Round 2: Farm bill debate now moves to Senate

Issue Date: August 8, 2007

By Christine Souza
Assistant Editor

Now that the U.S. House of Representatives has passed its $286 billion farm bill package, the debate over the nation's farm policy shifts to the Senate where it will develop its own plan to guide the nation's agricultural programs over the next five years.

The California Farm Bureau Federation says the House version of the farm bill provides great opportunities for the state's farmers and ranchers.

"This farm bill will lead to increased purchases of fruits, nuts and vegetables for school and government purchase programs. It also strikes a good balance in maintaining traditional farm programs that are important to our rice, cotton, wheat and dairy producers," said California Farm Bureau Federation President Doug Mosebar. "This farm bill impacts California agriculture more than any previous proposal, particularly in the areas of research, trade, market development, pest exclusion and energy. Ultimately, taxpayers and consumers will be the true beneficiaries."

The House legislation also changes the way conservation funds are spent by putting more emphasis on working farmlands and greater flexibility to meet air and water quality regulations, Mosebar said.

"We appreciate the support of all of our California House members who represent agricultural areas, particularly our House Agriculture Committee members, led by Dennis Cardoza, as a subcommittee chair, Jim Costa, Kevin McCarthy and Joe Baca," Mosebar said.

The House of Representatives passed the 2007 Farm Bill (H.R. 2419) by a 231-191 margin.

Representatives of California's program crops realize that there will be pressures to change the direction of the farm bill once it reaches the Senate.

"The House bill is not a perfect bill, but all in all it is probably about the best thing we can expect at this point," said Mark Bagby, Calcot director of communications. "The talk coming out of the Senate is they are going to make some changes to the House bill, but frankly we would probably like to see the House version stand."

The pressure for reforming traditional subsidy programs is so great that Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-San Francisco. was criticized by her fellow Democrats for not going far enough.

"Cardoza, working with Speaker Pelosi, played a role getting something in this bill for specialty crops, conservation and nutrition. The Peterson bill was a compromise and Pelosi maintained support even with criticism," said Rayne Thompson, CFBF director of specialty crops. "People don't always realize that the farm bill is not party-oriented as much as it is state-oriented."

Additional pressure to reform subsidy programs comes from the Bush administration. The Office of Management and Budget warns that the current version of the farm bill would be vetoed because it exceeds what the administration wants in payment limits. The Bush administration wants to ban farm payment programs to farmers with adjusted gross incomes greater than $200,000.

The passage of the House farm bill ended on a rocky note as passage came primarily from Democratic votes. The majority of Republicans objected to the inclusion of funding from what they called tax increases imposed on U.S. companies with overseas operations.

"Republicans were concerned about voting in favor of their first tax increase before the House," Thompson said.

Republicans participated in all of the amendment votes and were part of the majority that voted against an amendment by Rep. Ron Kind, D-Wis. The Kind Amendment was seen as the test vote on whether farm programs would be radically changed with reduced funding or stay with the more traditional approaches. The Kind amendment, which failed on a 117-309 vote, included additional funding in certain areas of nutrition, but did not adequately address all of the needs of specialty crops.

"A vote on the Kind amendment became pivotal because initially it was supported by Democrats as kind of the new reform, the new farm bill," Thompson said.

When the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee returns to Capitol Hill in September following a month-long recess, it will write its own farm bill. The Senate must finish in September so the House and Senate can reconcile their competing bills before the current farm bill expires Sept. 30. Some senators are considering adding AgJOBS, the immigration proposal, as a farm bill amendment.

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, chairman of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, said the House bill could use some improvements in the areas of conservation and energy production.

CFBF believes there are additional opportunities for conservation funds directed at California needs, air quality, the Market Access Program and further expanding the fruit and vegetable snack program. Some things that did not make it in the House bill, CFBF will be pursuing in the Senate. An amendment offered by Cardoza, D-Merced, on the House floor but was removed, returns. This amendment would return Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service's border pest authority to the jurisdiction of the U.S. Department of Agriculture. It was withdrawn after it was ruled that other committees had jurisdiction.

Rep. Adam Putnam, R-Fla., failed in his attempt to remove payment limit restrictions on conservation monies.

"It is our understanding that the current version of the farm bill would prevent farmers and ranchers who have an adjusted gross revenue of $1 million from participating in programs, including vital conservation programs such as EQIP (Environmental Quality Incentives Program)," said Emily Robidart, CFBF director of farm policy. "We are concerned that due to the high-value crops in our state, that many farmers and ranchers wouldn't have the needed assistance these programs provide to improve the environment and to address air and water quality issues."

"There are areas where we will seek improvement in the Senate, but on balance the House farm bill provides greater equity for California and new opportunities, especially for our specialty crop industry," Mosebar said.

Barry Bedwell, president of the California Grape and Tree Fruit League, agrees.

"We recognize that the House bill is a good start, but we don't think this is the be-all, end-all and we want to try to build on this as a baseline in working with the Senate," Bedwell said. "We want to make sure people understand that this is truly an investment in the future of specialty crops for the benefit of not only producers, but for taxpayers and consumers as well. That is what we think farm policy should be about."

Janet Kister, nursery grower and San Diego County Farm Bureau board member, said the House farm bill could further expand funding for conservation.

"For the nursery industry, the best part of the House bill is expanded funding on conservation practices, which is EQIP," Kister said. "We have a lot of regulations that we need to be abiding by and unfortunately those regulations require us to make some pretty large capital investments in infrastructure. Having EQIP goes a long way to help us to be in compliance."

House farm bill highlights

The House of Representatives approved a five-year farm bill that authorizes $286 billion in spending for the nation's farm programs.

Highlights include:

$190 billion for food stamps, school lunches and other food and nutrition-related programs.
$42 billion for commodity/farm price supports and other aid to federally supported commodities. It continues direct payments at the same levels as the current law, retains the non-recourse marketing loan program and places no payment caps on the loans.
$29 billion for research, trade and market development, block grants, pest exclusion programs, energy proposals and rural development.
$25 billion for conservation. The funds will extend and make $3 billion in new investments in conservation programs, including the Conservation Reserve Program, Wetlands Reserve Program, Farm and Ranchland Protection Program, and many others. The Environmental Quality Incentive Program will be extended and 60 percent of those funds will be allocated to livestock producers. Additional funds will help California producers comply with air and water quality compliance.
More than $1.6 billion to strengthen and support the fruit and vegetable sector. Funding for specialty crops will be distributed among food safety grants, specialty crop block grants, fruit and vegetable snack programs, technical assistance, research and organic programs. Included in these funds is $200 million in mandatory funding for pest and disease detection and control.
The bill also implements Mandatory Country of Origin Labeling for fresh fruits and vegetables and meat.
There will be increases of $225 million per year for the Market Access Program.
$215 million for a Specialty Crop Research Initiative and $25 million for fresh produce safety grants.

(Christine Souza is a reporter for Ag Alert. She may be contacted at csouza@cfbf.com.)

Permission for use is granted, however, credit must be made to the California Farm Bureau Federation when reprinting this item. Top