Senate Ag members meeting tonight on farm bill
November 07, 2011 | 02:17 PM | Filed in: Farm bill Senate Ag Committee
By JERRY HAGSTROM
FARGO, N.D. — Democratic and Republican members of the Senate Agriculture Committee will meet separately this evening to discuss the status of the farm bill proposal to the super committee in charge of deficit reduction, but there is still substantial work to be done on the details of the proposal, three senators said here today.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., all spoke at a farm bill conference organized by Conrad and North Dakota State University’s Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
The senators said they are determined to come up with a proposal that can be attached to the super committee’s bill because they think it will be difficult to write a farm bill in 2012 in the current Congress, but all expressed concerns about the proposal in development.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D.
Conrad said the $23 billion cut in farm spending over 10 years would be divided, with $13 billion coming from the commodity programs, $6 billion from conservation and $4 billion from nutrition.
Although most accounts have described the cut from farm programs at $15 billion, Conrad said that $2 billion would be used to pay for the new shallow losses revenue assurance program.
Conrad also emphasized that he wants that new program to cover disaster assistance and noted that the “I” states — Illinois, Indiana and Iowa — are more concerned about protection against price drops, while farmers in North Dakota and other Plains states are concerned “about the big enchilada” — sharp production declines, price declines and quality losses.
He also said it is important to reauthorize the livestock disaster program.
Members of the agriculture committee have not seen a proposal in writing, Conrad noted, and that World Trade Organization commitments also have to be followed.
He said that the average crop revenue election program known as ACRE came out of Ohio, another state concerned with price drops, but that even corn growers who were expected to be enthusiastic about it did not sign up for it in big numbers because it was based on an area trigger, not an individual farmer's production.
If the new program is based on a county trigger, that will mean some farmers get payments when they do not have losses, while others will have losses and not get payments.
“I’m very concerned about having a farm program that is defensible,” Conrad said. “It’s got to have programs to pay people with losses and not pay people who don’t have them.”
He added that “everybody has to be subject to payment limits,” and that some commodity groups are trying to convince members that payment limits should not be applied to their products.
Hoeven said there has to be "balance" in payment limits and Klobuchar said there has be a balance between northern and southern interests.
Although he did not mention any specific crops, Conrad also said that “the South, as always, is pressing for advantage.”
Conrad also said that if the chairmen and ranking members cannot come up with a plan that is satisfactory before the super committee has to vote on its bill on Nov. 23, then the super committee should give the agriculture committees more time to write a proper bill.
Conrad told The Hagstrom Report that such a process could mean giving the agriculture committees more time to write a bill before the Dec. 23 deadline for the House and Senate to vote on the super committee proposal, or it could mean leaving the farm bill until next year.
Conrad said he realized that waiting until next year could mean cuts above the $23 billion.
“It’s more important to get it right than to rush it," he said. "It’s absolutely imperative we have something that’s defensible.”
While the Democrats said they want to maintain crop insurance at current levels and emphasized the importance of the new program to pay for losses not covered by crop insurance, Hoeven said crop insurance “not only needs to be sustained but enhanced” because it had already been subject to cuts.
That seemed to reflect the view of Senate Agriculture Committee ranking member Pat Roberts, R-Kan., who has said that any interaction between the new program and crop insurance should mean a cut in crop insurance expenditures.
Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D.
Hoeven said there had been a proposal to obtain $3 billion in cuts from crop insurance, but that that proposal had been “pushed back.”
Hoeven confirmed that he had received a call from Roberts this weekend that there was a basic deal on the bill, but Hoeven said that should be viewed as “a construct” rather than a final bill.
A Roberts spokeswoman said in an email, however, that “The current proposal for recommendations to the super committee is being negotiated by the two chairs, without Roberts and (House Agriculture ranking member Collin) Peterson (D-Minn.). It is not complete, and Roberts has not seen most of the language and has not signed off on the proposal.”
She confirmed, however, that the Republican members would meet tonight to discuss what they have been told are details of the proposal.
Klobuchar said this evening's talks would include the dairy title and the energy title. Conrad added that he supports continuing programs for development of renewable energy because those programs keep energy spending in the U.S. economy rather than in the Middle East.
Rep. Rick Berg, R-N.D., who does not sit on the House Agriculture Committee, said there is some concern in the House that Congress might pass a smaller super committee deficit reduction bill that would include the $23 billion in agriculture cuts, and that agriculture would still be subject to cuts under sequestration, which have been estimated at $15 billion.
The senators noted the differences between the North and South over farm bill provisions, but said they believe that a deal can still be worked out.
Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn.
Klobuchar said the regional divisions must be bridged so the agriculture committees can write a farm bill rather than leaving the job up to members from states without so much interest in agriculture.
She emphasized the importance of writing a bill with “consistency” and “a five-year number locked in.”
“The last thing we want to do is get nickled-and-dimed,” Klobuchar added.
“We need them, they need us,” Conrad said, of the Southerners. "When either side overreaches, that creates problems. I don't want to say more than that.”
“This next week will be critical,” Klobuchar said. “We have to come out with something this week.”
People are always looking for scapegoats, she added, and “scapegoating is not fair to agriculture. We are a star in the economy.”
FARGO, N.D. — Democratic and Republican members of the Senate Agriculture Committee will meet separately this evening to discuss the status of the farm bill proposal to the super committee in charge of deficit reduction, but there is still substantial work to be done on the details of the proposal, three senators said here today.
Senate Budget Committee Chairman Kent Conrad, D-N.D., Sen. John Hoeven, R-N.D., and Sen. Amy Klobuchar, D-Minn., all spoke at a farm bill conference organized by Conrad and North Dakota State University’s Department of Agribusiness and Applied Economics.
The senators said they are determined to come up with a proposal that can be attached to the super committee’s bill because they think it will be difficult to write a farm bill in 2012 in the current Congress, but all expressed concerns about the proposal in development.
Conrad said the $23 billion cut in farm spending over 10 years would be divided, with $13 billion coming from the commodity programs, $6 billion from conservation and $4 billion from nutrition.
Although most accounts have described the cut from farm programs at $15 billion, Conrad said that $2 billion would be used to pay for the new shallow losses revenue assurance program.
Conrad also emphasized that he wants that new program to cover disaster assistance and noted that the “I” states — Illinois, Indiana and Iowa — are more concerned about protection against price drops, while farmers in North Dakota and other Plains states are concerned “about the big enchilada” — sharp production declines, price declines and quality losses.
He also said it is important to reauthorize the livestock disaster program.
Members of the agriculture committee have not seen a proposal in writing, Conrad noted, and that World Trade Organization commitments also have to be followed.
He said that the average crop revenue election program known as ACRE came out of Ohio, another state concerned with price drops, but that even corn growers who were expected to be enthusiastic about it did not sign up for it in big numbers because it was based on an area trigger, not an individual farmer's production.
If the new program is based on a county trigger, that will mean some farmers get payments when they do not have losses, while others will have losses and not get payments.
“I’m very concerned about having a farm program that is defensible,” Conrad said. “It’s got to have programs to pay people with losses and not pay people who don’t have them.”
He added that “everybody has to be subject to payment limits,” and that some commodity groups are trying to convince members that payment limits should not be applied to their products.
Hoeven said there has to be "balance" in payment limits and Klobuchar said there has be a balance between northern and southern interests.
Although he did not mention any specific crops, Conrad also said that “the South, as always, is pressing for advantage.”
Conrad also said that if the chairmen and ranking members cannot come up with a plan that is satisfactory before the super committee has to vote on its bill on Nov. 23, then the super committee should give the agriculture committees more time to write a proper bill.
Conrad told The Hagstrom Report that such a process could mean giving the agriculture committees more time to write a bill before the Dec. 23 deadline for the House and Senate to vote on the super committee proposal, or it could mean leaving the farm bill until next year.
Conrad said he realized that waiting until next year could mean cuts above the $23 billion.
“It’s more important to get it right than to rush it," he said. "It’s absolutely imperative we have something that’s defensible.”
While the Democrats said they want to maintain crop insurance at current levels and emphasized the importance of the new program to pay for losses not covered by crop insurance, Hoeven said crop insurance “not only needs to be sustained but enhanced” because it had already been subject to cuts.
That seemed to reflect the view of Senate Agriculture Committee ranking member Pat Roberts, R-Kan., who has said that any interaction between the new program and crop insurance should mean a cut in crop insurance expenditures.
Hoeven said there had been a proposal to obtain $3 billion in cuts from crop insurance, but that that proposal had been “pushed back.”
Hoeven confirmed that he had received a call from Roberts this weekend that there was a basic deal on the bill, but Hoeven said that should be viewed as “a construct” rather than a final bill.
A Roberts spokeswoman said in an email, however, that “The current proposal for recommendations to the super committee is being negotiated by the two chairs, without Roberts and (House Agriculture ranking member Collin) Peterson (D-Minn.). It is not complete, and Roberts has not seen most of the language and has not signed off on the proposal.”
She confirmed, however, that the Republican members would meet tonight to discuss what they have been told are details of the proposal.
Klobuchar said this evening's talks would include the dairy title and the energy title. Conrad added that he supports continuing programs for development of renewable energy because those programs keep energy spending in the U.S. economy rather than in the Middle East.
Rep. Rick Berg, R-N.D., who does not sit on the House Agriculture Committee, said there is some concern in the House that Congress might pass a smaller super committee deficit reduction bill that would include the $23 billion in agriculture cuts, and that agriculture would still be subject to cuts under sequestration, which have been estimated at $15 billion.
The senators noted the differences between the North and South over farm bill provisions, but said they believe that a deal can still be worked out.
Klobuchar said the regional divisions must be bridged so the agriculture committees can write a farm bill rather than leaving the job up to members from states without so much interest in agriculture.
She emphasized the importance of writing a bill with “consistency” and “a five-year number locked in.”
“The last thing we want to do is get nickled-and-dimed,” Klobuchar added.
“We need them, they need us,” Conrad said, of the Southerners. "When either side overreaches, that creates problems. I don't want to say more than that.”
“This next week will be critical,” Klobuchar said. “We have to come out with something this week.”
People are always looking for scapegoats, she added, and “scapegoating is not fair to agriculture. We are a star in the economy.”
