Lucas: Farm bill more likely in January
December 04, 2013 | 10:02 AM
On the eve of an important meeting of the chairmen and ranking members of the House and Senate Agriculture committees today, House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, R-Okla., told an Oklahoma radio station that it's more likely the farm bill will be finished in January.
In the interview Tuesday with AgriTalk, Lucas also signaled an attempt to make a concession in the battle over basing payments on planted versus base acreage, discussed what direction he has received from the House leadership and conceded that Congress will not replace the 1938 and 1949 permanent laws with the commodity title of the new farm bill.
Speaking of what farm bill action is likely in the remainder of the calendar year, Lucas said, “I think a set of understandings about the final draft of the bill can be achieved. I think it is possible then to leave, for the remainder of December, the final drafting, and the scoring, and the verification of the details by CBO and USDA in the hands of folks so that when we would return that first week in January, that it could be implemented. It is possible to do that, even if I can’t now physically get a conference report across the floor of the United States House in the next 10 days. I just don’t know that that’s physically possible. But it can be done.”
On the question of whether the farm bill would be combined with other legislation, Lucas said that getting the policies he wants is the most important issue.
“Any kind of a budget deal that sorts out sequestration, that enables the appropriators to do their work this year and for the coming year requires substantial savings. I’ve always known that when we achieved our objectives here that those resources would be available in other areas,” Lucas said.
But “the bottom line remains,” he said, “you can’t have my money ’til you have my policies.”
He also hinted that congressional leaders might want to attach the budget bill to the farm bill.
“We do our work, the savings can be used somewhere else, but I think a freestanding bill, unless perhaps they need to attach a budget deal to some piece of legislation, and oh well, a good, clean, solid farm bill that provides a safety net, that takes care of rural America, meets the needs of the consumers, we’ll pick up a few hitchhikers if we need to,” Lucas said.
On the issue of basing payments on base acres, which the Senate wants, or planted acres, which the House wants, Lucas said, “I can come up with, and my economist can come up with, almost any option that will work, but all of the people we play with have to stop and fix on a particular principle. If this notion of decouple is the most important thing, if base is the most important thing, then we can make it work for the orphan acres and all the other things. But the folks I deal with have to be willing to stop and say this is the point, this is where we lay the foundation, this is what we build off of.”
On whether the House leadership has given him direction, Lucas said, “there were some pretty clear signals” that on food stamps, the bill would have to require “people have an opportunity, if they’re able-bodied citizens, to demonstrate their willingness to work for their help.”
He also said that House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is “clearly ... very concerned, from Day One, about supply management in dairy” and that "the body as a whole said you’ve got to have reforms in all sections of the bill, you’ve got to save some real dollars.”
But Lucas also said the House leadership had “allowed me to try to do my work” and had not micromanaged the bill.
Lucas also repeated previous statements that any extension would be short-term, not long-term, and that farm leaders who have proposed a two-year extension including direct payments “aren’t realistic about the environment we’re dealing in right now.”
On the question of replacing permanent law, Lucas said, “Nobody apparently in this town except for me supports that concept, so it’s probably not going to be the case.”
In the interview Tuesday with AgriTalk, Lucas also signaled an attempt to make a concession in the battle over basing payments on planted versus base acreage, discussed what direction he has received from the House leadership and conceded that Congress will not replace the 1938 and 1949 permanent laws with the commodity title of the new farm bill.
Speaking of what farm bill action is likely in the remainder of the calendar year, Lucas said, “I think a set of understandings about the final draft of the bill can be achieved. I think it is possible then to leave, for the remainder of December, the final drafting, and the scoring, and the verification of the details by CBO and USDA in the hands of folks so that when we would return that first week in January, that it could be implemented. It is possible to do that, even if I can’t now physically get a conference report across the floor of the United States House in the next 10 days. I just don’t know that that’s physically possible. But it can be done.”
On the question of whether the farm bill would be combined with other legislation, Lucas said that getting the policies he wants is the most important issue.
“Any kind of a budget deal that sorts out sequestration, that enables the appropriators to do their work this year and for the coming year requires substantial savings. I’ve always known that when we achieved our objectives here that those resources would be available in other areas,” Lucas said.
But “the bottom line remains,” he said, “you can’t have my money ’til you have my policies.”
He also hinted that congressional leaders might want to attach the budget bill to the farm bill.
“We do our work, the savings can be used somewhere else, but I think a freestanding bill, unless perhaps they need to attach a budget deal to some piece of legislation, and oh well, a good, clean, solid farm bill that provides a safety net, that takes care of rural America, meets the needs of the consumers, we’ll pick up a few hitchhikers if we need to,” Lucas said.
On the issue of basing payments on base acres, which the Senate wants, or planted acres, which the House wants, Lucas said, “I can come up with, and my economist can come up with, almost any option that will work, but all of the people we play with have to stop and fix on a particular principle. If this notion of decouple is the most important thing, if base is the most important thing, then we can make it work for the orphan acres and all the other things. But the folks I deal with have to be willing to stop and say this is the point, this is where we lay the foundation, this is what we build off of.”
On whether the House leadership has given him direction, Lucas said, “there were some pretty clear signals” that on food stamps, the bill would have to require “people have an opportunity, if they’re able-bodied citizens, to demonstrate their willingness to work for their help.”
He also said that House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, is “clearly ... very concerned, from Day One, about supply management in dairy” and that "the body as a whole said you’ve got to have reforms in all sections of the bill, you’ve got to save some real dollars.”
But Lucas also said the House leadership had “allowed me to try to do my work” and had not micromanaged the bill.
Lucas also repeated previous statements that any extension would be short-term, not long-term, and that farm leaders who have proposed a two-year extension including direct payments “aren’t realistic about the environment we’re dealing in right now.”
On the question of replacing permanent law, Lucas said, “Nobody apparently in this town except for me supports that concept, so it’s probably not going to be the case.”
