As I was recently attempting to determine which Republican presidential candidate was least in the pocket of Big Agriculture, I came across Rand Paul's record. It's mostly strongly anti-subsidy except one case where he voted against an amendment that would end subsidized crop "insurance" for tobacco farmers. Since he already alienated the agro lobby with his other votes, this vote doesn't make sense to me even from a purely corrupt bargain standpoint.
Has Rand Paul ever talked about this vote and why he voted the way he did? If not, is there a procedural/strategic issue that makes this vote different, legitimate justification that applies only to subsidies for tobacco farmers (and not to the plethora of other subsidies Paul voted against), or specific tie between Rand Paul and the Tobacco lobby that could explain this one singular deviation from a strong anti cronyism record?