Lucas, Peterson concerned about rural definitions report
February 25, 2013 | 07:48 PM
Reacting to the release Friday of a long-awaited report on the various definitions of rural at the Agriculture Department, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., and ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., said today they are worried that the conclusions of the report could shift money away from certain parts of rural America.
“We are pleased that, more than two and a half years after it was due, USDA has finally fulfilled its statutory obligation to report on how the various definitions of rural have impacted our rural development programs,” Lucas and Peterson said in a joint statement.
“The report offers useful insights into issues such as how municipal entities are defined in various regions,” the statement said. “But, we are disappointed in USDA’s proposals to shift funding away from the most rural areas by inflating the definition across the board. This will result in smaller communities competing with larger and more urban areas for funding.”
“It is our hope that continued dialog with our agencies charged with implementing rural programs will yield meaningful and sustainable outcomes that might be used to improve the accessibility and effectiveness of these programs,” they added.
Various divisions of USDA have had different definitions of rural depending on how Congress wrote the programs. Congress asked USDA to write the report because local officials had complained that the many definitions make it difficult to know whether or not a community qualifies for a program or not.
“We are pleased that, more than two and a half years after it was due, USDA has finally fulfilled its statutory obligation to report on how the various definitions of rural have impacted our rural development programs,” Lucas and Peterson said in a joint statement.
“The report offers useful insights into issues such as how municipal entities are defined in various regions,” the statement said. “But, we are disappointed in USDA’s proposals to shift funding away from the most rural areas by inflating the definition across the board. This will result in smaller communities competing with larger and more urban areas for funding.”
“It is our hope that continued dialog with our agencies charged with implementing rural programs will yield meaningful and sustainable outcomes that might be used to improve the accessibility and effectiveness of these programs,” they added.
Various divisions of USDA have had different definitions of rural depending on how Congress wrote the programs. Congress asked USDA to write the report because local officials had complained that the many definitions make it difficult to know whether or not a community qualifies for a program or not.
