NSAC: Don’t give payment limit rule to USDA
January 23, 2014 | 04:12 PM
The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition said today that a proposal to turn the issue of payment limitations and how many farm managers can qualify for subsidy payments over to the Agriculture Department for a final decision won't result in strict rules.
“Some have suggested that perhaps the bipartisan, bicameral reform should be scrapped in whole or in part and instead be turned over to the administration to decide,” NSAC said. “Where have we heard that before?”
“The 2008 farm bill required USDA to rewrite the regulations governing actively engaged in farming rules,” NSAC said. “It did not, however, dictate how or in what fashion USDA should change the rules. That was the compromise struck between supporters and opponents of reform in the last farm bill - neutral language that left it up to the determination of USDA, using public notice and comment rulemaking procedures.”
“Both the Bush and Obama administrations took a crack at writing those rules, and in the end, the final rule issued in January 2010 left the management loophole firmly in place, despite an overwhelming number of public comments supporting reform and urging that the management loophole be closed,” NSAC said.
“Given that abdication of responsibility to address reform, Congress rightfully came back to the issue in this new farm bill and the reform agenda won in both the House and the Senate. If a farm is so large that it needs five managers, or 10 managers, or 20 managers to function, and even if all those managers are doing some small but critical function on behalf of the farm, it does not therefore follow that the statutory payment limitation for that farm should magically be multiplied by five or 10 or 20.”
“Some have suggested that perhaps the bipartisan, bicameral reform should be scrapped in whole or in part and instead be turned over to the administration to decide,” NSAC said. “Where have we heard that before?”
“The 2008 farm bill required USDA to rewrite the regulations governing actively engaged in farming rules,” NSAC said. “It did not, however, dictate how or in what fashion USDA should change the rules. That was the compromise struck between supporters and opponents of reform in the last farm bill - neutral language that left it up to the determination of USDA, using public notice and comment rulemaking procedures.”
“Both the Bush and Obama administrations took a crack at writing those rules, and in the end, the final rule issued in January 2010 left the management loophole firmly in place, despite an overwhelming number of public comments supporting reform and urging that the management loophole be closed,” NSAC said.
“Given that abdication of responsibility to address reform, Congress rightfully came back to the issue in this new farm bill and the reform agenda won in both the House and the Senate. If a farm is so large that it needs five managers, or 10 managers, or 20 managers to function, and even if all those managers are doing some small but critical function on behalf of the farm, it does not therefore follow that the statutory payment limitation for that farm should magically be multiplied by five or 10 or 20.”
