This is a column where I split my column inches on two totally different topics. I tried to intermingle my points on the two topics – didn’t work. So first some random thoughts on the egregious House “Farm Bill” passed with 216 Republicans votes, followed by some random thoughts on the travails of scandal-laden San Diego Mayor Bob Filner…
FARM BILL
— Republicans in Congress often decry taxpayer subsidies, price controls, government manipulation of free markets, and using the power of government to pick winners and losers. Yet 216 House GOPers suspended their convictions long enough to vote out an egregious $200 billion spending bill (called the “Farm Bill”) that does all of these things and more. It’s both embarrassing and disheartening.
— For those curious about how California’s 15 Republicans voted on the so-called “Farm Bill” — Voting yes: Ken Calvert, Jeff Denham, Darrell Issa, Doug LaMalfa, Kevin McCarthy, Buck McKeon, Gary Miller, Devin Nunes, Dana Rohrabacher, Ed Royce and David Valadeo. Voting no: Tom McClintock and Paul Cook. Not voting: John Campbell and Duncan Hunter. With the exception of Gloria Negrete McLeod who did not vote, all of California’s Democrats voted no.
— Apparently 13 California Republicans were very comfortable casting a vote to support the idea that “tax freedom day” for those in the agriculture business in American should come a little earlier at the expense of everyone else. It sounds like the definition of hypocrisy.
— There’s nothing sweeter in the GOP “Farm Bill” then a regulatory scheme, made permanent in the bill, to enrich domestic producers of sugar. Ask me which of these characteristics sound consistent with Republican policy positions: trade restrictions, high price supports, domestic supply restricts, and quota. Central planning by the federal government, courtesy of the GOP. And who said we had too many entitlement programs.
— One of the most egregious components of the Farm Bill, which is expanded over the previous bill, is taxpayer subsidized crop insurance. That’s right, money is taken from you to “cover” any losses experienced by farming companies. I couldn’t sum it up any better than Congressman Tom McClintock, when he said on the House floor: “The practical effect is to guarantee profits to farmers, while shifting their losses to taxpayers.” — How is this policy consistent with Republican principles?
FILNER
— Former San Diego Councilwoman Donna Frye, at a press conference last week, described what sounds like sexual battery by Mayor Bob Filner saying that the Mayor grabbed a woman and, “rammed his tongue down her throat.” It’s pretty sickening that Mayor Filner has just decided to give a keynote address at a benefit for victims of sexual assault.
— So the “Filner Dance” and the “Filner Headlock” are becoming common phrases. Whoops.
— At at a time when local government budgets are being squeezed under the weight of massive, unfunded employee pension liabilities, San Diego taxpayers will be thrilled to know that they may be out millions of dollars as the bad behavior (which is an understatement) of their Mayor shifts to formal complaints, litigation, and resulting court verdicts or settlements. Even if Filner resigned tomorrow, taxpayers would still be on the hook. Nothing says “file a lawsuit” than a Mayor who releases a video statement admitting that he has engaged in inappropriate behavior.
— One has to wonder if former San Diego Mayoral candidate and now Congressional candidate Carl DeMaio is hoping that predictions of an quick departure by Bob Filner are correct. As a practical matter, as time goes by, it becomes less and less feasible for DeMaio, to terminate his campaign against Rep. Scott Peters, and turn his sights on Mayor. Timing issues for DeMaio engender to the benefit of veteran GOP Councilman Kevin Faulconer, who has really been the strongest counter-point to Filner on the City Council.
— While there are many reasons to conjecture as to why Filner is digging in and not resigning — probably high on the list being his desire to maintain power and his need for the salary — it occurs to me that at top of the list is that in retaining his office, Filner keeps the only chit he has to play if he is the target of a criminal investigation (no doubt he will be, if he’s not already) and needs to try and make a deal with the District Attorney (or if she punts it, the Attorney General).