Farm bill insurance blasted as too costly
Babcock argues that a simple county-based insurance policy would put a solid floor under growers’ revenue in areas hard hit by drought or other circumstances beyond their control and ensure that payouts only go to farmers who actually need the help. It would also encourage development of a private insurance industry that would offer risk protection products that farmers would be willing and able to buy without federal subsidies.
“That would be the kind of reform that farmers need and taxpayers deserve,” said Cox. “Ending direct payments and re-engineering crop insurance would save billions of dollars; savings that could be used for deficit reduction and investments in conservation, healthy food, research and other priorities that would provide far greater benefits to all of agriculture—and to taxpayers.”
- Economist: Taxing P could reduce risk of algal blooms
- Study suggests more waters may deserve federal protection
- Fertilizer maker Mosaic cuts phosphate output
- Ag markets moved mostly lower Tuesday night
- Cause of California drought linked to climate change
- Irrigation Association to release online courses with Cal Poly
- Activists fighting Golden Rice even more in 2014
- U.S. GMO labeling foes triple spending in first half of this year
- Source shows half of GMO research is independent
- White House issues veto threat on bill to block WOTUS rule
- How much corn can the ethanol industry use?
- East-West Seed signs marketing collaboration with Monsanto