Aren’t cattle the biggest grain consumers, so wouldn’t that be counter productive?
I’ve heard of the ag lobby and the meat and dairy lobbies but never big grain. Of course they exist and do something but going against the meat lobby just seems weird.
To contextualize this given the parent commenter's question:
-- About 50% of US corn production goes toward animal feed (and another 30% goes to ethanol). Slightly out of date source, but recent figures show this has only moved a few percentage points. [1]
-- Over 70% of US soybean production goes toward animal feed. [2]
-- I wasn't able to find something similar about wheat, but I would guess nearly all of it is human consumption.
Given this, it's safe to say that a large portion of these grain subsidies are linked to meat, although to get a better idea of the distribution, we would need to see a further breakdown by category (corn, soybeans, wheat).
I think mahogany’s comment is more important but I just want to add: how many subsidies they get doesn’t relate at all to what research they might fund.
They’re deeply tied to the meat industry so would benefit more from increased consumption.
I’ve heard of the ag lobby and the meat and dairy lobbies but never big grain. Of course they exist and do something but going against the meat lobby just seems weird.