is replete with the usual ag policy
\nflim-flams. By law, peanut support prices must be based on
\ncost of production (COP). The Agriculture Department gets
\nthis “fair price” by averaging costs of the most productive
\nand least competent farmers. The implicit premise is that no
\nmatter how badly a farmer bungles his business, he is
\nentitled to be reimbursed (in part) for his efforts.<\/p>\n

In 1980, peanuts were hit by drought, which sharply
\nreduced yields and thereby temporarily boosted per-pound
\nproduction costs. Congress based its 1981 COP calculation on
\nthe 1980 drought year — which conveniently justified a 21%
\nhike in price supports, from $440 to $555 a ton.<\/p>\n

The COP figure is also a joke because the peanut program
\nitself adds as much as 50% to a farmer’s cost of production.
\nApproximately half of all growers rent licenses to grow
\n(called quota allotments) from outsiders, paying a tribute of
\nup to $120 a ton for the right to grow goobers. The cost of
\nrenting allotments is added to the COP formula, which results
\nin higher price supports, which drives up the rents for the
\nprivilege to grow peanuts, which results in higher COP . . .
\nad infinitum.<\/p>\n

The quota system is also responsible for exhausting the
\nsoil and driving down peanut yields in many places. Quota
\nallotments cannot be rented outside of the county they were
\noriginally allocated to in 1949. Peanut yields in parts of
\nTexas have long been declining. While many acres with yields
\nbelow 1,000 pounds have quotas, over a million acres with
\npotential yields of 2,500 pounds or more are banned from
\nproducing for the domestic market.<\/p>\n

The restrictions on renting quotas outside the original
\ncounty have turned a program to protect peanut farmers into a
\nprogram to protect local tax bases.<\/p>\n

The one good thing about the peanut program is also the
\nelement that proves that the whole shebang is unnecessary. As
\nof 1981, any farmer could grow peanuts for export (called
\nAdditional Peanuts) — but with no real price guarantees from
\nUncle Sam. Peanut export sales are now far above mid-1970s
\nlevels. Georgia farmers are growing peanuts for export at
\n$325 a ton — at the same time that Congress insists on
\npaying farmers $555 a ton to produce for domestic
\nconsumption. Foreigners can buy U.S. peanuts much more
\ncheaply than Americans can.<\/p>\n

Though it is good that more farmers have finally been
\nallowed to grow peanuts, the two-tier system sacrifices the
\nnewcomers to the old guard. By strictly limiting the domestic
\nquota, the Agriculture Department reduces U.S. peanut
\nconsumption and thereby dumps a few hundred million tons of
\nextra peanuts on the world market. This depresses prices
\nreceived by American farmers growing peanuts for export.<\/p>\n

The two-tier system is absurd. Peanut butter made from
\nquota peanuts can be exported to Canada and Mexico, but
\npeanut butter made from additional peanuts cannot. (The
\nAgriculture Department fears the cheaper peanut butter made
\nfrom additional peanuts could be re-imported.) The additional
\npeanuts themselves can be exported to Canada, and American
\npeanut butter manufacturers are paranoid that Canadian
\ncompanies might be using cheap peanuts to make peanut butter
\nand then sending it back across the border. According to
\ncongressional testimony, peanut-exporting companies are
\nrequired to closely supervise their peanuts until they cross
\nthe border, which adds about $20 a ton to handling costs.<\/p>\n

Congress gives peanut growers a far better deal than other
\nfarmers receive. An American Peanut Product Manufacturers
\nInstitute study estimated that peanut price supports “have
\nbeen set 80% above USDA-defined production costs . . . when
\nland costs are excluded, and 60% above when the inflated
\ncosts of land are included.” The Institute differs with the
\nAgriculture Department’s method of calculating peanut
\nproduction costs. APPMI estimates that net returns to peanut
\nfarmers are four to 10 times higher than returns from
\ncompeting crops.<\/p>\n

Consumers are, as usual, the victims of this farm program.
\nThe Agriculture Department estimates that the peanut program
\nboosts peanut butter prices 13.5%. Public Voice for Food and
\nHealth Policy, a Washington consumer group, estimates that
\nthe peanut program mulcts consumers for $250 million to $300
\nmillion a year.<\/p>\n

There is hope for reform. The peanut program was almost
\nknocked off in 1981. That year, Rep. Stan Lundine (D., N.Y.)
\nproposed terminating the program, and the House approved
\n250-159. Sen. Lugar proposed phasing it out, and the Senate
\ninitially approved, 56-42. (The Senate later reversed itself,
\n51-47, and Rep. Lundine’s bill vanished in conference.) Now
\nboth Rep. Lundine and Sen. Lugar will try again. APPMI, other
\npeanut-product manufacturers, and Public Voice are vigorously
\nlobbying to persuade Congress to end the goober madness. The
\npeanut program’s opposition is stronger and better organized
\nthis year and appears to have a good chance of success. And
\nif the peanut program can be knocked down, a domino effect
\ncould occur with the rapid demise of the honey, wool and
\nsugar programs.<\/p>\n

The peanut program artfully combines the worst traits of
\nfeudalism and central economic planning. Congress has a
\nchance to end this program that makes a mockery of
\nefficiency, fairness and property rights.<\/p>\n

—Mr. Bovard writes frequently on farm and other U.S.
\nprograms.<\/p>\n

+++<\/p>\n

Lugar called out the hypocrisy of U.S. complaints on foreign wheat subsidies –<\/p>\n

The Washington Times<\/strong><\/p>\n

January 26, 1994, Wednesday, Final Edition<\/p>\n

HEADLINE: U.S. pasta-makers strain trade goals<\/p>\n

BYLINE: James Bovard<\/p>\n

BODY:
\nAmerican farmers earlier this month blockaded a grain elevator in Shelby,
\nMont. The reason for the blockade: The elevator was purchasing wheat from
\nCanada, which the American farmers considered the equivalent of an act of
\ntreason.<\/p>\n

The farmers, flaunting signs demanding, “Stop the Canadian Grain,” hope to
\nstampede the Clinton administration into action. But, if the Clinton
\nadministration kowtows to the farmers’ demands, this will signal a betrayal of
\nall the Clinton, Bush, and Reagan administrations sought to achieve in
\nliberalizing agricultural trade.<\/p>\n

The farmers are angry over a surge of durum wheat from north of the border.
\nDurum wheat is used for pasta products, certain breads and pastries, cereals and
\nother basic food items. Canadian imports of pasta have increased in recent
\nyears and now account for roughly 25 percent of U.S. consumption. To add
\ninsult to supposed injury, Canadian durum wheat is often higher quality than
\nAmerican durum because of Canada’s cooler growing climate and Canadian
\ngrain-handling practices.<\/p>\n

Sen. Max Baucus of Montana proclaimed, “Canadian [unfair] practices put
\nJapan to shame.” Nine farm-state senators sent a letter to Agriculture Secretary
\nMike Espy, demanding an “immediate initiation … of trade action to restrict
\nU.S. imports of Canadian wheat.” Agriculture Undersecretary Gene Moos told the
\nSenate Agriculture Committee Sept. 21 that he had formally recommended that the
\npresident “consider an emergency proclamation establishing quotas on the imports
\nof Canadian wheat.”<\/p>\n

Farm-state senators have picked an unfortunate time to denounce imports,
\nsince U.S. durum wheat prices – more than $4.50 a bushel – are far above
\nfederal target prices (prices picked by congressmen to guarantee most farmers
\na generous profit). Yet American farmers are infuriated because the government –
\nafter guaranteeing good prices – does not also give them a domestic monopoly.<\/p>\n

While Northern Midwest senators busily denounce Canadian imports, their
\nstates may be hurt more by the sharp cutbacks in wheat production caused by
\nfederal acreage idling programs. U.S. production of durum wheat has nosedived
\nsince 1981, falling from 5.8 million acres annually to just more than 2 million
\nacres in 1993. The Conservation Reserve Program (CRP), under which government
\npays farmers to idle their land for 10 years, is the largest single set-aside
\nprogram. Sen. Kent Conrad of North Dakota complained in 1992 that the CRP has
\n“absolutely wiped out small town after small town as we took land out of
\nproduction.”<\/p>\n

Even though U.S. farmers are not even growing enough durum to meet U.S.
\nconsumption, the U.S. government is still lavishly subsidizing the export of a
\nlarge portion of the U.S. harvest.<\/p>\n

The combination of falling U.S. production of durum and artificially
\nincreased demand for durum caused by the export subsidies has driven the U.S.
\ndurum price far above the world price. Naturally, the high prices have been a
\nsignal to foreign producers that the U.S. market needs more durum. Sen.
\nRichard Lugar<\/strong> judiciously observed: “The credibility of our programs falters
\nif somehow someone writes a story that the federal government is deliberately
\nraising domestic [wheat] prices and then suddenly accusing the Canadians of bad
\nfaith.” (Mr. Lugar opposes import quotas on Canadian wheat).<\/p>\n

If the U.S. restricts Canadian wheat imports, the U.S. price of durum will
\nlikely spike higher. This would put American pasta makers at an even greater
\ndisadvantage against imports. Foreigners can buy U.S. wheat much cheaper than
\ncan American food manufacturers, thanks to U.S. export subsidies. Industry
\nexperts predict that if Mr. Clinton restricts Canadian wheat imports, some U.S.
\npasta-making plants will move to Canada and many jobs will be lost.<\/p>\n

American farmers complain that the Canadian wheat exports are unfair because
\nthe Canadian farmers receive government subsidies. But U.S. farmers are also
\nwallowing in government largess. Since 1991, American wheat farmers have
\nreceived almost $7 billion in subsidies, and the Clinton administration
\nestimates that wheat subsidies will continue at almost $2 billion a year through
\n1998. In 1991, federal farm policy forced American taxpayers and consumers to
\npay wheat farmers subsidies equal to 78 percent of the total value of the wheat
\nproduced in the United States, according to the Organization for Economic
\nCooperation and Development.<\/p>\n

It is to be hoped that American farmers will be able to resist following the
\nworst examples of protesting French farmers, such as setting live British sheep
\non fire to protest mutton imports. While most of the media coverage of the
\nfarmers’ blockade was sympathetic, no one apparently asked the farmers how much
\nin federal subsidies they had received. This type of illiterate news coverage
\nsimply encourages the worst abuses of the farm lobby.<\/p>\n

Mr. Clinton should not export the U.S. food manufacturing industry by
\nrestricting wheat imports. The U.S. International Trade Commission (ITC), at
\nMr. Clinton’s behest, is conducting a formal investigation studying the effects
\nof the Canadian imports on the costs of U.S. farm subsidy programs. Rather
\nthan taking emergency action, the Clinton administration should wait till the
\nITC makes its formal request. Better still, Mr. Clinton should take emergency
\naction in defense of American taxpayers and abolish all U.S. wheat subsidies.<\/p>\n

James Bovard is the author of “The Fair Trade Fraud” (1991) and the
\nforthcoming “Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Libert” (St. Martin’s
\nPress, April 1994).<\/p>\n

 <\/p>\n

Lugar favored ending or at least radically rolling back the sugar program:<\/p>\n

States News Service<\/p>\n

December 9, 1994, Friday<\/p>\n

HEADLINE: SUGAR PROGRAM’S FUTURE UNCERTAIN UNDER REPUBLICAN CONGRESS<\/p>\n

BYLINE: By Juliet Eilperin, States News Service<\/p>\n

BODY:
\nNow that they’ve managed to take control of Congress, Republicans are
\npromising deep cuts in agriculture programs. If they chose to dismantle sugar
\nprice support policy, however, they should prepare for a bruising fight.<\/p>\n

The battle that has raged for two centuries will continue in the 104th
\nCongress, as soft drink and candy manufacturers spar with sugar growers. And
\nmembers of Congress rarely mince words when sugar users challenge the status
\nquo.<\/p>\n

When Sweetener Users Association President Tom Hammer argued in 1990 that the
\ngovernment guarantees a profit for sugar beet growers, Sen. Kent Conrad, D-N.D.,
\nurged him to join him on a trip back home and make the same claim before the
\ngrowers. Taking a page from the Jesse Helms play book, Conrad warned Hammer
\nthat he would be wise to bring along protection: “We probably would have to have
\nthe 82nd Airborne.”<\/p>\n

Republicans are less likely to kill the sugar program, congressional staffers
\npredict, because it does not drain the federal treasury. The program also
\nenjoys widespread political support: roughly half the states in the U.S. have
\nsweetener producers, ranging from cane farmers to corn growers.<\/p>\n

But critics argue the policy gouges consumers by imposing limits on imports,
\ncontradicting America’s renewed commitment to free trade.<\/p>\n

Members hailing from South Florida, where sugar production continues to make
\nan impact on the local economy, have traditionally fought for the federal
\nprogram. In Palm Beach County, the industry directly accounts for the
\nequivalent of 19,000 full-time jobs, and produces $839 million in raw sugar each
\nyear.
\nStates News Service, December 9, 1994<\/p>\n

Under the current program, the government sets a minimum price for sugar,
\nlending money to processors which they repay with interest in nine months. If
\nthey cannot sell the sugar at that price, the government must buy the remaining
\nsugar and sell it, but without taking a loss. This scenario has never happened,
\nprimarily because the government sets import quotas to keep U.S. prices stable.<\/p>\n

The program will survive, sugar producers say, because it keeps farmers in
\nbusiness, makes money for the government and helps consumers.<\/p>\n

“If you cut the sugar program, you might even hurt the deficit,” said Florida
\nSugar Cane League executive vice president Dalton Yancey, noting that under the
\nprogram, the federal government collects interest payments and assessment fees
\nfrom the industry.<\/p>\n

Several economists, however, insist American consumers would be better off
\nbuying sugar at the world price, which is less than half as high as the American
\none. In a study commissioned by the Save Our Everglades coalition, University
\nof Connecticut professor Rigoberto A. Lopez estimated the program had cost
\nAmericans an average of $137 million annually between 1970 and 1974. A U.S.
\nDepartment of Agriculture official said the American price for sugar would fall
\nif the import quotas were lifted, whether or not other countries liberalized.
\nStates News Service, December 9, 1994<\/p>\n

Sugar industry executives question these kinds of studies, noting the price
\nof sugar has risen dramatically in the periods when the U.S. abandoned its sugar
\npolicy, and producers dump sugar on the world market at an artificially low
\nprice.<\/p>\n

But economist James Bovard said Americans can afford to take the risk.
\n“This is the old hobgoblin protectionists always use,” he said. “It’s a
\nguaranteed loss now versus a slight risk loss in the future.”<\/p>\n

Incoming Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Richard Lugar, R-Ind.<\/strong>, seems
\nto agree. During a press conference Friday, he compared the policy to the
\nmohair subsidy Congress eliminated last year.<\/p>\n

“Why should sugar production be protected and imports restricted if the
\nresult is higher sugar prices for American consumers?” he asked.<\/p>\n

Bob Buker, vice president of U.S. Sugar, said Americans would be happy to
\ncompete on the open market, as long as European governments stop subsidizing
\ntheir growers.<\/p>\n

“We’re not for unilateral disarmament,” Buker said, adding that farmers would
\nbe wiped out of business if the U.S. lifted its quotas in the immediate future.<\/p>\n

Furthermore, Buker argued, lowering sugar’s price would only help industrial
\nusers, like the soft drink and candy manufacturers. They would never pass on the
\nsavings to consumers, he predicted, and the U.S. would then end up at the mercy
\nof foreign producers.<\/p>\n

As Buker points out, industrial users and sugar producers — not consumers —
\nare busy debating the nation’s sugar policy. The two groups contribute heavily
\nto members of Congress: sugar political action committees gave nearly $160,000
\nto members of the Florida delegation between Jan. 1, 1991, and June 30, 1994,
\naccording to the Center for Responsive Politics. Food and beverage
\nmanufacturers gave even more money to Congress, and both groups show up to
\ntestify when Congress reconsiders the legislation.<\/p>\n

One congressional source in the Florida delegation said the sugar program
\nwould remain intact in the 1995 farm bill because of its merits. The staffer
\nacknowledged, however, that industrial users and the sugar industry would play
\nkey roles in the fight.<\/p>\n

Save Our Everglades co-chair George Barley said the sugar industry’s
\nextensive political contributions have given it more influence than it
\ndeserves.<\/p>\n

“The federal government acts like this is a 4,000 pound gorilla,” Barley
\nsaid.<\/p>\n","protected":false},"excerpt":{"rendered":"

Former senator Richard Lugar died yesterday at age 87.\u00a0\u00a0 He was from Indiana and he understood farm policy far better than most members of Congress.\u00a0 I briefly met him a time or two; he and I were both speakers at a farm credit conference in Nashville in the early 1990s. (My other memory of that […]<\/p>\n","protected":false},"author":1,"featured_media":13518,"comment_status":"open","ping_status":"open","sticky":false,"template":"","format":"standard","meta":{"footnotes":""},"categories":[1],"tags":[181,1998,329,1999,855,1997],"class_list":["post-13515","post","type-post","status-publish","format-standard","has-post-thumbnail","hentry","category-uncategorized","tag-boondoggles","tag-export-subsidies","tag-farm-subsidies","tag-freeman-protestors","tag-peanuts","tag-richard-lugar"],"yoast_head":"\nSen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P. - James Bovard<\/title>\n<meta name=\"description\" content=\"R.I.P. to Richard Lugar, a six-term senator and decent fellow from Indiana who fought to end some of the biggest farm policy boondoggles.\" \/>\n<meta name=\"robots\" content=\"index, follow, max-snippet:-1, max-image-preview:large, max-video-preview:-1\" \/>\n<link rel=\"canonical\" href=\"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:locale\" content=\"en_US\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:type\" content=\"article\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:title\" content=\"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P. - James Bovard\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:description\" content=\"R.I.P. to Richard Lugar, a six-term senator and decent fellow from Indiana who fought to end some of the biggest farm policy boondoggles.\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:url\" content=\"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:site_name\" content=\"James Bovard\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:author\" content=\"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jim.bovard\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:published_time\" content=\"2019-04-29T18:23:52+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"article:modified_time\" content=\"2019-04-29T19:53:55+00:00\" \/>\n<meta property=\"og:image\" content=\"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:width\" content=\"398\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:height\" content=\"599\" \/>\n\t<meta property=\"og:image:type\" content=\"image\/jpeg\" \/>\n<meta name=\"author\" content=\"Jim\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:card\" content=\"summary_large_image\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:creator\" content=\"@jimbovard\" \/>\n<meta name=\"twitter:label1\" content=\"Written by\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data1\" content=\"Jim\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:label2\" content=\"Est. reading time\" \/>\n\t<meta name=\"twitter:data2\" content=\"20 minutes\" \/>\n<script type=\"application\/ld+json\" class=\"yoast-schema-graph\">{\"@context\":\"https:\\\/\\\/schema.org\",\"@graph\":[{\"@type\":\"Article\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#article\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/\"},\"author\":{\"name\":\"Jim\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f\"},\"headline\":\"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P.\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-04-29T18:23:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-29T19:53:55+00:00\",\"mainEntityOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/\"},\"wordCount\":4126,\"commentCount\":0,\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg\",\"keywords\":[\"boondoggles\",\"export subsidies\",\"farm subsidies\",\"Freeman protestors\",\"peanuts\",\"Richard Lugar\"],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"CommentAction\",\"name\":\"Comment\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#respond\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"WebPage\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/\",\"name\":\"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P. - James Bovard\",\"isPartOf\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\"},\"primaryImageOfPage\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"image\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#primaryimage\"},\"thumbnailUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg\",\"datePublished\":\"2019-04-29T18:23:52+00:00\",\"dateModified\":\"2019-04-29T19:53:55+00:00\",\"author\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f\"},\"description\":\"R.I.P. to Richard Lugar, a six-term senator and decent fellow from Indiana who fought to end some of the biggest farm policy boondoggles.\",\"breadcrumb\":{\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#breadcrumb\"},\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"ReadAction\",\"target\":[\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/\"]}]},{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#primaryimage\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/wp-content\\\/uploads\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg\",\"width\":398,\"height\":599},{\"@type\":\"BreadcrumbList\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/2019\\\/04\\\/29\\\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\\\/#breadcrumb\",\"itemListElement\":[{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":1,\"name\":\"Home\",\"item\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/\"},{\"@type\":\"ListItem\",\"position\":2,\"name\":\"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P.\"}]},{\"@type\":\"WebSite\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#website\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/\",\"name\":\"James Bovard\",\"description\":\"\",\"potentialAction\":[{\"@type\":\"SearchAction\",\"target\":{\"@type\":\"EntryPoint\",\"urlTemplate\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/?s={search_term_string}\"},\"query-input\":{\"@type\":\"PropertyValueSpecification\",\"valueRequired\":true,\"valueName\":\"search_term_string\"}}],\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\"},{\"@type\":\"Person\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/#\\\/schema\\\/person\\\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f\",\"name\":\"Jim\",\"image\":{\"@type\":\"ImageObject\",\"inLanguage\":\"en-US\",\"@id\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"contentUrl\":\"https:\\\/\\\/secure.gravatar.com\\\/avatar\\\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r\",\"caption\":\"Jim\"},\"description\":\"Bovard's homepage is at http:\\\/\\\/www.jimbovard.com He can be contacted at jim@jimbovard.com James Bovard is the author of ten books. The Wall Street Journal called Bovard \\\"the roving inspector general of the modern state\\\" and Washington Post columnist George Will called him a \\\"one-man truth squad.\\\" His 1994 book, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty, received the Free Press Association\u2019s Mencken Award as Book of the Year. His Terrorism & Tyranny won the Lysander Spooner \\\"Best Book on Liberty in 2003\\\" award. He received the Thomas Szasz Award for Civil Liberties work, awarded by the Center for Independent Thought and the Freedom Fund Award from the Firearms Civil Rights Defense Fund of the National Rifle Association. Bovard\u2019s writings have been publicly denounced by FBI director Louis Freeh, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Postmaster General, and the chiefs of the U.S. International Trade Commission, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as by many congressmen and other malcontents.\",\"sameAs\":[\"http:\\\/\\\/www.jimbovard.com\",\"https:\\\/\\\/www.facebook.com\\\/jim.bovard\",\"https:\\\/\\\/x.com\\\/jimbovard\"],\"url\":\"https:\\\/\\\/jimbovard.com\\\/blog\\\/author\\\/admin\\\/\"}]}<\/script>\n<!-- \/ Yoast SEO plugin. -->","yoast_head_json":{"title":"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P. - James Bovard","description":"R.I.P. to Richard Lugar, a six-term senator and decent fellow from Indiana who fought to end some of the biggest farm policy boondoggles.","robots":{"index":"index","follow":"follow","max-snippet":"max-snippet:-1","max-image-preview":"max-image-preview:large","max-video-preview":"max-video-preview:-1"},"canonical":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/","og_locale":"en_US","og_type":"article","og_title":"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P. - James Bovard","og_description":"R.I.P. to Richard Lugar, a six-term senator and decent fellow from Indiana who fought to end some of the biggest farm policy boondoggles.","og_url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/","og_site_name":"James Bovard","article_author":"https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jim.bovard","article_published_time":"2019-04-29T18:23:52+00:00","article_modified_time":"2019-04-29T19:53:55+00:00","og_image":[{"width":398,"height":599,"url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg","type":"image\/jpeg"}],"author":"Jim","twitter_card":"summary_large_image","twitter_creator":"@jimbovard","twitter_misc":{"Written by":"Jim","Est. reading time":"20 minutes"},"schema":{"@context":"https:\/\/schema.org","@graph":[{"@type":"Article","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#article","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/"},"author":{"name":"Jim","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f"},"headline":"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P.","datePublished":"2019-04-29T18:23:52+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-29T19:53:55+00:00","mainEntityOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/"},"wordCount":4126,"commentCount":0,"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg","keywords":["boondoggles","export subsidies","farm subsidies","Freeman protestors","peanuts","Richard Lugar"],"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"CommentAction","name":"Comment","target":["https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#respond"]}]},{"@type":"WebPage","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/","url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/","name":"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P. - James Bovard","isPartOf":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#website"},"primaryImageOfPage":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#primaryimage"},"image":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#primaryimage"},"thumbnailUrl":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg","datePublished":"2019-04-29T18:23:52+00:00","dateModified":"2019-04-29T19:53:55+00:00","author":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f"},"description":"R.I.P. to Richard Lugar, a six-term senator and decent fellow from Indiana who fought to end some of the biggest farm policy boondoggles.","breadcrumb":{"@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#breadcrumb"},"inLanguage":"en-US","potentialAction":[{"@type":"ReadAction","target":["https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/"]}]},{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#primaryimage","url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg","contentUrl":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-content\/uploads\/2019\/04\/lugar-copyright-free-398px-Defense.gov_News_Photo_060912-D-9880W-111.jpg","width":398,"height":599},{"@type":"BreadcrumbList","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/2019\/04\/29\/sen-richard-lugar-r-i-p\/#breadcrumb","itemListElement":[{"@type":"ListItem","position":1,"name":"Home","item":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/"},{"@type":"ListItem","position":2,"name":"Sen. Richard Lugar, R.I.P."}]},{"@type":"WebSite","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#website","url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/","name":"James Bovard","description":"","potentialAction":[{"@type":"SearchAction","target":{"@type":"EntryPoint","urlTemplate":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/?s={search_term_string}"},"query-input":{"@type":"PropertyValueSpecification","valueRequired":true,"valueName":"search_term_string"}}],"inLanguage":"en-US"},{"@type":"Person","@id":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/#\/schema\/person\/79550830ad81c14be529a2c37469974f","name":"Jim","image":{"@type":"ImageObject","inLanguage":"en-US","@id":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r","url":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r","contentUrl":"https:\/\/secure.gravatar.com\/avatar\/d95466cfd0934e38803c5035629df727ae4ec1f3f96c6883c05b5c52e2044505?s=96&d=mm&r=r","caption":"Jim"},"description":"Bovard's homepage is at http:\/\/www.jimbovard.com He can be contacted at jim@jimbovard.com James Bovard is the author of ten books. The Wall Street Journal called Bovard \"the roving inspector general of the modern state\" and Washington Post columnist George Will called him a \"one-man truth squad.\" His 1994 book, Lost Rights: The Destruction of American Liberty, received the Free Press Association\u2019s Mencken Award as Book of the Year. His Terrorism & Tyranny won the Lysander Spooner \"Best Book on Liberty in 2003\" award. He received the Thomas Szasz Award for Civil Liberties work, awarded by the Center for Independent Thought and the Freedom Fund Award from the Firearms Civil Rights Defense Fund of the National Rifle Association. Bovard\u2019s writings have been publicly denounced by FBI director Louis Freeh, the Secretary of Agriculture, the Secretary of Housing and Urban Development, the Postmaster General, and the chiefs of the U.S. International Trade Commission, the Drug Enforcement Administration, the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and the Federal Emergency Management Agency, as well as by many congressmen and other malcontents.","sameAs":["http:\/\/www.jimbovard.com","https:\/\/www.facebook.com\/jim.bovard","https:\/\/x.com\/jimbovard"],"url":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/author\/admin\/"}]}},"_links":{"self":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13515","targetHints":{"allow":["GET"]}}],"collection":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts"}],"about":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/types\/post"}],"author":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/users\/1"}],"replies":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/comments?post=13515"}],"version-history":[{"count":9,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13515\/revisions"}],"predecessor-version":[{"id":13525,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/posts\/13515\/revisions\/13525"}],"wp:featuredmedia":[{"embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media\/13518"}],"wp:attachment":[{"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/media?parent=13515"}],"wp:term":[{"taxonomy":"category","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/categories?post=13515"},{"taxonomy":"post_tag","embeddable":true,"href":"https:\/\/jimbovard.com\/blog\/wp-json\/wp\/v2\/tags?post=13515"}],"curies":[{"name":"wp","href":"https:\/\/api.w.org\/{rel}","templated":true}]}}