July 27, 2010 —     FRANKFORT - Someone remarked to me the other day that covering the Senate race between Republican Rand Paul and Democrat Jack Conway must be fun.

Interesting perhaps, but it’s not always fun or enlightening. In an age of instant news there is pressure to get the story out right now. But Conway and Paul routinely toss out charges or examples of government ineptitude which don’t bear up under scrutiny. Some time checking their “facts” often indicates what they said isn’t accurate.

    On Thursday, Conway said Paul “unequivocally for the record” has said he wants to eliminate the U.S. Department of Agriculture. But it appears Paul stopped short of advocating the elimination of USDA, saying it’s not feasible and advocating the elimination of some egregiously wasteful USDA programs. A little investigation usually indicates his examples are at best exaggerated. When he claimed the USDA paid subsidies to 234 “dead farmers” last year in Florida, CNHI News reported the real number was five — and legitimate because the farmers died during the crop year. On Thursday, he said USDA paid $1 billion to just three companies last year. But The Courier-Journal’s Joe Gerth reported the three companies are cooperatives owned by thousands of farmers who got about $4,000 each on average.

    There are reasonable arguments on both sides about farm subsidies. Large corporations do benefit. It seems counter-intuitive to pay farmers not to farm in some cases. But those farm programs also keep small farmers in business and allow this country to spend a smaller percentage of income on food than others. They pay for school nutritional programs. It doesn’t seem counter-intuitive to preserve domestic food production or family farms.

Conway and Paul ought to engage in serious debate about farm subsidies and a host of other issues which separate them. But they won’t. It’s easier for Paul to try to link Conway to “his President Obama” than to challenge his ideas. Same for Conway when he says Paul is “risky.”  Tell us why. Instead of saying Paul wants to bar minorities from lunch counters (he doesn’t) argue which is paramount — equal treatment or private property rights. Conway should be able to win that argument. And Dr. Paul, if Obama is Conway’s president simply because they are both Democrats, should you be judged on the record of George Bush during whose administration most of the deficit accrued? If reducing the deficit is the first priority, why extend temporary tax cuts passed when the government had a surplus but which would now make it very difficult to balance the budget? Conway, too, since he now says he’d also extend them.

    Conway says he’s a fiscal conservative. Fine, tell us how you’d cut the deficit. A few billion saved in negotiating prescription drug prices and closing off-shore tax loopholes won’t do it. Paul promises not just to offer but to pass a balanced budget as soon as he arrives in Washington. Tell us specifically what you’d cut and how a freshman Senator (probably a minority member) will get it passed. Do both of you believe we can ignore scientists’ warnings about climate change? If so, tell us why they’re wrong and you’re right. Should the rest of the nation live with the consequences so Kentucky can enjoy electricity rates lower than the rest of the country?

    Voters have responsibilities, too. We should not swallow easy sound bites as serious debate. We ought to realize there are no quick or easy solutions and solving the nation’s fiscal problems will require sacrifice. But don’t hold your breath waiting either for them — or us — to do it.



    RONNIE ELLIS writes for CNHI News Service and is based in Frankfort. Reach him at rellis@cnhi.com. Follow CNHI News Service stories on Twitter at www.twitter.com/cnhifrankfort.