Total Market Facilitation Program payments in 7th District of California (Rep. Ami Bera) totaled $748,329 from 2018-2020‡.
States Receiving Total Market Facilitation Program payments, 1995-2020‡
| Rank | State | Total Market Facilitation Program 1995-2020‡ | Pct of Total | Running Percentage |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Iowa | $2,581,026,214 | 11.1% | 11.1% |
| 2 | Illinois | $2,578,013,073 | 11.1% | 22.3% |
| 3 | Minnesota | $1,755,590,560 | 7.6% | 29.8% |
| 4 | Kansas | $1,564,735,102 | 6.8% | 36.6% |
| 5 | Nebraska | $1,550,242,831 | 6.7% | 43.3% |
| 6 | Texas | $1,330,293,766 | 5.7% | 49.0% |
| 7 | Indiana | $1,307,700,565 | 5.6% | 54.7% |
| 8 | North Dakota | $1,156,297,451 | 5.0% | 59.6% |
| 9 | Missouri | $1,084,248,755 | 4.7% | 64.3% |
| 10 | Ohio | $999,435,841 | 4.3% | 68.6% |
| 11 | South Dakota | $960,318,126 | 4.1% | 72.8% |
| 12 | Arkansas | $728,079,096 | 3.1% | 75.9% |
| 13 | Wisconsin | $558,251,829 | 2.4% | 78.3% |
| 14 | Mississippi | $543,317,159 | 2.3% | 80.7% |
| 15 | Michigan | $457,389,949 | 2.0% | 82.6% |
| 16 | California | $453,092,966 | 2.0% | 84.6% |
| 17 | Kentucky | $389,360,771 | 1.7% | 86.3% |
| 18 | Georgia | $374,907,385 | 1.6% | 87.9% |
| 19 | Tennessee | $372,332,161 | 1.6% | 89.5% |
| 20 | North Carolina | $301,998,561 | 1.3% | 90.8% |
| 21 | Oklahoma | $274,956,943 | 1.2% | 92.0% |
| 22 | Louisiana | $272,514,791 | 1.2% | 93.2% |
| 23 | Washington | $174,665,621 | 0.8% | 93.9% |
| 24 | Alabama | $170,251,322 | 0.7% | 94.7% |
| 25 | Montana | $158,879,513 | 0.7% | 95.3% |
| 26 | Pennsylvania | $133,522,323 | 0.6% | 95.9% |
| 27 | Colorado | $129,603,818 | 0.6% | 96.5% |
| 28 | Virginia | $118,634,232 | 0.5% | 97.0% |
| 29 | New York | $107,291,767 | 0.5% | 97.4% |
| 30 | Idaho | $99,999,347 | 0.4% | 97.9% |
| 31 | Maryland | $93,284,063 | 0.4% | 98.3% |
| 32 | South Carolina | $83,814,435 | 0.4% | 98.6% |
| 33 | Arizona | $72,531,589 | 0.3% | 99.0% |
| 34 | Oregon | $58,919,303 | 0.3% | 99.2% |
| 35 | New Mexico | $50,937,813 | 0.2% | 99.4% |
| 36 | Delaware | $29,908,555 | 0.1% | 99.6% |
| 37 | Florida | $29,756,521 | 0.1% | 99.7% |
| 38 | New Jersey | $16,640,860 | 0.1% | 99.8% |
| 39 | Utah | $13,717,559 | 0.1% | 99.8% |
| 40 | Vermont | $9,416,557 | 0.0% | 99.9% |
| 41 | Wyoming | $8,561,415 | 0.0% | 99.9% |
| 42 | Massachusetts | $7,482,162 | 0.0% | 99.9% |
| 43 | West Virginia | $5,418,320 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 44 | Nevada | $4,869,528 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 45 | Maine | $3,096,526 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 46 | Connecticut | $1,583,856 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 47 | New Hampshire | $913,073 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 48 | Hawaii | $230,581 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 49 | Rhode Island | $135,357 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
| 50 | Alaska | $99,287 | 0.0% | 100.0% |
Source: Environmental Working Group. Compiled from USDA data.
‡ Data for 2020 includes payments made by USDA through June 30, 2020 and does not include crop insurance premium subsidies.
Federal crop insurance reform vital for incentivizing climate adaptation on farms
Farm Subsidies Ballooned Under Trump
Is Federal Crop Insurance Policy Leading to Another Dust Bowl?
Double Dipping:
The "Farm Crisis" Myth
Crying Wolf