WATCH: Hands Off The Raisins! Property Rights Case Headed Back to SCOTUS.

Can the government take your raisins?


The Supreme Court has decided to hear an important property rights case involving raisin farmers who aren't allowed to keep and sell their own crop. Every year, their raisins are seized by a Depression-era bureaucratic organization called the Raisin Administrative Committee, as Damon Root noted yesterday.

Reason TV profiled the couple at the center of the case, Marvin and Laura Horne, two years ago when the case was on its way to the Supreme Court for the first time. The court ended up kicking the case back down to the 9th Circuit, citing jurisdictional issues, but now that the 9th Circuit has ruled against the Hornes and their fellow raisin farmers once and for all, SCOTUS will finally decide the central issue of the case: Does personal property (i.e., crops) qualify for the same protections under the Fifth Amendment's "Takings Clause" as does real property (i.e., land)?

Watch the video for the full background on the case and to see what it's like for farmers who have up to 47 percent of their crop seized every year.

"USDA v. Horne" was written and produced by Zach Weissmueller. About 7 minutes. Original release date was July 18, 2013, and original writeup is below.

"They want us to pay for our own raisins that we grew," says Raisin Valley Farms owner Marvin Horne. "We have to buy them back!"

This is but one absurdity that Marvin and his wife Laura have faced during their decade-long legal battle with the United States Department of Agriculture (USDA). Every year, the Hornes plant seeds, tie vines, harvest fruit, and place grapes in paper trays to create sun-dried raisins. And every year, the federal government prevents them from bringing their full harvest to market.

It's called an agriculture marketing order. Depression-era regulations meant to stabilize crop prices endanger the livelihoods of small farmers across the country, but the raisin marketing order is particularly egregious. An elected board of bureaucrats known as the Raisin Administrative Committee decides what the proper yield should be in any given year in order to meet a previously decided-upon price. Once they can estimate the size of the year's harvest, they force every farmer to surrender a percentage of their crop to raisin packers. The packers then place the raisins in a "reserve pool," a special holding vat for raisins that cannot be sold in the U.S. Eventually, the packers can sell the reserve pool raisins overseas at highly discounted prices set by the government or funnel them into school lunch programs for next to nothing.

The farmers were always supposed to get a percentage of the money raised from the reserve pool raisins, but as profit margins dwindled over the years, so did the return to farmers. The tipping point came in 2003, when farmers received zero dollars in return for the 47 percent of the crop they had surrendered.

"You can't work for a whole year and then give 47 percent of what you made away and still keep that business afloat," says Laura Horne.

Frustrated and desperate, the Hornes started packing and selling their own raisins, which they believed would allow them to circumvent the marketing order. In doing so, they inadvertantly sparked a small revolution, as other independent raisin farmers saw their initial success and began to pack and sell, too. The government wasn't happy (neither was Sun-Maid).

The USDA saddled the Hornes with massive fines in addition to demanding payment for the raisins they had failed to surrender. Marvin Horne estimates his outstanding balance at close to a million dollars, a virtually insurmountable figure for a small, family-owned farm. The Hornes decided to fight back.

When the Hornes and a few other raisin farmers tried to challenge the USDA's seizure of their crop without payment as an unconstitutional taking of property in violation of the Fifth Amendment, the government balked and said that the issue should be heard in a Federal Claims court, as the case had nothing to do with the taking of property but instead was a matter of the Hornes violating farming regulations and being fined for doing so. Remarkably, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals agreed with the USDA and declared that they had no jurisdiction in the case. Luckily for the Hornes, however, the Supreme Court took the case and ruled, in a 9-0 decision, that the 9th Circuit was mistaken and must consider the case on its constitutional merits. 

And now, after nearly a decade of fighting, the Hornes must wait a little longer. This saga may well end in 9th Circuit Court of Appeals in the next few months, or the Hornes may one day soon find themselves before the Supreme Court once again. A favorable legal outcome is far from certain, but their raisins—and our property rights—depend on it.

Produced by Zach Weissmueller. Camera by Tracy Oppenheimer and Weissmueller. Music by Case Newsom.

About 7 minutes.

Scroll down for downloadable versions and subscribe to Reason TV's YouTube Channel to receive automatic updates when new material goes live.

NEXT: VID: Campbell Brown on Her Fight To Get Lousy Teachers Fired

Editor's Note: We invite comments and request that they be civil and on-topic. We do not moderate or assume any responsibility for comments, which are owned by the readers who post them. Comments do not represent the views of or Reason Foundation. We reserve the right to delete any comment for any reason at any time. Report abuses.

  1. Wow, I wish I could listen to Garrison Keillor forever!

    /nobody younger than a Baby Boomer, ever

    1. Whenever you hear someone dismissively say “White people” with a sigh, Prairie Home Companion is what they have in mind.

      1. I’ve often described A Prairie Home Companion as “the stereotypical white people that black people make fun of”.

    2. Don’t worry, next week’s show will be indistinguishable from this one.

    3. I don’t know about forever, but I do like him (or his show, seems like he might be kind of a dick personally).

  2. “[…]do what we want with our own crrop”

    You see, there’s a problem with this concept here.

    1. That was literally the fucking argument. From the amicus:

      “The brief makes one main point: the Hornes, as raisin “handlers” cannot assert a takings defense because they didn’t have title to the raisins they claimed were taken, and thus lack standing.”

      So, the raisins they grew aren’t theirs. This is just a sophisticated form of peonage.

      1. I would say it is a more unsophisticated “throw arguments at the wall and see what sticks” line of thought.

  3. If I read inbetween the lines here, I can see how raisin farmers (in aggregate) got themselves into this.

    What probably was pitched (and may have been in practice) a good idea when this program was instituted, is being challenged because it’s no longer such a good idea. It’s a classic case of making a pact with the devil.

    It sounds like initially, the state would take 47% of your crop, but you were guaranteed a decent price back from it, in addition to guaranteeing market prices for your unconfiscated crops. But, according to the video, the return on the confiscated portion has dropped to zero, and now everyone’s screaming.

    Had the farmers refused this deal when it was initially offered, this would have been what progressives would call “voting against your own interests”.

    1. Had the farmers refused this deal when it was initially offered, this would have been what progressives would call “voting against your own interests”.

      I doubt it was voluntary.

      1. These things tend to not spring forth out of nothing. I’m guessing it was a large coalition of politically connected farmers who created this bureaucracy.

        The fact that this system has been in place for well over thirty years tells you something.*

        And the video alludes to it. This thing the California farmers created became sentient and they’ve lost control of it.

        According to my (now increasing) knowledge of this body, it was finally challenged in 2013.

        *googled it. Created in 1949

        The reserve gained prominence in 2013 when Marvin Horne challenged the legitimacy of the reserve. Before 2002, he had been contributing voluntarily to the reserve, although he stopped that year.

        So again, this looks like a classic case of an industry group, demanding a federally run program be created to protect them from crash pricing, went sentient and now they want out.

      2. IN fact, the more I read of this Raisin Committee, how it was formed, what it was designed to do, it really belongs in the Stalin thread below.

        Furthermore, if one remembers what was going on in California politically at the time this body was created, it’s hardly surprising that a full-on communist five-year-plan type agency would be formed.

        1. And by “they”, we’re only talking about a subset of farmers. Plenty of other farmers consider Horne an outlaw and are angry that he no longer participates.

          They’ve essentially created a Raisin Farmer’s Union, and Horne is seen as a scab.

          Meet Marvin Horne, raisin farmer. Horne has been farming raisins on a vineyard in Kerman, Calif., for decades. But a couple of years ago, he did something that made a lot of the other raisin farmers out here in California really angry. So angry that they hired a private investigator to spy on Horne and his wife, Laura. Agents from a detective agency spent hours sitting outside the Hornes’ farm recording video of trucks entering and leaving the property.


          1. More amazing that NPR would do a supportive piece on someone who went against the almighty state.

            I would have expected something instead implying that he was an ‘astroturf farmer’ in an evil lawsuit supported by the Kochs, who by doing his own small farming was depriving los braceros of opportunities, or something like that.

            By the way, among my least favorite people are those who start virtually everything they say with “I heard on NPR the other day…..”. I imagine they believe it makes them sound super-intelligent and on top of all current issues.

            1. By the way, among my least favorite people are those who start virtually everything they say with “I heard on NPR the other day…..”. I imagine they believe it makes them sound super-intelligent and on top of all current issues.

              I feel like one of those same douches whenever I start a sentence that way. It’s been a while in my case, since I haven’t listened to NPR much since 2012. Their barest pretense of objective journalism had, to my mind, completely been done away with during the runup to Dear Leader’s reelection.

            2. That’s somewhat of a caricature. NPR does quite a bit of good journalism criticizing the state, at least in the area of criminal justice. They did a great series on bail issues, one on the petty fines cities like Ferguson engage in, and on asset forfeiture.

              1. Bo, I must reiterate – at that time, I perceived that their bias was stronger than ever. I’ve listened very seldom since. I could have easily been wrong in my perception, and to the extent I was right, they may have done good work since.

                Please don’t confuse my perception at the time with some sort of last word on the subject.

                1. I didn’t mean to imply they don’t have biases, I think they surely do. But they sometimes seem to overcome them, or at perhaps it’s the broken clock is correct twice a day thing (which would make them better than a lot of media).

                  1. I find it very useful to say “I heard on NPR…” When I am talking to progs and citing anti-state ideas. I usually add ” but you know how biased they are”

                    1. I have in the past sometimes said “I heard on NPR (or read in the NYT, etc)” when the item in question was actually on Fox News or from the CATO institute, and then conversely said “I heard on Fox News” when the item in question was actually on NPR just to fuck with certain people.

              2. NPR certainly has biases. It shows in reporting on some issues (like gun control) and in commentary. And they share with most media an enthusiasm for government. But in general, I think they are still among the best for mainstream news sources. Most of their straight reporting is pretty decent.

    2. Had the farmers refused this deal when it was initially offered, this would have been what progressives would call “voting against your own interests”.

      It’s only 6:30 a.m. but I know already that this is the best sentence I will read today.

  4. Every year, their raisins are seized by a Depression-era bureaucratic organization called the Raisin Administrative Committee

    “The tree of liberty must be refreshed from time to time with the blood of patriots and raisin gangsters.”

    Raisin farmers need to weld up some killdozers.

  5. Who needs more than 53% of their own crop?

    1. Well finally, Mitt Romney’s comment makes sense.

    2. Those raisins? You didn’t sun dry them.

    3. ‘Who needs more than 8% of their own crop?’

      Just so we don’t forget.

    4. I was always amazed at the cheap price of American raisins here in Taiwan. We get some American produce cheaper than in America. American lemons compete with the local product on price.

  6. Killdozers….me likey.

    1. Chateau Dozer de Meurtre? I’d drink that.

  7. Kulaks!

  8. OT: Ship your enemies glitter is up for sale.

    Hi guys, I’m the founder of this website. Please stop buying this horrible glitter product ? I’m sick of dealing with it. Sincerely, Mat.

    You’re doing it wrong.

    1. “You have made your glitter-coated bed and I’m afraid you will have to lie in it,”


    2. Lots of comments deleted by The Guardians moderator.

      Imagine if they did that here? Probably need two interns just to work on deleting posts.

      1. The feedback mechanisms provided by the comentariot would easily overcome any moderation efforts.

        Think exponential growth vs linear response.

        1. Good point. At some point the exponential growth provided by the commentariat may lead to the “Comment Event Horizon” where the entire web is nothing but comments made by Reasonoids.

          1. Yeah, both of us!

        2. Did somebody say Goat Fucker?

    3. “It’d be like picking off bystanders with a sniper rifle: fun at first, but it would quickly become a depressing chore.”

  9. The more government actions I see like this the more I am convinced that the sociopaths in government believe that all property belongs to them. They certainly behave as if they believe that.

  10. “You can’t work for a whole year and then give 47 percent of what you made away and still keep that business afloat,” says Laura Horne.

    Somehow I’ve managed the last few years. Thank you IRS and MN DOR.

    1. NotAnotherSkippy|1.17.15 @ 8:50PM|#

      “”You can’t work for a whole year and then give 47 percent of what you made away and still keep that business afloat,” says Laura Horne.

      Somehow I’ve managed the last few years. Thank you IRS and MN DOR.”
      I would bet she’s doing the same as you are with the 47% they let her keep.
      BTW, I’m sure you’ll find it interesting that the CA sales tax collection agency is named “The State Board of Equalization”. Kind of gives you a little shiver, doesn’t it?

      1. the CA sales tax collection agency is named “The State Board of Equalization”.

        I. am. speechless. This is beyond parody.

    2. I’m guessing they still take 50% of the 53% they are allowed to sell.

      1. “I’m guessing they still take 50% of the 53% they are allowed to sell.”

        ‘Scuse me; I had it backwards.

  11. Eating Chipotle and watching the tax deductions dance to Buster Poindexter and Joe Cuba.

    Yeah, Life is good right now.

    1. poopmcscoopface
      9 months ago

      this song makes me want to do coke off of a strippers ass on a florida beach while smuggling dope in from cuba by boat ?

      Never change, Youtube comments section; you’re beautiful just the way you are.

        1. YukkyMeat (not verified) on Aug 9, 2014
          Why are you only looking at water consumption?
          The writer of this article, Amanda, is clearly uneducated about this important issue.
          Amanda, you fail to also include:
          * MASSIVE deforestation to house the cows you eat
          * The disgusting ways cattle (and all animals that are eaten) are treated
          * The HUGE amounts of methane produced by these animals farting all day
          * The mounting evidence that meat consumption is a major cause of heart disease and cancer
          * The fact that these cattle are fed grains and soy which should be used to FEED THE MILLIONS OF STARVING PEOPLE WORDWIDE.
          So the huge amounts of water to raise these poor creatures is only the tip of the iceberg.
          Get your facts straight Amanda, as I am sure you are one of the many who waste water everyday.
          Stop trying to justify something that is causing all of the problems, health wise and environment wise.
          There is no brainwashing going on here…its called education. People who don’t eat meat are not like an extreme religious group; we are showing people the facts, not something that you can’t see.

          1. I’m going back to Chipotle to order a double Barbacoa Burrito, now, in honor of YukkyMeat

          2. According to Wikipedia, there are approximately 1.3 billion cattle in the world, about 1.08 billion domestic sheep in the world, 925 million domestic goats, and about 1 billion domestic pigs. In addition there would be vast numbers of domesticated chickens, geese, ducks. Do these vegans plan, pray tell, to slaughter all these animals? If so, who will do this, who will bury them?

            And don’t forget the violence that would almost certainly break out in India if you started killing cows.


            1. People who don’t eat meat are not like an extreme religious group

              Oh really? Then why do you feel the need to tell everyone else how to live? Sounds exactly like a proselytizing extreme religion from here.

              How about you be proud of yourself being a vegetarian to yourself and your other protein-deficient feeble friends, and let the rest of us do what we want? I’ve never told you that you have to live like me.

              1. I assume their response would be something like:

                “We’re not a religion – this is based on science. And, since it’s science, we are empirically justified in forcing other people to do what we know is right.”

          3. “So the huge amounts of water to raise these poor creatures is only the tip of the iceberg.”

            I find this sort of claim proof of blindness at least, ignorance perhaps, stupidity in either case.
            Do the people making this claim presume the water consumed by meat animals somehow is ejected into space or otherwise disappears from the surface of the earth?
            Hint: Whatever they don’t pee is consumed and peed by those who eat them, you twit!

            1. People are stupid about water. The problem with water isn’t that it is a particularly scarce resource. Obviously it isn’t. The problem is that it is unevenly distributed and it’s difficult to move in large qualtities. If you live in a place with abundant fresh water, it doesn’t matter how much you give cows or use on crops or your lawn or to wash your car and it has no effect on droughts in other parts of the world.

          4. Oh! I better change the water in my pool.

  12. Can we please change the comments to Disqus?

    1. ^^ This, please.

      1. Ambiguity for the win!

    2. God no. Disqus is even worse than H&R’s platform.

      1. Uh, I dunno about that. I remember White Indian’s reign of terror pretty well.

  13. OT: kiss on head sexual assault.…

  14. Regulatory taking case, written by Scalia, holding that personal property is equally as eligible to be subject to a “total taking” as real property, citing Lucas heavily.

  15. If I were having 47% of the fruits of my labor confiscated even before taxes, I might decide that it makes more economic sense to hire a fighting force than to hand it over.

    1. “… fruits of my labor …”

      Raisins. Har har

      1. Reasonoid, raisinoid. At this point what difference does it make?

  16. Great Britain continues to slide into the abyss- 100,000 pounds spent on statue of two single moms…..birmingham

    1. I’m not exactly sure why this is such a bad thing, or rather why is it any worse than any other publicly funded (if that’s the case here) statue? A lot of single mom’s out there are working hard to raise their children right with little help from the fathers.

      1. Yeah, but if they’re determined to waste public money they could have, you know, actually given it to some single moms rather than blowing the cash on some stupid statue.

        1. Sure, it’s symbolism. Is that important? I can see that sometimes it can be, though if I were a single mom I’d probably like a few thousand pounds more.

        2. FTW, Susan.

        3. The problem of single moms is largely the creation of the state giving cash to single moms.

      2. Here’s a hundred or so people that would make better statues to plant in front of the Birmingham library than a couple single-mom gypsies.

        1. I like the racism multiplied by the sexism there.

          1. If you weren’t such a retarded SJW you’d recognize that my actual -ism is elitism, the apparently antiquated notion that statues should memorialize achievements beyond being a gypsie and getting pregnant.

            1. This +a million^^^^

            2. Sidd 1, Bo 0.

            3. You sir win the internets.

            4. Zing! I like v2.01 much more than v2.00, it’s got more snap to its arguments.

              1. I’m basically Vista SP1. There’s a long way to go but it could be much worse.

        2. Where do you get that they are Gypsies?

          1. Other articles I’ve read make a big deal about them being “mixed race” and one of them is named Roma and they look like gypsies.

      3. Most of the single moms I’ve seen are significantly to blame for their own situation. They shacked up with an obvious douchebag without using protection. I don’t think they deserve credit for finally deciding to be responsible at some point.

    2. I wonder if “aspiring rapper” is next?

    3. Pro-tip: You bronze the baby’s shoes, not the whole damn family.

    4. I’m all for losing the stigma of being a single parent. People do what they do. But the notion that it is something that should specifically be celebrated seems a bit much.

  17. Teenage girl plans to marry her father and have children.

    The unnamed 18-year-old revealed in an interview with New York Magazine her romantic relationship of almost two years with her biological father after being estranged from him for 12 years.

    In the interview, the girl also said the two also plan on having children.

    The teenager said her father reached out to her on Facebook when she was in high school and soon after, she went to stay with him for a week.

    After the week together, the 18-year-old said they had sex and then started dating.

    “Everyone on my mom’s side of the family sees us as father and daughter,” she told the magazine. “Those who know that he’s my dad, and that we are engaged, include my father’s parents (they can see we are happy together and they can’t wait for us to have babies ? they treat us just like any other couple), the woman we live with, and my best friend.”

    Is one allowed to call Squick on this, or would that be evidence that one is on the Wrong Side of History?

    1. I missed the most interesting part:

      After the wedding, the woman says they plan to move to New Jersey where adult incest is legal.

    2. Heh; looking at other articles about this story, I learned a new term: “Walmartians”.

    3. “Later that day, we went shopping because I had grown out of all my shorts, so I asked him if he could buy me some new ones. I was trying them on and asked him how I looked and he said I looked good and I felt like I was picking up on something more, but I pushed it out of my head. That night we were play wrestling in the room I was going to sleep in and I bit him. He was wearing a pair of basketball shorts and a tank top and after I bit him I could see goose bumps pop up from his toes to his shoulders. Then he pinched my inner thigh and I got goose bumps.

      We stopped and said that we didn’t know what was going on but admitted that we had strong feelings for each other. We discussed whether it was wrong and then we kissed. And then we made out, and then we made love for the first time. That was when I lost my virginity.”

      Read more at…..lmutojz.99

      1. I know that gets a bad rap for being “liberal”, but they can really put things in perspective.

        My guess is that the girl will next be publishing a book entitled “Heaven is real, for realz.”

        1. I never thought Snopes had much of a political slant. Maybe I just read about topics where that isn’t an issue there.

      2. ^^^I’m sorry, but I can’t read this without laughing for some reason.

      3. “…read more at snopes..”


      4. Dear Penthouse Letters: I used to think that your letters were made up, but I must tell you something that happened to me…

    4. Is one allowed to call Squick on this, or would that be evidence that one is on the Wrong Side of History?

      WE MUST STOP THIS IMMEDIATELY! If we allow this to happen, why, people will be lining up round the block to marry their parents!

      (Looking forward to gay marriage advocates arguments against this development)

      1. Ah, I thought so. One isn’t even allowed to display a slight disapproving frown at such behavior.

        I hope no Christian gets it into his head to refuse to bake the wedding cake.

        1. What? Disapprove all you want. Most people will (if it’s not made up). What is your point?

      2. (Looking forward to gay marriage advocates arguments against this development)

        Consenting adults, not violating anyone’s rights. Who cares?

        1. Francisco, I know that and you know that. But you know there will be more than a few that can’t make that connection.

          I’m just anticipating the sure-to-be-entertaining mental gymnastics of “Gay marriage is good, but this is obscene.”

          1. You’re right.

            You see it when the subject of bigamy comes up all the time. Funny that people have beliefs without ever questioning why they believe what they do. Consistency is hard.

    5. These idiots put this on Facebook for all to see…lulz. Jesus H Christ in a cathouse…the stupid, it burns.

      1. The Facebook part is really the best. I agree with the consenting adults stuff above, but she seems to be looking for approval here.

        “Have you considered that your purpose in life is to serve as example to others?”

        1. ^an example.


        2. “Approval”? I think you misspelled notoriety.

    6. Squick. My revulsion would be lessened if they agreed to keep their retarded children from collecting welfare and other taxpayer provided benefits.

      What did the Alabama girl say when she lost her virginity?

      “Stop it dad, you’re crushing my smokes”

    7. If the story is true, that girl is a train wreck.

      In fifth grade I dated a boy for two years. But one night he got drunk and had sex with a girl who ended up pregnant.

      I had a girlfriend in middle school and that was the most major sexual experience I’d ever had. But she was very religious and every time we were intimate she would sob and read me verses out of the Bible.

      We chitchatted online for a few days and found out we were similar. We shared the same favorite TV shows ? The Simpsons and The Big Bang Theory ? and we both love to draw.

      And soup, and not talking…

      Was there a single moment you realized that you were sexually and romantically attracted to your dad?
      After I had stayed with him for about five days.

      What happened?
      He was living with his girlfriend. On the first night he slept on the couch and I slept on the floor, just to make sure that I was okay.

    8. If they were identified, who would the state arrest and register as sex-offenders?

      I assume it’s always the male, but have there been cases where the female was charged in incest cases? What happens in polygamy cases?

  18. Okay, another topic. A fellow on the Internets posed a question to “neo-liberal conservatives”. I posted this last night, but apparently was the only one interested in giving the gentleman an answer in the comments. He eventually told me that Capitalism needs to die, or else poor people will be used as target practice by the One Percent.

    His primary concern was that technology will eventually lead to a replacement of humanity.

    1. I figured that is where his “question” would lead. He seemed to be using it as bait. Guess others thought so too.

      The real trolls come out when there’s some mass shooting, though. Good times, good times.

      1. I was hoping that it would allow me an “in” to talk to him about something even more important.

        1. That was rather generous of you.

          I just figure the post is another one of Tulpa or PBP’s socks.

          1. You see, he hasn’t even read one of the D&D 4th edition books, and I was hoping I would be able to change his mind, or at least open it, a little.

            As you noted, however, he’s most likely an inveterate troll.

            1. I know, right?

              I mean, if he’s not going to stay current on D&D, what kind of a loser are we dealing with here? I admit that the original Gygax works were seminal, but hey, times change, and you’ve got to practice evidence-based gaming.

              Looking at the above paragraph, it seemed funnier when I thought it than it appears there.

              1. He’s not considering the 5th edition, either, so he’s totally not hip and stuff.

                1. And what, by the way, am I supposed to use for target practice, if not the poor? It’s not like there’s an endless supply of orphans here.

    2. Elon Musk?

  19. SJW triple derp score: Microaggressions causes obesity in minorities…..rine-timpf

    1. I’ve encountered this kind of bullshit before. It’s just a variation of the “black people have more hypertension because they have to think about race all the time” meme.

      The microaggression shit is so annoying. It has its own cottage industry now, though, so it’s going to be hard to exorcise.

      If you’d like to raise *your* blood pressure, browse through Derald Sue’s _Counseling the Culturally Diverse_.

    2. I like the author’s picture. I wonder if she practices that smug smirk in the mirror.

  20. By the way, some good news on this raisin story:

    A Florida congressman has introduced a bill that would eliminate one of the U.S. government’s most unusual institutions: the Raisin Administrative Committee, keepers of the national raisin reserve. This was back in 2013.

    Unfortunately, there is also some bad news: Rep. Radel resigned last summer, due to being caught buying cocaine from an undercover Federal agent. I have not found anything concerning whether his bill is still being considered or not.

    1. Also, I cannot find a link to the Horner’s Raisin Farm Website (if they have one), just so I could buy some raisins from them to poke the FedGov in the eye.

      Eh…the raisins are probably sour, anyway.

    2. Sorta OT, but I have noticed a consistent theme in politics.

      Sex or drug scandal unrelated to work = universal condemnation and shame-filled resignation.

      Utter contempt for the constitution = no problem!

      1. Eh. Usually it’s only Republicans who resign after such scandals.

        Democrats either resign and then run again (and win again) or don’t even bother to resign.

      2. It’s not universal. If you’re a democrat, and a homosexual, your boyfriend is allowed to run an escort service out of your apartment. If you’re a republican, having a “wide stance” is political armageddon.

  21. I was going to comment on how they should have pushed FDR’s wheelchair over and laughed as he crawled around on the floor for implementing stupid policies like this, but then I saw that this was actually a Truman policy.

  22. Florida police caught using mug shots of black men for target practice…..t-practice

  23. “Every year, the Hornes plant seeds, tie vines, harvest fruit, and place grapes in paper trays to create sun-dried raisins.”

    Why don’t they just declare themselves performance artists and then claim their right to free speech/expression?

    1. I am not sure what that means. When growing grapes one does not plant seeds. One grafts vines, harvests, dries etc, but the majority of the work is trimming the vines.

      Plant seeds?

      1. It means the reporter couldn’t be bothered to ask how grapes work.

        1. Fucking grapes! How do they work?

      2. What do you think you graft the vines on? I’d guess you plant the root stock as seed, then graft onto that.

  24. There is a dude that knows what time it is. Wow.

  25. This is what it looks like when crony capitalism turns on you.

    1. Exactly, they were content to get that money all those years the grapes were above market value, but now it turned and they whine like little punks.

  26. Ella . even though Paula `s artlclee is terrific… I just purchased Mazda MX-5 after having made $6168 thiss month and-also, ten-grand this past month . this is certainly the best-job Ive ever had . I started this four months/ago and practically straight away began to bring in over $86… per-hour . read ………

  27. My last pay check was $9500 working 12 hours a week online. My neighbour’s sister has been averaging 15k for months now and she works about 20 hours a week. I can’t believe how easy it was once I tried it out.
    Try this site ?????

Please to post comments

Comments are closed.