Major farm groups offer differing farm bill proposals
September 29, 2011 | 06:35 PM | Filed in: Conservation Disaster aid Crop insurance Farm bill Nutrition Soybeans
By JERRY HAGSTROM
Three major farm groups — the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Soybean Association and the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives — today released their farm bill proposals.
All three groups said that agriculture should not bear a disproportionate share of budget cuts, but otherwise offered different proposals.
While these proposals and those offered by other groups differ in the details, one prominent farm lobbyist said today that the policies for crop producers are all focused on addressing the shortcomings in the ACRE program and taking into account the expiration of the SURE program.
The differences are mainly on whether the trigger will be at the state, crop reporting district, county or individual farm level and whether the payment will be based on whole farm revenue or be commodity specific.
Other variables such as whether payments are made on base acres or all planted acres, whether payments are made on acres that could not be planted, and whether there have to be other percentage cuts in acreage or payments will depend on how much money Congress has to spend, the lobbyist said.
Farm Bureau is the nation’s largest farm group and represents the broadest range of growers, and its policy recommendations reflect the difficulty such a large organization has in coming up with policy changes.
Although several key commodity groups have already issued proposals that would include the elimination of or major cuts to the direct payments that crop producers get whether prices go up or down, Farm Bureau said that “all of our current programs, including direct payments, crop insurance, ACRE, target prices, and a marketing loan program should be maintained. Farm Bureau is willing to consider modifications and adjustments to these programs to make them more effective in a reduced budget environment.”
The only program that Farm Bureau delegates did not endorse at their convention last January was the crop disaster program known as SURE, which expires on Friday. In recommendations which the board approved on Wednesday, Farm Bureau said that neither SURE nor the 36 other programs that do not have baseline should be revived or continued
The Farm Bureau proposal is also remarkable because the organization said that 30 percent of any cuts in the Agriculture budget should come from nutrition programs, including the food stamp program that is now officially known as the supplemental nutrition assistance program or SNAP.
While most farm leaders have said they do not believe Congress will cut nutrition programs while so many Americans are unemployed, Farm Bureau said that each of the major types of farm bill programs — commodities, nutrition and conservation — should supply 30 percent of the total cut, with the additional 10 percent cut coming from crop insurance.
But Farm Bureau noted that the nutrition programs now account for such a large percentage of the Agriculture budget that the actual cut to nutrition would be a tiny percentage of expenditures, even though it would amount to a large amount of money. Farm Bureau said it believes all the cuts in nutrition programs could come from administrative savings, not from cuts to benefits to individuals.
The Farm Bureau also recommended:
The American Soybean Association released a proposal that places crop insurance at the center of the farm program, but provides for a program of additional payments based on small revenue losses not covered by crop insurance.
The payments would be triggered by the loss for an individual commodity on an individual farm rather than by losses within a state, crop reporting district or county or by a farmer’s revenue loss on all crops.
To offset the cost of a revenue-based program that includes these provisions, ASA supports eliminating direct payments, counter-cyclical payments, the existing ACRE program, and the SURE program. Any additional offset required would come from reducing the payment percentage from the proposed 85 percent to a lesser percentage. The existing marketing loan program would be continued.
The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives endorsed the Peterson dairy bill as an adequate safety net for farmers, making sure that farmer cooperatives remain eligible to participate in federal programs for the benefit of the farmer members and the continuation of the Market Access Program and the Foreign Market Development , which are used to encourage exports.
Three major farm groups — the American Farm Bureau Federation, the American Soybean Association and the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives — today released their farm bill proposals.
All three groups said that agriculture should not bear a disproportionate share of budget cuts, but otherwise offered different proposals.
While these proposals and those offered by other groups differ in the details, one prominent farm lobbyist said today that the policies for crop producers are all focused on addressing the shortcomings in the ACRE program and taking into account the expiration of the SURE program.
The differences are mainly on whether the trigger will be at the state, crop reporting district, county or individual farm level and whether the payment will be based on whole farm revenue or be commodity specific.
Other variables such as whether payments are made on base acres or all planted acres, whether payments are made on acres that could not be planted, and whether there have to be other percentage cuts in acreage or payments will depend on how much money Congress has to spend, the lobbyist said.
American Farm Bureau Federation
Farm Bureau is the nation’s largest farm group and represents the broadest range of growers, and its policy recommendations reflect the difficulty such a large organization has in coming up with policy changes.
Although several key commodity groups have already issued proposals that would include the elimination of or major cuts to the direct payments that crop producers get whether prices go up or down, Farm Bureau said that “all of our current programs, including direct payments, crop insurance, ACRE, target prices, and a marketing loan program should be maintained. Farm Bureau is willing to consider modifications and adjustments to these programs to make them more effective in a reduced budget environment.”
The only program that Farm Bureau delegates did not endorse at their convention last January was the crop disaster program known as SURE, which expires on Friday. In recommendations which the board approved on Wednesday, Farm Bureau said that neither SURE nor the 36 other programs that do not have baseline should be revived or continued
The Farm Bureau proposal is also remarkable because the organization said that 30 percent of any cuts in the Agriculture budget should come from nutrition programs, including the food stamp program that is now officially known as the supplemental nutrition assistance program or SNAP.
While most farm leaders have said they do not believe Congress will cut nutrition programs while so many Americans are unemployed, Farm Bureau said that each of the major types of farm bill programs — commodities, nutrition and conservation — should supply 30 percent of the total cut, with the additional 10 percent cut coming from crop insurance.
But Farm Bureau noted that the nutrition programs now account for such a large percentage of the Agriculture budget that the actual cut to nutrition would be a tiny percentage of expenditures, even though it would amount to a large amount of money. Farm Bureau said it believes all the cuts in nutrition programs could come from administrative savings, not from cuts to benefits to individuals.
The Farm Bureau also recommended:
- Cuts to direct payments and the average crop revenue election program known as ACRE by reducing the acreage base on which those payments are made below the current 85 percent.
- No cuts to the countercyclical and marketing loan programs.
- No change in the sugar program because it would not produce budgetary benefits.
- Approval of the dairy bill that House Agriculture Committee ranking member Collin Peterson, D-Minn., has introduced.
- Reducing the number of acres in the land-idling Conservation Reserve Program, capping the number of acres in the Conservation Stewardship Program and consolidating many other conservation programs . But making no cuts to the environmental quality incentives program because it helps farmers meet regulatory requirements.
- Cutting only administrative and operating accounts in the crop insurance program, not farmer premium subsidies.
American Soybean Association
The American Soybean Association released a proposal that places crop insurance at the center of the farm program, but provides for a program of additional payments based on small revenue losses not covered by crop insurance.
The payments would be triggered by the loss for an individual commodity on an individual farm rather than by losses within a state, crop reporting district or county or by a farmer’s revenue loss on all crops.
To offset the cost of a revenue-based program that includes these provisions, ASA supports eliminating direct payments, counter-cyclical payments, the existing ACRE program, and the SURE program. Any additional offset required would come from reducing the payment percentage from the proposed 85 percent to a lesser percentage. The existing marketing loan program would be continued.
National Council of Farmer Cooperatives
The National Council of Farmer Cooperatives endorsed the Peterson dairy bill as an adequate safety net for farmers, making sure that farmer cooperatives remain eligible to participate in federal programs for the benefit of the farmer members and the continuation of the Market Access Program and the Foreign Market Development , which are used to encourage exports.
