

SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FREE NEWSLETTER
Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.
5
#000000
#FFFFFF
To donate by check, phone, or other method, see our More Ways to Give page.


Daily news & progressive opinion—funded by the people, not the corporations—delivered straight to your inbox.

Sara Sciammacco, ssciammacco@ewg.org 202-667-6982
Environmental Working Group's latest update of the EWG farm subsidy database shows that 23 members of Congress, or their family members, benefitted from $6,199,807 in taxpayer-funded farm subsidy payments between 1995 and 2011. The much-referenced database tracks $240 billion in commodity, crop insurance, and disaster programs and $37 billion in conservation subsidies paid to farmers in that period.
Environmental Working Group's latest update of the EWG farm subsidy database shows that 23 members of Congress, or their family members, benefitted from $6,199,807 in taxpayer-funded farm subsidy payments between 1995 and 2011. The much-referenced database tracks $240 billion in commodity, crop insurance, and disaster programs and $37 billion in conservation subsidies paid to farmers in that period.
"Members of Congress who receive farm subsidies are part of a system that cries out for reform and poses stark choices between propping up the largest and most successful businesses or helping working farmers, struggling families and the environment," said Craig Cox, senior vice president of agriculture and natural resources at EWG.
According to EWG's analysis of the data, derived from U.S. Department of Agriculture records, among those members of the House of Representatives who received substantial subsidies were:
* Rep. Stephen Fincher, R-Tenn. and his wife received $3,528,295
* Rep. Kristi Noem, R-S.D received $480,790
* Rep. Tom Latham, R-Iowa received $332,446
The distribution of subsidies among lawmakers reflects the highly distorted distribution of farm subsidies in the U.S. Just five crops - corn, cotton, rice wheat and soybeans - account for 90 percent of all farm subsidies. Since 1995, just 10 percent of subsidized farms have raked in 75 percent of all subsidy payments.
"These farm payments are not improper or illegal, but they do create a conflict of interest for these members of Congress," said Cox. "Some of them are major players in the 2012 farm bill debate and all of these lawmakers will be forced to cast a vote on the final bill."
The recently passed Senate farm bill would do away with the discredited direct payments, which go out regardless of economic need and cost taxpayers $5 billion a year. However, it includes a provision to replace those wasteful subsidies with another potentially more expensive entitlement that would guarantee income for the same farm businesses that have benefitted from the lion's share of traditional farm subsidies.
The same congressional families that benefitted from farm subsidies have likely received crop insurance premium subsidies too. That question cannot be answered until Congress changes the law that bars the federal government from releasing recipients' names. An EWG analysis found that 26 policyholders nationwide each received more than $1 million in premium subsidies and more than 10,000 policyholders each received $100,000 or more in 2011. With the identities of individuals cloaked, it is not possible to establish the extent to which members of Congress and their families reaped crop insurance subsidies.
"We are deeply disturbed by the public's inability to see who gets what when it comes to taxpayer-funded insurance subsidies," said Scott Faber, EWG vice president of government affairs. "The names of recipients should not be a state secret."
EWG supported a farm bill amendment introduced by Sens. Mark Begich, D-Alaska, and John McCain, R-Ariz. that would have lifted the veil of secrecy that has protected crop insurance subsidy recipients' identities for more than a decade, but it was never considered on the Senate floor.
"House lawmakers have a real opportunity to increase government transparency and make meaningful reforms that will create a safety net for working family farmers who need the help and will improve America's diets and protect the environment," Faber said.
Members of Congress who have received checks from the federal government include:
U.S. HOUSE OF REPRESENTATIVES (in alphabetical order)
Rep. Robert Aderholt (R-Ala.)
Aderholt's wife, Caroline Aderholt, is a 6.3 percent owner of McDonald Farms according to ownership records as of 2008. McDonald Farms received a total of $3,262,386 in federal farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011. She received $1,101 in commodity subsidies directly between 2009 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidies to Caroline Aderholt, using the percentage share information received by USDA, comes to $206,631.
Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-Iowa)
Boswell is listed as directly receiving a total of $16,235 in subsidies between 2001 and 2008.
Rep. John Campbell (R-Calif.)
Campbell is listed as a 1.5 percent owner of the Campbell/McNee Family Farm LLC according to ownership records as of 2008. The farm received a total of $16,876 in federal farm subsidies between 2007 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Campbell received, based on the percentage share, is $253.
Rep. Jim Costa (D-Calif.)
Costa is listed as a 50 percent owner of Lena E Costa Living Trust, which received $2,494 in federal farm subsidies between 2006-2007.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidy benefits Costa received, based on the percentage share information submitted to USDA, is a total of $1,247 between 2006 and 2007.
Rep. Blake Farenthold (R-Texas)
Farenthold received a total of $1,205 in farm subsidies directly from USDA between 1999 and 2005.
Rep. Stephen Fincher (R-Tenn.)
Fincher is listed as directly receiving a total of $114,519 from USDA between 1995 and 1999. Fincher's farm, Stephen & Lynn Fincher Farms, is also listed in the EWG database as receiving a total of $3,413,776 between 1999 and 2011. Fincher and his wife Lynn are each 50 percent partners in that farm.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Fincher and his wife received totaled $3,528,295 between 1995 and 2011.
Rep. Vicky Hartzler (R-Mo.)
Hartzler is listed in the EWG Farm Subsidy Database, but no subsidies were directly paid to her. Her husband, Lowell Hartzler is listed as 98 percent owner of Hartzler Farms, which received a total of $820,768 in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011. His ownership percentage rose from 53 percent in the years up to 2005 to 98 percent in 2006.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Lowell Hartzler received, based on the percentage share information (assumed to be 53 percent prior to 2006) supplied to USDA, totaled $514,645 between 1995 and 2011.
Rep. Rush Holt (D-N.J.)
Holt is listed as a 10.5 percent owner of Froelich Land Trust No. 1, which received at total of $34,623 in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011. Holt's wife, Margaret Lancefield, is listed as a 25 percent owner of Lancefield Farm, which received a total of $24,681 in subsidies between 1996 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Holt received, using the percentage share information provided to USDA, is a total of $9,806 between 1995 and 2011.
Rep. Timothy Huelskamp (R-Kan.)
Huelskamp is listed as directly receiving $258 in 2002.
Rep. John Kline (R-Minn.)
Kline's wife, Vicky Sheldon Kline, is listed as a 20 percent owner of Sheldon Family Farms LP, which received a total of $29,717 between 2000 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Ms. Kline received, based on the percentage share information supplied to USDA, is a total of $5,943 between 2000 and 2011.
Rep. Tom Latham (R-Iowa)
Latham is listed as part owner of four entities: 33 percent owner of Latham Seed Co., which received a total of $448,925 in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2003; 25 percent owner in Latham Hospital Farm, which received a total of $76,612 between 1995 and 2001; 25 percent owner in Latham Kanawha Farm, which received a total of $15,648 between 1995 and 2001; and 3 percent owner in DTB Farms LLC, which received a total of $552,017 between 2003 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidy benefits Latham received, based on the percentage share information submitted to USDA, is a total of $332,446 between 1995 and 2011.
Rep. Cynthia Lummis (R-Wyo.)
Lummis is listed as a 31.3 percent owner of Lummis Livestock, which received a total of $47,093 in farm subsidies in between 1996 and 2002. Lummis listed her ownership of Lummis Livestock in her 2009 financial disclosure form.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Lummis received, based on the percentage share information submitted to USDA, is a total of $14,289 between 1996 and 2002.
Rep. Randy Neugebauer (R-Texas)
Neugebauer is involved in two business entities. He owns 50 percent of Lubbock Land Company Five LTD, which received a total of $3,369 in farm subsidies between 1998 and 2003. He also owns 50 percent of Lubbock Land Company Two LTD, which received a total of $4,608 in farm subsidies in between 1998 and 1999. Neugebauer's financial disclosure forms for 2009 do not list either company.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidy benefits Neugubauer received, based on the percentage share information submitted to USDA, is a total of $3,989 between 1998 and 2003.
Rep. Kristi Noem (R-S.D.)
Noem is listed as having a 13.5 percent share in Racota Valley Ranch between 2000 and 2001 and a 16.9 percent share between 2002 and 2008. Racota Valley Ranch received a total of $3,198,617 in farm subsides between 1995 and 2011. Noem's 2009 financial disclosure form listed her as a partner in Racota Valley Ranch.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidy benefits Noem received, based on the percentage share information submitted to USDA, is $480,790.
Rep. Collin Peterson (D-Minn.)
Peterson is listed as receiving a total of $828 between 2005 and 2009.
Rep. Dennis Rehberg (R-Mont.)
Rehberg received a total of $7,971 directly from USDA between 1995 and 2002. Rehberg's wife, Jan Rehberg, also received $1,455 directly from USDA between 2008 and 2011. Jan Rehberg also has ownership in two entities that received payments. She has a 33 percent stake in Lenhardt Property LP, which received a total of $1,039 between 2006 and 2011. She also has a 5.6 percent stake in Teigen Land and Livestock Company, which received a total of $31,890 between 2002 and 2003.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidy benefits Rehberg and his wife received, based on the percentage share information provided to USDA, is a total of $11,418 between 1995 and 2011.
Rep. Marlin Stutzman (R-Ind.)
Stutzman is listed as directly receiving a total of $190,226 in farm subsidies between 1997 and 2011.
Rep. Mac Thornberry (R-Texas)
Thornberry listed as William M. Thornberry, directly received a total of $4,306 in farm subsidies from USDA between 1995 and 1999. Thornberry is also a one-third owner of Thornberry Brothers, which received a total of $76,401 in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011. His financial disclosure form in 2009 lists him as an owner in Thornberry Brothers Cattle.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Thornberry received, based on the percentage share information provided to USDA, is a total of $29,773 between 1995 and 2011.
US SENATE (in alphabetical order)
Sen. Michael Bennet (D-Colo.)
Bennet's wife, Susan Daggett, is listed in his 2010 financial disclosure forms as 5.5 percent owner of Daggett Farms LP and LMD Farms LP. Daggett Farms LP received a total of $268,969 in farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of farm subsidy benefits Daggett received, based on the percentage share information provided to USDA, is a total of $20,419 between 1995 and 2011.
Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa)
Grassley is listed as directly receiving a total of $316,535 in federal farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011.
Sen. Richard Lugar (R-Ind.)
Lugar is listed as a 9.39 percent owner of Lugar Stock Farm. His wife, Charlene Smeltzer , is listed as a 7.42 percent owner in Lugar Stock Farm. Lugar Stock Farm received a total of $168,343 in farm subsidies in between 1995 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Lugar and his wife received totals $28,304 between 1995 and 2011.
Sen. Jon Tester (D-Mont.)
Tester received a total of $177,744 directly from USDA between 1995 and 2011. Testers' wife, Sharla, is listed as a 50 percent owner of T-Bone Farms - Tester is listed as owning the other 50 percent. T-Bone farms received a total of $306,638 in federal farm subsidies between 1995 and 2011.
EWG's estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Tester and his wife received, based on percentage share information provided to USDA, is a total of $484,382 between 1995 and 2011.
Sen. Orrin Hatch (R-Utah)
EWG'S estimate of the farm subsidy benefits Hatch and his wife received, based on the share information provided to USDA regarding Ms. Hatch's share of Edries N Hansen Properties LLC which received $189,026 in subsidies between 2008 and 2011, is a total of $1,890 between 2008 and 2011.
The Environmental Working Group is a community 30 million strong, working to protect our environmental health by changing industry standards.
(202) 667-6982The final days of early voting saw a surge in youth turnout, according to numbers released by the NYC Board of Elections.
Democratic New York City mayoral candidate Zohran Mamdani on Monday taunted top rival Andrew Cuomo for receiving a decidedly backhanded endorsement from President Donald Trump.
During an interview on CBS News' "60 Minutes" that aired on Sunday, Trump criticized both Cuomo and Mamdani, but said that he would pick the former New York governor to be New York City's next mayor if forced to choose.
“I’m not a fan of Cuomo one way or the other," the president said. "But if it's gonna be between a bad Democrat and a communist, I’m gonna pick the bad Democrat all the time, to be honest with you."
Trump again says that he prefers that Cuomo wins the NYC mayoral race.
“I’m not a fan of Cuomo one way or the other, but if it’s gonna be between a bad Democrat and a communist, I’m gonna pick the bad Democrat all the time, to be honest with you.”pic.twitter.com/pGpdMSvotf
— bryan metzger (@metzgov) November 3, 2025
Mamdani, a Democratic state Assembly member who has represented District 36 since 2021, immediately pounced on Trump's remarks and sarcastically congratulated his rival for winning the endorsement of a president who is deeply unpopular in New York City.
"Congratulations, Andrew Cuomo!" he wrote in a social media post. "I know how hard you worked for this."
A leaked audio recording from a Cuomo fundraiser in the Hamptons in August included comments from the former governor about help he expected to receive from Trump as he ran as an independent in the mayoral race, following his loss to Mamdani in the Democratic primary. Cuomo and Trump have reportedly spoken about the race.
The former governor has also suggested that protests against Trump's deployment of federal immigration agents are an "overreaction," and has declined to forcefully condemn the president's weaponization of the justice system against his political opponents.
The New York City mayoral election will conclude on Tuesday night, and polls currently show Mamdani with a commanding lead over Cuomo and Republican candidate Curtis Sliwa.
The New York Times reported on Sunday that New Yorkers cast 735,000 early ballots this year, which the paper notes is "the highest early in-person turnout ever for a non-presidential election in New York."
The Times also noted that more than 150,000 early ballots were cast on the final day of early voting, driven by a surge in young voters flocking to the polls.
"Turnout among younger age groups lagged early in the week, with about 80,000 people under 35 voting from Sunday to Thursday," the Times explained. "That number jumped from Friday to Sunday, with over 100,000 voters under the age of 35 casting ballots, including more than 45,000 on Sunday."
Laura Tamman, a political scientist at Pace University, told Gothamist on Monday that the surge in youth turnout in the last days of early voting was a "meaningful shift," and likely good news for Mamdani's chances on Tuesday.
In the closing days of the campaign, Cuomo has been accused of employing racist tactics as he has tried portraying Mamdani as an outsider who does not share New York's cultural values, and he pointed to the fact that Mamdani has dual citizenship with the US and Uganda as evidence.
“His parents own a mansion in Uganda, he spent a lot of time there,” Cuomo said during an interview on Fox Business. “He just doesn’t understand the New York culture, the New York values, what 9/11 meant, what entrepreneurial growth means, what opportunity means, why people came here.”
Cuomo also appeared to agree with a recent comment from radio host Sid Rosenberg, who said Mamdani would "be cheering" if "another 9/11" took place.
“This is Andrew Cuomo’a final moments in public life," said Mamdani in response to the remark, "and he’s choosing to spend them making racist attacks.”
"The new American oligarchy is here," said the CEO of Oxfam America. "Billionaires and mega-corporations are booming while working families struggle to afford housing, healthcare, and groceries."
New research published Monday shows that the 10 richest people in the United States have seen their collective fortune grow by nearly $700 billion since President Donald Trump secured a second term in the White House and rushed to deliver more wealth to the top in the form of tax cuts.
The billionaire wealth surge that has accompanied Trump's return to power is part of a decades-long, policy-driven trend of upward redistribution that has enriched the very few and devastated the working class, Oxfam America details in Unequal: The Rise of a New American Oligarchy and the Agenda We Need.
Between 1989 and 2022, the report shows, the least rich US household in the top 1% gained 987 times more wealth than the richest household in the bottom 20%.
As of last year, more than 40% of the US population was considered poor or low-income, Oxfam observed. In 2025, the share of total US assets owned by the wealthiest 0.1% reached its highest level on record: 12.6%.
The Trump administration—in partnership with Republicans in Congress—has added rocket fuel to the nation's out-of-control inequality, moving "with staggering speed and scale to carry out a relentless attack on working-class families" while using "the power of the office to enrich the wealthy and well-connected," Oxfam's new report states.
"The data confirms what people across our nation already know instinctively: The new American oligarchy is here," said Abby Maxman, president and CEO of Oxfam America. "Billionaires and mega-corporations are booming while working families struggle to afford housing, healthcare, and groceries."
"Now, the Trump administration and Republicans in Congress risk turbocharging that inequality as they wage a relentless attack on working people and bargain with livelihoods during the government shutdown," Maxman added. "But what they're doing isn't new. It's doubling down on decades of regressive policy choices. What's different is how much undemocratic power they've now amassed."
"Today, we are seeing the dark extremes of choosing inequality for 50 years."
Oxfam released its report as the Trump administration continued to illegally withhold federal nutrition assistance from tens of millions of low-income US households just months after enacting a budget law that's expected to deliver hundreds of billions of dollars in tax breaks to ultra-rich Americans and large corporations.
Given the severity of US inequality and ongoing Trump-GOP efforts to make it worse, Oxfam stressed that a bold agenda "that focuses on rebalancing power" will be necessary to reverse course.
Such an agenda would include—but not be limited to—a wealth tax on multimillionaires and billionaires, a higher corporate tax rate, a permanently expanded child tax credit, strong antitrust policy that breaks up corporate monopolies, a federal job guarantee, universal childcare, and a substantially higher minimum wage.
"Today, we are seeing the dark extremes of choosing inequality for 50 years," Elizabeth Wilkins, president and CEO of the Roosevelt Institute, wrote in her foreword to the report. "The policy priorities in this report—rebalancing power, unrigging the tax code, reimagining the social safety net, and supporting workers' rights—are all essential to creating that more inclusive and cohesive society. Together, they speak to our deepest needs as human beings: to live with security and agency, to live free from exploitation."
"Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?" asked Sen. Bernie Sanders.
US Sen. Bernie Sanders on Sunday implored his Democratic colleagues in Congress not to cave to President Donald Trump and Republicans in the ongoing government shutdown fight, warning that doing so would hasten the country's descent into authoritarianism.
In an op-ed for The Guardian, Sanders (I-Vt.) called Trump a "schoolyard bully" and argued that "anyone who thinks surrendering to him now will lead to better outcomes and cooperation in the future does not understand how a power-hungry demagogue operates."
"This is a man who threatens to arrest and jail his political opponents, deploys the US military into Democratic cities, and allows masked Immigration and Customs Enforcement agents to pick people up off the streets and throw them into vans without due process," Sanders wrote. "He has sued virtually every major media outlet because he does not tolerate criticism, has extorted funds from law firms and is withholding federal funding from states that voted against him."
If Democrats capitulate, Sanders warned, Trump "will utilize his victory to accelerate his movement toward authoritarianism."
"At a time when he already has no regard for our democratic system of checks and balances," the senator wrote, "he will be emboldened to continue decimating programs that protect elderly people, children, the sick and the poor while giving more tax breaks and other benefits to his fellow oligarchs."
Sanders' op-ed came as the shutdown continued with no end in sight, with Democrats standing by their demand for an extension of Affordable Care Act (ACA) tax credits as a necessary condition for any government funding deal. Republicans have so far refused to negotiate on the ACA subsidies even as health insurance premiums skyrocket nationwide.
The Trump administration, meanwhile, is illegally withholding Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) funding from tens of millions of Americans—including millions of children—despite court rulings ordering him to release the money.
In a "60 Minutes" interview that aired Sunday, Trump again urged Republicans to nuke the 60-vote filibuster in the Senate to remove the need for Democratic support to reopen the government and advance other elements of their agenda unilaterally. Under the status quo, Republicans need the support of at least seven Democratic senators to advance a government funding package.
"The Republicans have to get tougher," Trump said. "If we end the filibuster, we can do exactly what we want. We're not going to lose power."
Congressional Democrats have faced some pressure from allies, most notably the head of the American Federation of Government Employees (AFGE), to cut a deal with Republicans to end the shutdown and alleviate the suffering it has inflicted on federal workers and many others.
But Democrats appear unmoved by the AFGE president's demand, and other labor leaders have since voiced support for the minority party's effort to secure an extension of ACA subsidies.
"We're urging our Democratic friends to hold the line," said Jaime Contreras, executive vice president of the 185,000-member Service Employees International Union Local 32BJ.
In his op-ed on Sunday, Sanders asked, "Does anyone truly believe that caving in to Trump now will stop his unprecedented attacks on our democracy and working people?"
"If the Democrats cave now, it would be a betrayal of the millions of Americans who have fought and died for democracy and our Constitution," the senator wrote. "It would be a sellout of a working class that is struggling to survive in very difficult economic times. Democrats in Congress are the last remaining opposition to Trump's quest for absolute power. To surrender now would be an historic tragedy for our country, something that history will not look kindly upon."