Physicians Against Nutrition update: Davis boosts Day's line on Farm Bill

We're guessing the Physicians Against Nutrition thing didn't work out so well for GOP endorsed candidate Brian Davis. Now, instead of going after kids' milk money, he's pilfering Dick Day's position on the Farm Bill.

Here's how it plays out. On May 21, the DFL asked the GOP hopefuls where they stood on the new Farm Bill.

It didn't take Dick Day long to venture an opinion. Back in May, Day took a press tour of Southern Minnesota. Never shy, Day weighed in on the Farm Bill. A passage from the May 29 New Ulm Journal is typical:

Speaking on the Farm Bill, Day said it contains good things for Minnesotans, but the bill is “laden with pork projects that have nothing to do with farming or feeding people.”

Day specifically mentions earmarks that came in via the Senate, including tax breaks for race horses. And so it went through the summer, until Farmfest, when asked if he would have voted for the Farm Bill, Day answered (our transcript):

Well, first off I would have voted for it and thank you to . . .Congressman Peterson and Congressman Walz for voting for it, and I as you well know putting together a bill sometimes can be rather cumbersome. The things that I didn’t like about it? I didn’t like the idea that it was $30 billion to not farm, I didn’t like that, you know, $400 and some billion for the Chesapeake bay, $90 billion for race horses, although you know as people who know me very well know I love racehorses and try to help that area. . . .

Davis, on the other hand, was publicly silent about the Farm Bill until Farmfest. Answering the same question about whether or not he'd have voted for the bill, Davis didn't answer yes or no, nor did he criticize pork in the earmarks. Instead, he scorned food stamps and other entitlements as the "bad parts" of the Farm Bill (our transcript):

You know I’ve been asked this question a few times before and I have to tell you this that since I’m not in Congress its difficult to give a straight yes or no answer because the reality is that it passed with such an overwhelming majority that President Bush couldn’t even veto it. We know that it is an improvement of what we had in the 1940s and what we’re looking for and we do need to have support for our rural communities. We do need to have a situation where farmers can pass down a family farm from one generation to the next. The improvements are in the cyclical payment program. The bad parts are about 70% of it are not really farm programs- they’re food stamps and entitlement programs. [emphasis added] So there reasons to be a better way to do it but it’s what we have right now and we need to move forward with it.

In today's Mankato Free Press, Davis has swiped Day's position:

Day said Davis is sometimes unwilling to take a clear stand on controversial issues, noting Davis wouldn’t say whether he would have supported the farm bill approved earlier this year. Day would have voted for it. Davis says he supported the commodity program provisions but disliked the level of pork barrel spending.

Davis's supporters continue to say that their man is the expert*, not a "politician." Really?  Looks likes one at this point. And while his supporters whine about Davis's grassroots support, this KEYC-TV video clip of coverage of a "rally" for Davis in Mankato doesn't reveal eager throngs. There's more lit on the tables than in people's hands and one woman intently studies a phone book. Looking to call for reinforcements?

Davis is staging "rallies" across the district, while Walz volunteers are out doorknocking voters. Help make sure Tim Walz returns to Congress to work for Southern Minnesotans by volunteering and contributing.

Image: Physicians Against Nutrition, by the divine Tild.

*As far as being an "expert" goes, Davis is reported to be a fine cancer doctor, but we know of no instances where he has worked on health care policy. And the nuclear power engineer bit? Eight months of working at an engineering firm after graduating from college twenty-five years ago doesn't make a person an expert on energy policy. It makes him someone who switched careers 25 years ago.