Vilsack predicts farm bill passage, discusses Christie, Clinton in Iowa
November 13, 2013 | 06:23 PM
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack predicted today that Congress will pass a farm bill and also discussed Iowa presidential politics in 2016.
“We’re going to have a farm bill because if you don’t have a farm bill you don’t have a budget,” Vilsack told the Washington Ideas Forum, presented by The Atlantic, the Aspen Institute and the Newseum.
If Congress wants to tone down the impact of the sequester, it will need additional savings from the farm bill, Vilsack said. It will be “more feasible” to make cuts in the mandatory spending in the farm bill than in Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security, he said.
There is no separation between the farm program and the nutrition title of the farm bill, Vilsack said, because the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP or food stamps, creates a market for farm products and consumers need a stable supply of food. The farm program, he said, reduces the risk of farming.
On changes to the SNAP program, Vilsack said Congress and the Agriculture Department should impose stiffer performance standards on the states in creating training programs and jobs for food stamp beneficiaries.
The federal government sends $350 million to $400 million to the states each year for jobs programs. House Republicans’ proposals to impose work requirements when states have waived those requirements due to high unemployment are misguided, he said.
On the increase in the number of people who get food stamps to 47 million, Vilsack said that when the Obama administration came into office, less than 50 percent of eligible beneficiaries in some states were participating in the program but that he is pleased that about 80 percent of eligible beneficiaries nationwide are now participating.
Vilsack also said there should be a “rebalancing” of the U.S. international food aid program to allow more purchases in countries near emergencies and to provide more assistance to Third World farmers to increase production, but he declined to specifically endorse the food aid provision in the Senate-passed bill that accomplishes many of those goals.
Conditions have changed since the food aid program was set up in the 1950s when the United States had huge surpluses and not so much of a market overseas, but “there are obviously vested interests that want to keep the status quo,” he said. There should be some changes, Vilsack said, but commodities should continue to be purchased in the United States and shipped from the United States “when it makes sense,” he added.
But he added that the Iowa Republican Party “in terms of caucus goers appears to be more conservative than four years ago.”
Christie, Vilsack said, might learn from now-President Barack Obama “to make the caucus like you would like it to be.” (Obama’s organizers turned out unexpected caucus participants in 2008.)
Vilsack also said he believes that if Clinton runs “she would do well in Iowa.”
In a broadcast aired on Iowa Public Television last Friday, however, when asked for his views on the decision of Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., to endorse Clinton when he visited the state, Vilsack said, “With due respect to Sen. Schumer, it is pretty early to be talking about 2016. We still have the 2014 elections to be concerned about and it seems like we just got over the 2013 elections.”
“The decision to run for president is a very personal one,” Vilsack said. “Having myself made it I know the thought that has to go into it and I want to respect Secretary Clinton’s ability to make that decision on her own based on whatever criteria she decides.”
“Obviously I have a great deal of respect for her. Obviously I think she would be a great president. But it's a little early and hopefully folks recognize that and give her enough space and time to make that decision on her own. And I’m confident that whatever she decides, Democrats will be fielding very strong, a strong slate of candidates in 2016.”
The Atlantic — How to Pass the Farm Bill: Make it About Anything but Farm Subsidies
“We’re going to have a farm bill because if you don’t have a farm bill you don’t have a budget,” Vilsack told the Washington Ideas Forum, presented by The Atlantic, the Aspen Institute and the Newseum.
If Congress wants to tone down the impact of the sequester, it will need additional savings from the farm bill, Vilsack said. It will be “more feasible” to make cuts in the mandatory spending in the farm bill than in Medicare, Medicaid or Social Security, he said.
There is no separation between the farm program and the nutrition title of the farm bill, Vilsack said, because the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP or food stamps, creates a market for farm products and consumers need a stable supply of food. The farm program, he said, reduces the risk of farming.
On changes to the SNAP program, Vilsack said Congress and the Agriculture Department should impose stiffer performance standards on the states in creating training programs and jobs for food stamp beneficiaries.
The federal government sends $350 million to $400 million to the states each year for jobs programs. House Republicans’ proposals to impose work requirements when states have waived those requirements due to high unemployment are misguided, he said.
On the increase in the number of people who get food stamps to 47 million, Vilsack said that when the Obama administration came into office, less than 50 percent of eligible beneficiaries in some states were participating in the program but that he is pleased that about 80 percent of eligible beneficiaries nationwide are now participating.
Vilsack also said there should be a “rebalancing” of the U.S. international food aid program to allow more purchases in countries near emergencies and to provide more assistance to Third World farmers to increase production, but he declined to specifically endorse the food aid provision in the Senate-passed bill that accomplishes many of those goals.
Conditions have changed since the food aid program was set up in the 1950s when the United States had huge surpluses and not so much of a market overseas, but “there are obviously vested interests that want to keep the status quo,” he said. There should be some changes, Vilsack said, but commodities should continue to be purchased in the United States and shipped from the United States “when it makes sense,” he added.
On Christie and Clinton in Iowa
Asked as a former Iowa governor for his views on the prospects for New Jersey Republican Gov. Chris Christie in the Iowa Republican caucuses and former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton in the Democratic caucuses, Vilsack said “I am probably the last person in the world who should be opining about the Republican process because I am not a Republican.”But he added that the Iowa Republican Party “in terms of caucus goers appears to be more conservative than four years ago.”
Christie, Vilsack said, might learn from now-President Barack Obama “to make the caucus like you would like it to be.” (Obama’s organizers turned out unexpected caucus participants in 2008.)
Vilsack also said he believes that if Clinton runs “she would do well in Iowa.”
In a broadcast aired on Iowa Public Television last Friday, however, when asked for his views on the decision of Sen. Charles Schumer, D-N.Y., to endorse Clinton when he visited the state, Vilsack said, “With due respect to Sen. Schumer, it is pretty early to be talking about 2016. We still have the 2014 elections to be concerned about and it seems like we just got over the 2013 elections.”
“The decision to run for president is a very personal one,” Vilsack said. “Having myself made it I know the thought that has to go into it and I want to respect Secretary Clinton’s ability to make that decision on her own based on whatever criteria she decides.”
“Obviously I have a great deal of respect for her. Obviously I think she would be a great president. But it's a little early and hopefully folks recognize that and give her enough space and time to make that decision on her own. And I’m confident that whatever she decides, Democrats will be fielding very strong, a strong slate of candidates in 2016.”
The Atlantic — How to Pass the Farm Bill: Make it About Anything but Farm Subsidies
