Food for thought

This is an opinion item.

Author(s)	The Philadelphia Inquirer editorial board
Source	The Philadelphia Inquirer
Date	August 18, 2007
URL	http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/20070818_Editorial___U_S__Farm_Subsidies.html
Quote	"The House did sweeten the pot for conservation, renewable energy, nutrition and specialty crops - all good steps, which confronted reform-minded lobbyists with a tough choice. Should they settle for these modest gains, or keep pushing for systemic change against long odds? They should keep pushing. The Senate can and must do better than a $286 billion bill that "promotes protectionism, overproduction and market interference," as Taxpayers for Commonsense says."

Add or change this opinion item's references

This item argues against the position Bill should be passed on the topic 2007 U.S. Farm Bill.