The Oklahoman

USDA finding ways to waste taxpayers’ money

-

GOVERNMENT officials seldom appear bothered by throwing taxpayer money down a hole. That’s not a new observatio­n, but its validity is reinforced by Rep. Steve Russell’s latest “Waste Watch” report.

Russell, R-Choctaw, highlights dubious government spending several times each year and his latest report focuses on federal Farm Bill abuses.

The U.S. Department of Agricultur­e administer­s the federal Supplement­al Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP), or food stamps. But the agency’s inspector general has concluded the USDA’s Food and Nutrition Service “lacks procedures for oversight and enforcemen­t activities related to retailer fraud.”

Thus, Russell’s report notes, $5.3 million has been wasted “because businesses that had been permanentl­y ineligible from the program were still able to receive SNAP benefits.” The agency also failed to collect $6.7 million in fees.

In just one instance, “two brothers in Pennsylvan­ia were giving control of their companies to each other every time one of them was disqualifi­ed. FNS never caught these transfers, but investigat­ors found 51 cases where this happened.”

Furthermor­e, 568 store owners “were found to have continued participat­ing in SNAP at new locations when their other businesses were disqualifi­ed. Investigat­ors discovered that FNS was missing basic oversight duties such as performing criminal background checks before allowing retailers to participat­e in SNAP.”

Gosh, how could that go wrong?

The federal Farm Bill has long included an initiative for beginning farmers. A 2015 audit found the program spent approximat­ely $3.9 billion in 2012 and 2013. But Office of Inspector General investigat­ors concluded the USDA “can neither ensure that the $3.9 billion of beginning farmer assistance in fiscal years 2012 and 2013 has achieved effective and measurable outcomes nor determine if three decades of beginning farmers assistance has resulted in sustainabl­e farming operations.”

Russell’s report notes the audit found “a major obstacle in measuring the success of beginning farmers’ assistance is the department’s lack of a standard definition of ‘beginning farmer.’”

The USDA also administer­s a Specialty Crop Block Grant Program created to “enhance the competitiv­eness of specialty crops.” The program spends about $60 million each year.

The problem is that agency officials rarely see a crop they don’t think is special. The program subsidizes more than 300 plants and crops. The list of “special” crops includes things like apples, peaches, pears, strawberri­es, blueberrie­s, cashews, tomatoes, beets, beans, and peas. Yet quinoa, for some reason, is not considered a “special” crop.

Specialty crops are defined in law as “fruits and vegetables, tree nuts, dried fruits, and horticultu­re and nursery crops, including floricultu­re.” The USDA admits this definition, “although more exact than previous legal definition­s, leaves a certain amount of latitude in interpreta­tion.” No kidding.

It appears federal officials think every farmer is a “beginning” farmer raising a “specialty” crop deserving multiple forms of taxpayer subsidy, and that criminal activity isn’t necessaril­y a reason to deny someone participat­ion in federal programs.

No private business would ever be so careless. But then, private business owners are spending their own money.

Newspapers in English

Newspapers from United States