Farm bill conference report almost ready
January 26, 2014 | 07:28 PM
House and Senate Agriculture committee staffs have completed all but a few items in the farm bill, and the House is likely to proceed to consideration of the bill this week without holding a public conference committee meeting, House aides said today.
That would mean a majority of conferees in each of the House and the Senate would need to sign the bill privately by Monday afternoon.
Lobbyists who have been working on the farm bill for more than three years appear to be ready to compromise.
“If indeed they have a deal and there are unhappy people, they need to get over it if we are going to get the conference report agreed to so we can have it on the House floor Wednesday,” said one agriculture lobbyist. “We can’t keep doing this forever.”
It is unclear what is happening on the Senate side, but the House would be expected to consider the bill first. A House GOP source said that only one rule will be issued for bills this week because the House will be tied up on Tuesday with the State of the Union address, which President Barack Obama will make on that evening in the House chamber.
The House Rules Committee has a meeting scheduled at 5 p.m. on Monday, but it is unclear whether the farm bill will be filed and considered at that time.
A lobbyist said that the Agriculture committees plan to file the conference report by 6:30 p.m. on Monday. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Friday that it is possible the House will take up the bill on Wednesday morning before the House recesses for the House Republican retreat.
Republican and Democratic House aides briefed the staffs of House farm bill conferees of their party today, the aides said. No paper was handed out.
The bill will save $24 billion, part of which will presumably go to payments in lieu of taxes for communities in Western states surrounded by federal lands. There appear to be no last-minute scoring issues, as there have been on previous farm bills.
The dairy issue has been resolved, with the House position on the dairy title prevailing “with some changes,” an aide said.
House Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., and dairy farmers have warned the bill would make the new insurance program unpopular without a provision to discourage overproduction that would continue to trigger payments when prices are low.
“Supply management won’t be in it,” said a GOP aide in reference to the objections of House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to the Senate version of the dairy title.
Three issues in the miscellaneous title are still unresolved:
▪ Changes to country-of-origin labeling for red meat.
▪ Restrictions on the Agriculture Department’s implementation of a 2008 farm bill provision on the Packers and Stockyards Act.
▪ The amendment sponsored by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, that would forbid states from banning the sale of an agricultural product in another state based on objections to production methods. The KIng amendment is aimed at a California law concerning the sale of eggs, but critics have said it would have an impact on many other state laws.
There has been agreement on payment limits, with the aggregate limit at $125,000 doubled to $250,000 for married couples, “no hard caps” on individual programs within that restriction and no restriction on crop insurance indemnity payments, a House aide said.
Rules on the number of people who can be considered “actively engaged” in agriculture have been “updated,” the aide said, but landowners will automatically be considered “actively engaged.”
The Agriculture Department will have discretion in determining who is considered a “family farmer” for payment limitations.
The commodity title provisions are basically those in the House-passed version of the bill, except that payments will be made on 86 percent of base acres rather than acres in current production. That means a combination of the Agricultural Risk Coverage program (ARC) favored by the Senate and the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) favored by the House, with the higher target prices in the House bill.
The commodity title also appears to provide opportunities for famers to update their base acreages, but payments will not be made on current production, a House proposal that garnered opposition on grounds that it could trigger cases against the United States in the World Trade Organization.
The nutrition title will cut about $8 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP or food stamps, by requiring states to make at least a $20-per-year payment to people in order to trigger an increased SNAP payment.
The bill will also forbid food stamps for lottery winners and restrict food stamps for college students, issues championed by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. A work requirement pilot project is also included, providing states about $200 million to start these programs.
The bill also increases funding for food banks by $205 million.
The nutrition title may save more than $8 billion total, but some of that money has been plowed back into the other nutrition title spending, an aide noted.
Lobbyists also said that the consolidation of conservation programs, the reauthorization of export promotion programs and the continuation of renewable energy development programs would be popular with farmers.
David Rogers of Politico has published a story including additional details.
That would mean a majority of conferees in each of the House and the Senate would need to sign the bill privately by Monday afternoon.
Lobbyists who have been working on the farm bill for more than three years appear to be ready to compromise.
“If indeed they have a deal and there are unhappy people, they need to get over it if we are going to get the conference report agreed to so we can have it on the House floor Wednesday,” said one agriculture lobbyist. “We can’t keep doing this forever.”
It is unclear what is happening on the Senate side, but the House would be expected to consider the bill first. A House GOP source said that only one rule will be issued for bills this week because the House will be tied up on Tuesday with the State of the Union address, which President Barack Obama will make on that evening in the House chamber.
The House Rules Committee has a meeting scheduled at 5 p.m. on Monday, but it is unclear whether the farm bill will be filed and considered at that time.
A lobbyist said that the Agriculture committees plan to file the conference report by 6:30 p.m. on Monday. House Majority Leader Eric Cantor, R-Va., said Friday that it is possible the House will take up the bill on Wednesday morning before the House recesses for the House Republican retreat.
Republican and Democratic House aides briefed the staffs of House farm bill conferees of their party today, the aides said. No paper was handed out.
The bill will save $24 billion, part of which will presumably go to payments in lieu of taxes for communities in Western states surrounded by federal lands. There appear to be no last-minute scoring issues, as there have been on previous farm bills.
The dairy issue has been resolved, with the House position on the dairy title prevailing “with some changes,” an aide said.
House Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., and dairy farmers have warned the bill would make the new insurance program unpopular without a provision to discourage overproduction that would continue to trigger payments when prices are low.
“Supply management won’t be in it,” said a GOP aide in reference to the objections of House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, to the Senate version of the dairy title.
Three issues in the miscellaneous title are still unresolved:
▪ Changes to country-of-origin labeling for red meat.
▪ Restrictions on the Agriculture Department’s implementation of a 2008 farm bill provision on the Packers and Stockyards Act.
▪ The amendment sponsored by Rep. Steve King, R-Iowa, that would forbid states from banning the sale of an agricultural product in another state based on objections to production methods. The KIng amendment is aimed at a California law concerning the sale of eggs, but critics have said it would have an impact on many other state laws.
There has been agreement on payment limits, with the aggregate limit at $125,000 doubled to $250,000 for married couples, “no hard caps” on individual programs within that restriction and no restriction on crop insurance indemnity payments, a House aide said.
Rules on the number of people who can be considered “actively engaged” in agriculture have been “updated,” the aide said, but landowners will automatically be considered “actively engaged.”
The Agriculture Department will have discretion in determining who is considered a “family farmer” for payment limitations.
The commodity title provisions are basically those in the House-passed version of the bill, except that payments will be made on 86 percent of base acres rather than acres in current production. That means a combination of the Agricultural Risk Coverage program (ARC) favored by the Senate and the Price Loss Coverage (PLC) favored by the House, with the higher target prices in the House bill.
The commodity title also appears to provide opportunities for famers to update their base acreages, but payments will not be made on current production, a House proposal that garnered opposition on grounds that it could trigger cases against the United States in the World Trade Organization.
The nutrition title will cut about $8 billion from the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program, better known as SNAP or food stamps, by requiring states to make at least a $20-per-year payment to people in order to trigger an increased SNAP payment.
The bill will also forbid food stamps for lottery winners and restrict food stamps for college students, issues championed by Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich. A work requirement pilot project is also included, providing states about $200 million to start these programs.
The bill also increases funding for food banks by $205 million.
The nutrition title may save more than $8 billion total, but some of that money has been plowed back into the other nutrition title spending, an aide noted.
Lobbyists also said that the consolidation of conservation programs, the reauthorization of export promotion programs and the continuation of renewable energy development programs would be popular with farmers.
David Rogers of Politico has published a story including additional details.
