Try the political quiz
@ISIDEWITHQuestionsEconomyStarted 15yrs agoActive 2wks ago

Should the government subsidize farmers?

A farm subsidy is a form of financial aid paid to farmers by the government. The purpose of the aid can be to supplement their income or influence the cost and supply of agricultural products. The U.S. government pays farmers more than $20 Billion a year in farm subsidies. Proponents argue that the subsides are necessary since net farm income has decline by 32% between 2014 and 2015. Opponents argue that the farmers should fend for themselves and point out that 2,300 farmers who do not grow crops receive annual subsidies.

+
Expand
+ Settings x  State Senate District 34 (Kansas)

Toggle voterbase

Statistics are shown for this demographic

Answer Overview

Response rates from 957 State Senate District 34 voters.

64%
Yes
36%
No
47%
Yes
32%
No
10%
Yes, but only small local farms instead of large corporations
4%
No, end all government subsidies and let the free market run its course
5%
Yes, but only as a temporary measure to stabilize prices
2%
Yes, but only for organic farms

Historical Support

Trend of support over time for each answer from 957 State Senate District 34 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Historical Importance

Trend of how important this issue is for 957 State Senate District 34 voters.

Loading data...

Loading chart... 

Other Popular Answers

Unique answers from State Senate District 34 voters whose views went beyond the provided options.

 @4QJ4ZM4from Florida  answered…6yrs6Y

No, instead the government should buy the crops that would otherwise not have been grown, and should give these crops to feed the hungry (in place of foreign aid and domestic food stamps).

 @4SVM8YTfrom Pennsylvania  answered…6yrs6Y

We need to realize that most unhealthy and uncontrollable condition occur within large factory farms and also realize what their unfair size advantage means to small business. This is a case of survival of the greediest not fittest. "Greediest" also referring to its over consuming American customers. We all consume way more than needed making us the cause in so many ways as well

 @4PPMZ96from District of Columbia  answered…6yrs6Y

Yes, but only to the extent that those farms provide foods and grains to third world countries, where children and the elderly die from hunger and starvation.

 @4SCHFFXfrom Ohio  answered…6yrs6Y

Commercial companies paid farmers to plant what they wanted or not plant at all. Thus, instead of real farming where there is a rotation of various crops, which would always re-nourish the ground, the ground is now like the dust-bowl of the early 2oth century. So, if the government were to pay the farmer it should be to first nourish the ground and then to plant a rotative selection of plants that would continue the helping and enriching of the soil.

 @4Q7W7C2from California  answered…6yrs6Y

Factory Farms are unethical and should never be subsidized by the government. They should be regulated though.

 @4RBR3VKfrom District of Columbia  answered…6yrs6Y

Small, organic vegetable farms to provide close, safe farms to every community. Stop subsidizing Corn! Increase seed variety by reversing patents on nature.

 @4WDJ395from Washington  answered…6yrs6Y

No, We should nationalize all farms.

 @4R5G9W2from New Jersey  answered…6yrs6Y

Yes, and give power back to farmers and away from big food corporations and deny subsides to farmers who don't grow any crops

Latest News

Stay up-to-date on the most recent “Farm Subsidies” news articles, updated frequently.

Popular Conversations

Join in on the most popular conversations.

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

Israeli Bombings Kill 2,300 In Lebanon in 3 weeks

Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.The Israeli military has ordered people living in more than a quarter of Lebanon to flee, according to a UN calculation, as its fight with the Iran-backed Shia militant group Hizbollah threatens to engulf the Mediterranean country.Lebanese authorities say Israeli bombing has killed more than 2,300 people and injured almost 11,000, mostly in the past three weeks, with Israeli attacks reaching areas far beyond Hizbollah’s traditional bastions of support in the south.More than 1mn people have fled their homes in Lebanon in under a month, according to its government, a dramatic forced movement of the population in a country of only about 5mn inhabitants with a land mass smaller than the US state of Connecticut. Israeli forces began a ground offensive in south Lebanon two weeks ago, in their fourth invasion of the country in under five decades. They had already destroyed large parts of the densely populated southern Beirut suburb where Hizbollah had its headquarters, and killed many top militant commanders in air strikes, including former leader Hassan Nasrallah.Rema Jamous Imseis, Middle East director of UNHCR, told journalists in Geneva that “over 25 per cent of [Lebanon is] under a direct Israeli military evacuation order”. “People are heeding these calls to evacuate and they’re fleeing with almost nothing,” she added, saying that 80 per cent of the shelters opened by the Lebanese government — mostly in schools — were now full.

▲  1012 replies

 @ISIDEWITH submitted…2yrs2Y

A Moment of Darkness': Washington Post's No-Endorsement Decision Ignites Media Firestorm

Even though the presidential race between former President Donald Trump and Vice President Kamala Harris is neck and neck, The Washington Post has decided not to make a presidential endorsement for the first time in 36 years, the publisher and CEO announced Friday."We are returning to our roots of not endorsing presidential candidates," Will Lewis wrote in an opinion piece published on the paper's website. He referenced the paper's policy in the decades prior to 1976, when, following the Watergate scandal that the Post broke, it endorsed Democratic nominee Jimmy Carter. The last time the Post did not endorse a presidential candidate in the general election was 1988, according to a search of its archives.Colleagues learned the news from the editorial page editor, David Shipley, at a tense meeting shortly before Lewis' announcement. The meeting was characterized by someone with direct knowledge of discussions on condition of anonymity to speak about internal matters.Shipley said that he told other editorial board leaders Thursday by management that there would be no endorsement, though he has known for weeks. He added that he "owns" this decision. The reason he cited was to create "independent space" where the newspaper does not tell people for whom to vote.Colleagues were said to be "shocked" and uniformly negative. Post corporate spokespeople have not responded to multiple messages left by NPR on the subject.Former Washington Post Executive Editor Martin Baron, who led the newsroom to acclaim during Trump's presidency, denounced the decision starkly."This is cowardice, a moment of darkness that will leave democracy as a casualty," Baron said in a statement to NPR. "Donald Trump will celebrate this as an invitation to further intimidate The Post’s owner, Jeff Bezos (and other media owners). History will mark a disturbing chapter of spinelessness at an institution famed for courage."A similar decision by Los Angeles Times owner Patrick Soon-Shiong led this week to the resignations of the paper's editorials editor and two editorial board members. Soon-Shiong said that he had asked the editorial board to draft a "factual analysis" of Trump and Harris' policies and plans. In her resignation letter, editorials editor Mariel Garza said the decision made the paper look “craven and hypocritical,” given its past reporting and editorials on Trump.

▲  1013 replies

About This Data

Based on 957 responses to this question.

These results come from iSideWith's ongoing political issues survey. We collect over a million responses per day, filter out duplicate and multiple submissions, and break the results down by political party, ideology, age, state, and census demographics (income, race, education, household).

iSideWith is non-partisan — we don't advocate for any party, candidate, or position. We report what the public tells us.

Read Our Full Methodology →

Cite Or Embed This Poll

Writing about this issue? Use the live data and link back to the full results.

Cite This Poll

iSideWith. (2026). “Should the government subsidize farmers?” — Public Opinion Poll Results. Retrieved June 17, 2026, from https://www.isidewith.com/poll/965576

Embed The Live Result

Preview