Total Commodity Programs in 3rd District of Washington (Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler), 1995-2023
Subsidy Recipients 81 to 100 of 375
Recipients of Total Commodity Programs from farms in 3rd District of Washington (Rep. Jaime Herrera Beutler) totaled $10,984,000 in from 1995-2023.
Rank | Recipient (* ownership information available) |
Location | Total Commodity Programs 1995-2023 |
---|---|---|---|
81 | Michael J Clark | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $17,943 |
82 | Leah M Clark | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $17,726 |
83 | James Mcphee | Ridgefield, WA 98642 | $17,434 |
84 | Ronald Van Laeken | Ridgefield, WA 98642 | $17,276 |
85 | Nolan R Johnson | Vancouver, WA 98686 | $16,886 |
86 | Michael Thomas Crouse | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $16,822 |
87 | Vernon W Forsberg | Woodland, WA 98674 | $16,724 |
88 | Thomas A Van Laeken | Ridgefield, WA 98642 | $16,684 |
89 | Majestic Farms Blueberries LLC | Brush Prairie, WA 98606 | $16,464 |
90 | Gary Quigley | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $16,428 |
91 | Daniel L Swain | Woodland, WA 98674 | $16,114 |
92 | Donald Wages | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $16,054 |
93 | Rian Ten Kley | Camas, WA 98607 | $15,252 |
94 | Reid C Ten Kley | Vancouver, WA 98682 | $15,252 |
95 | William Olsen | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $15,040 |
96 | Thomas M Tarabochia | Kelso, WA 98626 | $14,956 |
97 | Brad Cowan | Astoria, OR 97103 | $14,098 |
98 | Terry R Ostling | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $13,563 |
99 | Annette M Johnson | Longview, WA 98632 | $13,199 |
100 | Fred Stanley | Cathlamet, WA 98612 | $13,048 |
* USDA data are not "transparent" for many payments made to recipients through most cooperatives. Recipients of payments made through most cooperatives, and the amounts, have not been made public. To see ownership information, click on the name, then click on the link that is titled Ownership Information.
** EWG has identified this recipient as a bank or lending institution that received the payment because the payment applicant had a loan requiring any subsidy payments go to the lender first. In 2019, the information provided to EWG by USDA began to include the entity that received the payment, rather than the person or entity that applied for it, which was previously provided. This move to shield subsidy recipients from disclosure enables USDA to further evade taxpayer accountability. Six percent of subsidy dollars went to banks, lending institutions, or the Farm Service Agency.”