Last-minute statements come in to farm bill conferees
October 30, 2013 | 03:15 PM
As the 41 House and Senate farm bill conferees prepared for what is likely to be a lengthy opening meeting with opening statements this afternoon, a few members and farm groups have issued last-minute statements on what the conferees should do.
The conference began a little before 3 p.m. After the leaders of the agriculture committees speak, the rest of the conferees are supposed to limit their remarks to three minutes each.
Earlier, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio, issued a statement in the manner of the old regional politics that have traditionally dominated farm bill conferences, rather than the partisan politics that have recently dominated.
Noting that “It seems to be a rarity these days when two members of Congress from different political parties are able to come together on an important issue such as the farm bill,” Brown, who is a conferee, and Gibbs, who is not, issued a statement that basically endorses the Senate version of the commodity title that Midwestern corn and soybean growers want rather than the House commodity title that rice and peanut growers favor.
Brown and Gibbs said that the price loss coverage program in the House bill “would undermine provisions of the Senate-passed bill that tie farm payments to planted acres, instead of the historic base acre calculation.”
“PLC could create inverse incentives for farmers to plant for the program instead of listening to the market,” Brown and Gibbs continued. “This proposal would drive farmers to overplant the crop that would give the highest guaranteed price.”
They also noted that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the National Foreign Trade Council have expressed concern over using planted acres and the effect it would have on taxpayers and trade.
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., who is not a conferee, said in a news release Tuesday that reauthorization of the livestock disaster program is a top priority in light of the blizzard that killed thousands of cattle in North Dakota and South Dakota this fall.
But she also said the Senate language linking crop insurance to conservation compliance should be eliminated, that there should be a farm-level trigger for commodity payments, that acres on which planting was prevented should be eligible for commodity payments and that the farm program should not influence planting decisions. She also said there should be mandatory funding for energy programs.
The Rural Coalition, which represents diverse farmers, ranchers, farmworkers and tribal, rural and urban communities, sent a letter to conferees Tuesday urging retention of current permanent law, reauthorization of the nutrition programs with no cuts on the same schedule as the farm program, and inclusion of a wide range of programs to help beginning, minority and women farmers and veterans who go into farmers.
The coalition also favors the Senate dairy program and opposes a provision in the House bill for a study of the implementation of the country of origin labeling program.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition released a letter from 278 farm and conservation groups urging the conference to adopt the conservation compliance and sod-saver provisions of the Senate bill.
“By shifting subsidies away from direct payments and towards a strong crop insurance safety net, this new farm bill creates a loophole in the longstanding requirements that those who receive subsidies take minimal steps to protect the public good,” the groups said in the letter to conferees.
“Without these key protections, billions of taxpayer dollars spent on crop insurance over coming years will subsidize soil erosion that will choke our waterways, increase the cost of water treatment and dredging, and reduce the long term productivity of farmland,” the coalition said.
“It will also allow for the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of valuable wetlands, resulting in increased downstream flooding, loss of wildlife habitat and decreased water quality.”
The conference began a little before 3 p.m. After the leaders of the agriculture committees speak, the rest of the conferees are supposed to limit their remarks to three minutes each.
Earlier, Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Ohio, and Rep. Bob Gibbs, R-Ohio, issued a statement in the manner of the old regional politics that have traditionally dominated farm bill conferences, rather than the partisan politics that have recently dominated.
Noting that “It seems to be a rarity these days when two members of Congress from different political parties are able to come together on an important issue such as the farm bill,” Brown, who is a conferee, and Gibbs, who is not, issued a statement that basically endorses the Senate version of the commodity title that Midwestern corn and soybean growers want rather than the House commodity title that rice and peanut growers favor.
Brown and Gibbs said that the price loss coverage program in the House bill “would undermine provisions of the Senate-passed bill that tie farm payments to planted acres, instead of the historic base acre calculation.”
“PLC could create inverse incentives for farmers to plant for the program instead of listening to the market,” Brown and Gibbs continued. “This proposal would drive farmers to overplant the crop that would give the highest guaranteed price.”
They also noted that the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, the National Association of Manufacturers, and the National Foreign Trade Council have expressed concern over using planted acres and the effect it would have on taxpayers and trade.
Sen. Heidi Heitkamp, D-N.D., who is not a conferee, said in a news release Tuesday that reauthorization of the livestock disaster program is a top priority in light of the blizzard that killed thousands of cattle in North Dakota and South Dakota this fall.
But she also said the Senate language linking crop insurance to conservation compliance should be eliminated, that there should be a farm-level trigger for commodity payments, that acres on which planting was prevented should be eligible for commodity payments and that the farm program should not influence planting decisions. She also said there should be mandatory funding for energy programs.
The Rural Coalition, which represents diverse farmers, ranchers, farmworkers and tribal, rural and urban communities, sent a letter to conferees Tuesday urging retention of current permanent law, reauthorization of the nutrition programs with no cuts on the same schedule as the farm program, and inclusion of a wide range of programs to help beginning, minority and women farmers and veterans who go into farmers.
The coalition also favors the Senate dairy program and opposes a provision in the House bill for a study of the implementation of the country of origin labeling program.
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition released a letter from 278 farm and conservation groups urging the conference to adopt the conservation compliance and sod-saver provisions of the Senate bill.
“By shifting subsidies away from direct payments and towards a strong crop insurance safety net, this new farm bill creates a loophole in the longstanding requirements that those who receive subsidies take minimal steps to protect the public good,” the groups said in the letter to conferees.
“Without these key protections, billions of taxpayer dollars spent on crop insurance over coming years will subsidize soil erosion that will choke our waterways, increase the cost of water treatment and dredging, and reduce the long term productivity of farmland,” the coalition said.
“It will also allow for the destruction of tens of thousands of acres of valuable wetlands, resulting in increased downstream flooding, loss of wildlife habitat and decreased water quality.”
