There has been a growing chorus of opposition to the farm bill passed by the House of Representatives yesterday, and this morning's New York Post lays out an argument against passage.

'We need to stand up to the special interests, bring Republicans and Democrats together and pass the farm bill immediately," Barack Obama declared last November. Weird words, since: the farm bill, which subsidizes an arbitrarily chosen section of the economy at the expense of taxpayers and consumers in general, is special-interest legislation by definition.

The latest version, which President Bush has promised to veto, includes tax breaks for racehorse owners, "marketing aid" for fruit and vegetable growers, research funding for organic farmers, added price supports for domestic sugar producers, increased subsidies for dairy farmers and a $170-million earmark for the salmon industry.

Less than a month ago, the Associated Press reported that "it's not a good year for a farm bill," what with surging food prices, record farm income and a tight federal budget. But in DC, the solution to wasteful, unjustified government spending is more wasteful, unjustified spending.

In response to fruit and vegetable farmers who've long complained about payments for other crops, the five-year, $300-billion bill expands subsidies while paying off the produce growers. In response to food-price inflation, it continues the price supports and ethanol subsidies that contribute to it while boosting spending on food stamps. It even manages to combine two kinds of farm folly in one program, requiring the government to protect domestic sugar producers by buying imported sugar and selling it at a loss to ethanol refiners.

The bill's supporters are bragging about a new rule that would bar payments to individual farmers earning more than $750,000 a year and couples earning more than $1.5 million. That modest change is expected to affect about 2,000 subsidy recipients, less than 1 percent of the total. But it highlights the extent to which farm subsidies are a welfare program for rich people. 

A strong farm bill is necessary to promote a robust agriculture industry - but this bill isn't just helping struggling farmers maintain solvency.  It contains billions of dollars in pork spending, handed out to wealthy owners while maintaining high food prices.  In fact, the Washington Post is reporting that food prices have jumped by the most in 18 years.

 Rising global grain prices helped spark the largest increase in monthly food costs in nearly 20 years, as consumers paid more in April for cereals and baked goods, and the dairy, meat and other animal products that rely on feedstocks, the government reported yesterday.

Food prices have risen at a seasonally adjusted annual rate of 6.1 percent past three months. The 0.9 percent rise from March to April was the biggest one-month advance since January 1990, according to the Bureau of Labor Statistics.

The rise in prices covered all categories of food but was most severe among such staples as grains and oils -- goods where inflation has touched off food riots in some less developed countries and led to concerns about shortages.

Americans deserve an agriculture that helps increase food production while lowering prices.  This farm bill gives tax dollars to maintain higher commodity costs - and in some cases makes the rich richer.  The President should uphold his promise and veto the bill.