Here's an example of why conservatives support smaller government. WHY IS THERE A USDA RAISIN ADMINISTRATIVE COMMITTEE and a NATIONAL RAISIN RESERVE?

  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 23, 2015 12:40 AM GMT
    http://reason.com/blog/2015/04/22/today-at-scotus-property-rights-vs-usda

    It's before the supreme court now.

    It started back in 1949 as a voluntary program for raisin producers to participate in to artificially raise their prices by voluntarily surrendering a yearly percentage of their crops to the USDA and the RAC to take them out of commercial markets.

    But what's the USDA and the RAC been doing with all the tons of raisins that have been voluntarily given to them each year?

    Selling them of course! That's how the RAC gets its operating money. Any extra money is supposed to have been distributed to the raisin producers.
    What could go wrong with a plan like that?
    Well, in 2010 the RAC took in $65.5 MILLION and distributed exactly zero dollars to the 47 raisin producers in the program. In the 66 years of the RAC it has distributed money to the producers only twenty two years and never at more than 12% of the market value of the crops.

    A farmer named Horne dropped out of the voluntary program in 2002. That's when he found out it wasn't as voluntary as it was supposed to be. In 2013 the RAC fined him $650,000 plus some other fines tacked on by the USDA. That's 4 years worth of raisins, over 600 tons of raisins.

    Horne went to court in California and is now in the Supreme Court with this absurd over extension of government bureaucracy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 1:07 AM GMT


    Erm, you'll have to forgive my obvious question: why did previous Republican gov'ts keep it up and running?
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 1:12 AM GMT

    bobobob, up here our Federal conervative gov't did this: We have something similar called the Canadian Wheat Board. Harper decided to sell it (smaller gov't, ya know?), so the Canadian Farmer's Assoc. came up with the money to buy it. Nope, says Harper, and sells it to a foreign national company out of......Saudi Arabia.

    icon_lol.gif

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1939906/canadian-wheat-board-sold-to-saudi-owned-global-grain-group/
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 23, 2015 1:42 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    Erm, you'll have to forgive my obvious question: why did previous Republican gov'ts keep it up and running?


    I imagine because no one involved with the Raisin Reserve has ever raised a ruckus about it. This Raisin Reserve scheme is just one of many. On the wikipedia page there's a list of the others. No doubt they will go the direction of the Raisin reserve after SCOTUS makes a ruling.

    meninlove said
    bobobob, up here our Federal conervative gov't did this: We have something similar called the Canadian Wheat Board. Harper decided to sell it (smaller gov't, ya know?), so the Canadian Farmer's Assoc. came up with the money to buy it. Nope, says Harper, and sells it to a foreign national company out of......Saudi Arabia.

    ^^^^^^^ THAT stinks real bad of a dirty lucre pay off. I read that it won't be finalized before June 1st. I sure hope people turn out before then to protest it... IF that's what they feel they should do. I'm not going to project across the border.
    I saw the temp on the link. 2C? 22 here.
    You have my sympathy.


    icon_lol.gif

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1939906/canadian-wheat-board-sold-to-saudi-owned-global-grain-group/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 1:59 AM GMT
    Hi Bob: The notion that the Republicans ever wanted much less realized a smaller government is a lie.

    NYT: A half-century ago, during the Republicans’ days in the wilderness, a National Review columnist named Frank Meyer championed a strategy that came to be known as: smaller government.

    The coalition started with Barry Goldwater but persevered to elect Ronald Reagan and take over Congress. But then Republicans’ faith in small government waned, partly because they discovered the perks of incumbency. The shutdown of 1995 scared Republicans so much that they became big-government conservatives.
    http://www.nytimes.com/2006/09/02/opinion/02tierney.html?_r=0

    NYT: The principles that propelled the movement have either run their course, or run aground, or been abandoned by Reagan’s legatees. Government is not only bigger and more expensive than it was when George W. Bush took office, but its reach is also longer, thanks to the broad new powers it has claimed as necessary to protect the homeland. It’s true that Reagan didn’t live up to everything he promised: he campaigned on smaller government, fiscal discipline and religious values, while his presidency brought us a larger government and a soaring deficit. But Bush’s apostasies are more extravagant by just about any measure you pick.
    http://opinionator.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/03/16/have-republicans-become-the-enemy/
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 2:00 AM GMT
    I will leave you with excerpts from a letter of a Republican.

    NYT: I AM a genetic Republican.

    Five generations of Tafts have served our nation as unwaveringly stalwart Republicans, from Alphonso Taft, who served as attorney general in the late 19th century, through William Howard Taft, who not only was the only person to be both president of the United States and chief justice of the United States but also served as the chief civil administrator of the Philippines and secretary of war, to my cousin, Robert Taft, a two-term governor of Ohio.

    As I write, a photograph of my grandfather, Senator Robert Alphonso Taft, looks across at me from the wall of my office. He led the Republican Party in the United States Senate in the 1940s and early 1950s, ran for the Republican nomination for president three times and was known as “Mr. Republican.” If he were alive today, I can assure you he wouldn’t even recognize the modern Republican Party, which has repeatedly brought the United States of America to the edge of a fiscal cliff — seemingly with every intention of pushing us off the edge.

    Throughout my family’s more than 170-year legacy of public service, Republicans have represented the voice of fiscal conservatism. Republicans have been the adults in the room. Yet somehow the current generation of party activists has managed to do what no previous Republicans have been able to do — position the Democratic Party as the agents of fiscal responsibility.

    http://www.nytimes.com/2013/10/23/opinion/the-cry-of-the-true-republican.html
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 23, 2015 2:59 AM GMT
    In the 1st or your comments, you're telling me nothing I'm not aware of. You actually sound like a script writer for some of my rants on party obedient Republicans.

    You will never hear me self-identify as a Republican because I'm well aware the party, as it has been for 3+ decades, has abandoned the core principles that I still adhere to. Let me stop here to say I'm not one to stop and devote time to discussions of the why, when, who and what brought about the change. To me that is an irrelevant endeavor leading to nothing.

    I have no allegiance to the Republican party and identify myself only as a conservative for pure simplicity in most conversations. The truth is far more complex.

    Socalfitness hit on something in a comment he made that has made me feel a bit more comfortable in "coming out" about my political beliefs. Ahead of all other considerations in politicians, business, and my personal life I've always judged people first and foremost on their integrity. That puts me in the crossfire between both major parties in the US who have both foresaken integrity from the top of the leaderships down the ladder. There is no pretense of honesty in politics 2015. No politician says what he means or means what he says. And to make it worse, almost no one who votes even expects politicians to act with any integrity.

    I do. I expect integrity and make many decisions based of whether I see it or don't see it in a person. That extends from the people I support in politics down to the decision of which of the seasonal employees who've been with us 4 months will be given opportunities for full time positions with higher wages the end of this month. Just as I believe in rewarding and encouraging integrity, I also believe in discouraging and ostracizing the lack of integrity.

    That applies to everyone from seasonal employees all the way up the ladder to the White House. That is why I have been vehemently opposed to Obama since 2007 and why I am vehemently opposed to HRC in 2015. Both of them personify the complete absence of integrity. Deep in most liberals' hearts they know this. Yet they compromise and diminish their own integrity to support people with none.

  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 23, 2015 3:02 AM GMT
    as for your 2nd comment. VERY informative and interesting. I'm bookmarking this page so I can come back and refer to easier than keeping up with it in RJ.

    We should take more.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 3:42 AM GMT
    bobbobbob saidThat is why I have been vehemently opposed to Obama since 2007 and why I am vehemently opposed to HRC in 2015. Both of them personify the complete absence of integrity. Deep in most liberals' hearts they know this.

    There you go again, insisting that you know what liberals think and feel better than they do themselves. How fucking presumptuous.
    As to integrity: if you can use that word in the description of any conservative on the public scene today, then you are sunk deeply into delusion.
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 23, 2015 4:00 AM GMT
    Sharkspeare said
    bobbobbob saidThat is why I have been vehemently opposed to Obama since 2007 and why I am vehemently opposed to HRC in 2015. Both of them personify the complete absence of integrity. Deep in most liberals' hearts they know this.

    There you go again, insisting that you know what liberals think and feel better than they do themselves. How fucking presumptuous.
    As to integrity: if you can use that word in the description of any conservative on the public scene today, then you are sunk deeply into delusion.


    Did you see me use the word integrity in description of any conservative politician?
    NO?
    Great!
    So STFU.
    Now go find yourself something else to bitch about.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 5:06 AM GMT
    That is not how federal marketing orders work.
    They are always controversial, but they exist because the growers (pretty much all conservative Republicans) wrote up the terms of the agreement and voted on it. The money raised through these programs goes to pay for advertising campaigns, ("The California Raisins," "Washington Apples," "Northwest Cherries," etc.) long-term plant breeding programs, and applied research at the state universities that directly benefit all of the growers. One guy wants to renege on his contract, not pay his dues, and undercut everyone else, while still enjoying all the benefits of the program. There are penalties for doing so. End of story.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 5:10 AM GMT
    bobbobbob said
    Did you see me use the word integrity in description of any conservative politician?
    NO?
    Great!
    So STFU.
    Now go find yourself something else to bitch about.


    OhHeMad-1.jpg
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 23, 2015 1:02 PM GMT
    ^^^ I wasn't mad in the least.

    And now I'm amused with your own fucking hypocrisy.

    Just one comment ago you tried to reprimand me for what you perceived as me trying to assume how liberal brains work.

    Here you are in all your smart ass hypocritical glory doing the exact same thing about me....

    GFY and adios
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 23, 2015 11:38 PM GMT
    bobbobbob said^^^ I wasn't mad in the least.

    And now I'm amused with your own fucking hypocrisy.

    Just one comment ago you tried to reprimand me for what you perceived as me trying to assume how liberal brains work.

    Here you are in all your smart ass hypocritical glory doing the exact same thing about me....

    GFY and adios


    Oh-He-Definitely-Mad.jpg
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 24, 2015 4:10 AM GMT
    mindgarden saidThat is not how federal marketing orders work.
    They are always controversial, but they exist because the growers (pretty much all conservative Republicans) wrote up the terms of the agreement and voted on it. The money raised through these programs goes to pay for advertising campaigns, ("The California Raisins," "Washington Apples," "Northwest Cherries," etc.) long-term plant breeding programs, and applied research at the state universities that directly benefit all of the growers. One guy wants to renege on his contract, not pay his dues, and undercut everyone else, while still enjoying all the benefits of the program. There are penalties for doing so. End of story.


    I did some research on this. The National Raisin Reserve was formed under the Agricultural Act of 1949, signed by Harry S. Truman, a Democrat. It was easy to find the Senate votes on this; 70 for 24 against with the votes for it breaking down as 46 Democrats/24 Republicans. I couldn't get the PDFs for other information to load.

    I could find nothing to support your contention that the farmers then or now are "pretty much all conservative Republicans."

    I believe a great deal of Mr. Horne's case is based in the manner in which the Raisin Administration Committee has redefined itself to meet its own purposes to become a more profitable organization from the donated produce (quantities are determined by the RAC itself each year) raisins it receives than the farmers it supposedly serves.

    It's the disease of all bureaucracies. They eventually begin to see themselves as being more important than the reason they were formed.

    Just like the Veteran's Administration diverting funds for services to veterans for their own bonuses. And just 2 days ago we found out the IRS diverted funds for taxpayer services for their own bonuses. An organization originally designed to aid raisin producers that can consume $65 million in revenue a year from the sales of "donated" raisins has become an out of control bureaucracy.
  • Posted by a hidden member.
    Log in to view his profile

    Apr 24, 2015 5:41 AM GMT
    I understand. It must be difficult to read when the tinfoil hat slips over your eyes. I hate bureaucrats as much as anybody. We seriously need to thin the herd. But although marketing orders were authorized by congress, they are run by the growers. The growers vote on the deal every six years. The last vote for the raisin order, in 2011, was 91% in favor. And are you seriously claiming that big agribusiness is not overwhelmingly republican? The Farm Bureau would be shocked to find that they're wasting all of their money!




  • tj85016

    Posts: 4123

    Apr 24, 2015 8:11 AM GMT
    meninlove said
    bobobob, up here our Federal conervative gov't did this: We have something similar called the Canadian Wheat Board. Harper decided to sell it (smaller gov't, ya know?), so the Canadian Farmer's Assoc. came up with the money to buy it. Nope, says Harper, and sells it to a foreign national company out of......Saudi Arabia.

    icon_lol.gif

    http://globalnews.ca/news/1939906/canadian-wheat-board-sold-to-saudi-owned-global-grain-group/


    those sneaky Arabs gotta eat too man, and probably a lot of Canadian wheat
  • bobbobbob

    Posts: 2812

    Apr 24, 2015 9:57 PM GMT
    From what I heard on NPR radio on this the majority of the Supreme Court are pretty disenchanted with the entire idea of the way the National Raisin Reserve is run. The questions they asked were very critical.