This was a vote on an amendment by Rep. Earl Blumenauer (D-OR) that would have limited agricultural subsidies provided to farmers by making farms earning more than $250,000 per year ineligible for federal subsidies. This amendment was offered to a continuing resolution funding the federal government through September 2011, and cutting $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs.

Blumenauer urged support for his amendment: “No serious effort to reduce the federal government is complete without addressing agricultural subsidies. Even in time of record high farm prices and profits, we still gave $16 billion in subsidies last year. There are no meaningful limits….This amendment would establish a hard limit of $250,000 per entity….I strongly urge that you join with me…to establish this limit, save $100 million this year and more in the future, and start us on a path of reform…”

Rep. Frank Lucas (R-OK) opposed the amendment: “This amendment changes current law. This is a decision that needs to be made in the context of the next new farm bill….I know it is a popular parlor game in some circles to see how far you can jerk farmers around, but making these changes midstream…is disruptive to market decisions that producers have made in some cases years ago. All farmers and ranchers want certainty. They plan to work under current law. Plain and simple, the author of this amendment wants to change agricultural policy, and this debate does not belong in this bill.”

The House rejected this amendment by a vote of 185-241. Voting “yea” were 134 Democrats—including a majority of progressives—and 51 Republicans. 187 Republicans and 54 Democrats voted “nay.” As a result, the House rejected an amendment that would have limited agricultural subsidies provided to farmers by a “continuing resolution” (which funded the federal government through September 2011, and cut $61 billion in federal funding for many government programs) to $250,000 per farm.