|
|
Farm bill: Evolutionary not revolutionaryFarm bill: Evolutionary not revolutionary The 2007 farm bill will be like most other farm bills--evolutionary rather than revolutionary, according to Sara Wyant, editor of Agri-Pulse newsletter and a contributing columnist to High Plains Journal. The evolution, however, could occur in a number of ways. Wyant spoke at the recent Small Grain Solutions seminars held over three nights at Clinton, Okla., Great Bend, Kan., and Sidney, Neb. John Deere and its local dealers as well as High Plains Journal sponsored the seminars. Wyant sees the new farm bill will offer opportunities for a return to more market-oriented payments as well as funding for rural development and expanded conservation or "green transfer" payments. It will be a contrast from the current farm law. "In 2002, we took a step backward from the push for market orientation that we had in 1996. At the time, the Chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Larry Combest of Texas, knew that projected farm spending would result in this great big pile of money that could be available for the farm bill. He knew that if we didn't find a way to spend it somebody else was likely going to get it," Wyant said. That "great big pile" was projected in 2001 to be a 10-year federal surplus of $5.6 trillion. Out of the surplus came $79 billion in additional funding for agriculture that included new counter-cyclical payments, institutionalized fixed payments and significantly expanded the role of conservation programs. "The political climate in 2007 is much, much different," Wyant said. "We don't have those huge federal surpluses anymore. The economy has seen a lot of rock and rolling since 9/11. That event really had a major impact on our federal budget, not just because of the terrorist attack but the war in Iraq and other factors." Some of the other factors that will impact the 2007 farm bill arrived in January with the new Democratic majority in the House and Senate. The oncoming 2008 presidential elections also loom as part of the debate. "I'm from a farm in eastern Iowa. It's not uncommon to be in a coffee shop or town hall in Iowa there and to see a TV crew come in to set up and Hillary Clinton or John McCain pops in," Wyant said. "It's kind of an interesting part of presidential elections and of course, they all want to have their say about something in agriculture when they're in Iowa." Along with the budget deficit, other factors creating a case for change in the next farm bill include the continuing shift in demographics from a rural to urban population, a group that thinks producers are more prosperous than ever before. "The thing is though, if you look at maps and see where the highest farm payments are, it's also where the highest population losses are, too. They line up exactly," Wyant said. "So people really wonder, who has benefited from those farm program payments?" The impact of technology also is creating change. "It's not only that machinery has changed in terms of technology so you can farm more acres in less time, but also genetic modification of seeds to be resistant to products such as Roundup Ready and other advancements. These things have really changed the way we farm. It's leading people to ask why do we need programs dating back to the 1930s in 2007," Wyant said. Outside forces ranging from Oxfam and Bread for the World to Pheasants Forever and Ducks Unlimited also are increasingly active in applying pressure to Congress. "The biggest farm bill meeting in Des Moines, Iowa this year, with 25,000 people in attendance, was Pheasants Fest, sponsored by Pheasants Forever," Wyant said. "They want more land in the Conservation Reserve Program and more land set aside for hunting and fishing. They are a very strong and influential group." These outside interests are part of a diverse body of individuals and groups who will want to weigh in on the farm bill. "The USDA had several forums on the farm bill to shape their proposal," Wyant said. "Secretary Johanns was taken very seriously with his proposal, and it was not dead on arrival in either the House or the Senate. USDA will be a player in the debate, not on everything but on some things." Other advocates include nutrition and research groups, renewable energy advocates, environmental, conservation and specialty crop interests as well as those advocating payment limitations. "There's also lots of competition between commodity groups," Wyant said. "The money will be tighter, about $34 billion less over the last farm bill. None of the commodity groups are saying none of the money should be going down anywhere. So the competition for dollars will be intense." The most exciting thing Wyant sees in U.S. agriculture is renewable energy. "You are sitting on the biomass breadbasket along with all the crops you produce for food and feed," Wyant said. Still, budget challenges will be the most important drivers to the farm bill debate. "The Democrats are trying to act more like fiscal conservatives than some of the Republicans have been with your tax dollars in recent years. They're now going to go to a pay-as-you go plan. It's like how you and I set our budget. If the money isn't there you can't spend it and if you do, you have to cut back from someplace else or find new sources of revenue," Wyant said. Meanwhile, Senate Democrats have promised $15 billion in new farm program spending and the House $20 billion from a government "reserve fund." "Is that money real? Well, no, not unless there's an offset from other spending or a tax increase," said Wyant, who speculated the dollars could come from several sources including cuts in direct payments, further tightening of payment limits, a reform of crop insurance reimbursements, and streamlining services at local USDA offices. However it is too early to tell where cuts might be made. "There's a big push to consolidate services in many states. In Kentucky, they're consolidating Farm Service Agency offices because nobody's growing tobacco down there. The customer base has moved, but the offices are still there," Wyant said. "But FSA offices are just like the post office in a small town, you never want to see it go." In the end, Wyant sees two likely scenarios for the conclusion of the farm bill. Either all interested parties could strike a deal and unify or farm groups could "form a circular firing squad" and force a long debate. "We could see the basic structure of the current farm bill, but with more money for conservation, renewable energy and specialty crops. Specialty crop growers will be big in this. Why? Because they can. They are represented by powerful members of Congress in places like Florida, New York and Michigan, all the way to California." Wyant told the producers at the seminar to be on the lookout for legislation from Democrat Ron Kind of Wisconsin to support rural development and conservation efforts as well as Rep. Dennis Cardozo of California that will support their specialty crop producers. "They do not want price supports. They don't want them," Wyant said. "They want support for research. They want more money for market promotion. They want more money to get their products into food and nutrition programs. They have organized in a way that is stronger than anything I've ever seen before." Wyant thinks traditional farm groups must get together with those seeking this new type of legislation. "The alternative is to have what I call 'a big food fight' on the House floor," Wyant said. Date: 8/10/07
Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2012. High Plains Publishers, Inc. All rights reserved. Any republishing of these pages, including electronic reproduction of the editorial archives or classified advertising, is strictly prohibited. If you have questions or comments you can reach us at High Plains Journal 1500 E. Wyatt Earp Blvd., P.O. Box 760, Dodge City, KS 67801 or call 1-800-452-7171. Email: webmaster@hpj.com |
|
