Federal subsidization of agriculture has become a necessary evil, more or less out of its own existence. Such is the outcome when government so greatly interferes in capitalistic endeavors: once the dominoes are set into motion by its "invisible hand" the damage is done and the pieces can never be put back to normal. We cannot go back to a true free market economy in regard to our foodstuff because the act of giving money to the farming industry has become so utterly entrenched in the ways of doing things and affects so many facets of our total economy (from food processors to retail establishments to the end consumers) that there is no way the system can be abandoned without unreasonable duress placed upon the entire nation.

But, this does not mean that that the current way of doing things cannot receive some manipulation. The Federal Government uses the same worn-out methods that have been in play since 1933 (the Agricultural Adjustment Act) and improved upon in 1949 (the Agricultural Act), an era when Americans were too amicable to quasi-communist actions (i.e. Social Security, Civilian Conservation Corps) made popular by Franklin Delano Roosevelt. Many of these practices are outdated or their scope too vast.

Among the problems that should be rectified is the determination of what exactly should be subsidized. Subsidies were put into play to lower national risk, offer security for domestic food producers and instill lower food prices in the marketplace to benefit all consumers. The main crux behind all three factors is "food"; subsidies were implemented to keep the creation and purchase of food affordable. That being said, certain subsidies, those not related to foods, should be dropped.

Of all the crops, corn has quickly become the poster child for such reform. A great deal of the corn planted on American soil is deserved of federal funds as it is one of the more significant inputs of our diets, providing not only table corn, but also corn syrup and sustenance for our cattle and chickens. Even so, corn is suddenly and uniquely positioned as a crop that’s more than just a food. It has become a renewable resource as well, accounting for 98% of the ethanol (the government’s fuel additive du jour) produced in the States. Corn is now a veritable yellow gold, bubbling crude’s best friend, with levels of ethanol at 10% per gallon of gasoline and 15% mixes becoming increasingly popular.

Because of this distinction as a non-food, a great deal of current and future corn production should theoretically be eliminated from the corporate welfare rolls. In 2007, American farmers planted an unbelievable 92.9 million acres of corn. Of that, 15 million acres were dedicated to ethanol production, meaning that 16% of all total corn output is not attributable to food. This number will grow substantially in the coming years as current ethanol output is expected to go from about 5 billion gallons this year to 9 billion gallons by 2010.

For all corn planted in 2005 (the most recent year that final data is available) federal subsidies exceeded $9.5 billion. Assuming the same for 2007 – which, admittedly, is a shot in the dark because the ten-year average is $5.25 billion – over $1.52 billion would have been thrown away this year to farmers who were supposed to feed our citizens but, instead, fed the Big Oil monster. That’s $1.52 billion that was stolen from the mouths of babes and injected into your fuel tank. Without reform, this misdirection of funds will continue because many subsidy payments are nearly automatic and there is no accountability factor in any form of the past, current, and future Farm Bills.

These dollars, if they really need to be used, are better spent on other crops such as soybeans, which are losing ground (figuratively and literally) because American farmers are finding preference in growing revenue-heavy corn.

Another reason that these corn-fuel subsidies should end is that we’ve already spent more than enough on ethanol through energy-related subsidies. Ethanol producers were paid $7 billion in federal and state monies in 2006 alone. These incentives by themselves amount to freebies that equal $1.40 per gallon. Add to that mix the cheap corn that someone, somewhere is reaping in this mess and the ethanol market looks like a sham, something that a self-serving federal government maintains in an effort to make itself look good in the eyes of our increasingly-"green" populace.