House Ag to review food stamp, conservation costs
March 15, 2011 | 04:11 PM
The House Agriculture Committee will review the food stamp and conservation programs as well as farm subsidies for possible cuts, it told the House Budget Committee today.
The committee adopted by voice vote a letter on its budget views that is required by the 1974 Congressional Budget Act for preparation of the fiscal year 2012 budget. It was signed by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., and sent to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., so that he will have the Agriculture committee's views in development of the budget.
In news releases, Lucas said he views the budget situation "as an opportunity to make our agriculture policy even more efficient" while not jeopardizing the stability of the agricultural industry, and Peterson emphasized that the Agriculture committee should not bear a disproportionate share of cuts.
In the letter, the committee noted that farm program spending has gone down and already been subject to various cuts but that spending for food stamps, another section of the Agriculture budget, has tripled over the last 10 years
"Given the economic downturn and high unemployment which has left many Americans with few options, an increase in nutrition assistance spending is to be expected," the committee said. "In fact, in 2001 there were 17.3 million SNAP (called food stamps at the time) recipients. That figure rose to 23.8 million in 2004, 28.2 million in 2008 and stands now at 44.3 million recipients for 2010."
"But much of the cost increase has come through government action as opposed to the kind of macroeconomic forces that naturally result in increased subscription," the committee continued. "The 2008 farm bill made a number of changes that increased benefits and participation at a cost of nearly $10 billion over 10 years. Also, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) included an across-the-board increase in benefits provided under the SNAP, which effectively replaced the increase in SNAP benefits that occurs based on annual food price inflation indexing at a cost of $60 billion. SNAP accounts for approximately 74 percent of USDA's budget."
The letter noted that the stimulus-related SNAP benefits were used as a pay-for in the last Congress to fund $11.9 billion in education, jobs and Medicaid programs, and $2.5 billion in improvements in child nutrition programs. The remaining added benefits created by ARRA will terminate on Nov. 1, 2013.
"The Committee will review whether this added benefit should continue or should go toward deficit reduction," the letter said.
The committee said its 2011 agenda would be focused on oversight of current and potential regulations affecting the economy and jobs and, in preparation for a new farm bill, an "audit" or inventory of all policies under the Agriculture Committee's jurisdiction.
The letter noted that the Agriculture Department renegotiated the standard reinsurance agreement with crop insurance providers to save $6 billion over 10 years, but that even higher savings are expected.
The committee also noted that the Appropriations committees have cut $7.5 billion from mandatory programs between 2003 and 2010, and that farm program spending over the last five years averaged $12.9 billion per year, a 28 percent reduction from the 2002- 2006 average of $17.9 billion, and a 31 percent reduction from the 1997-2001 average of $18.8 billion. Much of that reduction occurred because commodity prices have been high and price-related subsidies have not been triggered.
The committee also said that "environmental regulations have become extremely costly and burdensome," and that if Congress succeeds in lowering the cost of compliance "by reining in the overzealous EPA," the committee will review conservation programs to see if conservation benefits used to achieve compliance are being administered as efficiently as possible.
The letter also said that, while farm gross cash income has risen 51 percent over the past nine years, cash expenses have risen 57 percent. Addressing the current budget crisis "is of utmost importance," the committee said, but added it will be important to keep farm programs in place to assure a food supply for 9 billion people in 2050.
House Agriculture Committee budget views and estimates letter
The committee adopted by voice vote a letter on its budget views that is required by the 1974 Congressional Budget Act for preparation of the fiscal year 2012 budget. It was signed by House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., and sent to House Budget Committee Chairman Paul Ryan, R-Wis., so that he will have the Agriculture committee's views in development of the budget.
In news releases, Lucas said he views the budget situation "as an opportunity to make our agriculture policy even more efficient" while not jeopardizing the stability of the agricultural industry, and Peterson emphasized that the Agriculture committee should not bear a disproportionate share of cuts.
In the letter, the committee noted that farm program spending has gone down and already been subject to various cuts but that spending for food stamps, another section of the Agriculture budget, has tripled over the last 10 years
"Given the economic downturn and high unemployment which has left many Americans with few options, an increase in nutrition assistance spending is to be expected," the committee said. "In fact, in 2001 there were 17.3 million SNAP (called food stamps at the time) recipients. That figure rose to 23.8 million in 2004, 28.2 million in 2008 and stands now at 44.3 million recipients for 2010."
"But much of the cost increase has come through government action as opposed to the kind of macroeconomic forces that naturally result in increased subscription," the committee continued. "The 2008 farm bill made a number of changes that increased benefits and participation at a cost of nearly $10 billion over 10 years. Also, The American Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009 (ARRA) included an across-the-board increase in benefits provided under the SNAP, which effectively replaced the increase in SNAP benefits that occurs based on annual food price inflation indexing at a cost of $60 billion. SNAP accounts for approximately 74 percent of USDA's budget."
The letter noted that the stimulus-related SNAP benefits were used as a pay-for in the last Congress to fund $11.9 billion in education, jobs and Medicaid programs, and $2.5 billion in improvements in child nutrition programs. The remaining added benefits created by ARRA will terminate on Nov. 1, 2013.
"The Committee will review whether this added benefit should continue or should go toward deficit reduction," the letter said.
The committee said its 2011 agenda would be focused on oversight of current and potential regulations affecting the economy and jobs and, in preparation for a new farm bill, an "audit" or inventory of all policies under the Agriculture Committee's jurisdiction.
The letter noted that the Agriculture Department renegotiated the standard reinsurance agreement with crop insurance providers to save $6 billion over 10 years, but that even higher savings are expected.
The committee also noted that the Appropriations committees have cut $7.5 billion from mandatory programs between 2003 and 2010, and that farm program spending over the last five years averaged $12.9 billion per year, a 28 percent reduction from the 2002- 2006 average of $17.9 billion, and a 31 percent reduction from the 1997-2001 average of $18.8 billion. Much of that reduction occurred because commodity prices have been high and price-related subsidies have not been triggered.
The committee also said that "environmental regulations have become extremely costly and burdensome," and that if Congress succeeds in lowering the cost of compliance "by reining in the overzealous EPA," the committee will review conservation programs to see if conservation benefits used to achieve compliance are being administered as efficiently as possible.
The letter also said that, while farm gross cash income has risen 51 percent over the past nine years, cash expenses have risen 57 percent. Addressing the current budget crisis "is of utmost importance," the committee said, but added it will be important to keep farm programs in place to assure a food supply for 9 billion people in 2050.
House Agriculture Committee budget views and estimates letter
