Moran- FSA office closings are not good for Kansas farmers

By Jennifer M. Latzke

Congressman Jerry Moran, R-KS, told news outlets in a conference call March 21 that he's still firmly opposed to the Kansas Farm Service Agency plan to close 11 offices in the state.

"I indicated to the FSA early on that this plan made little sense to me," Moran said. He explained that the estimated savings, about $240,000 annually, in the grand scheme don't outweigh the negatives of closing offices in small communities. He said there are other ways to save significantly.

There is no Congressional mandate either encouraging or requiring FSA to make changes, but there is a lack of funding in the appropriations process, Moran explained. The timing of closure decisions is premature, he added. The next farm bill has yet to be passed, and there's opportunities for funding in the next fiscal year that have yet to be made.

"I expect that the next farm bill will create more responsibilities for the FSA, with more and new programs," Moran said. "This would ask local employees to do more, not less under a new farm bill. The decision about closures and consolidations should wait until we see what new programs are covered by the next farm bill."

While the congressman's office is still in communication with the state FSA office, Moran indicated that he's willing to take his argument to the U.S. Department of Agriculture.

"With these FSA office closings in 11 communities, there are many counties that are not affected simply breathing a sigh of relief, but this is just the first step," Moran said. "If this is successful, they'll proceed with more announcements in the future. No county is immune.

"It's troubling that the Department of Agriculture, which should be the rural development department of D.C., is pursuing policies that don't save money and are detrimental to many communities across Kansas," he said.

Congressman Moran also discussed pending legislation in the House to fund disaster aid for agriculture, which is coupled with funding for the war on terror. With many farm states still reeling from years of drought and the recent winter blizzards that pummeled the Plains, farm groups have been pressing officials for a government response.

The disaster aid portion of the bill would be similar to historical disaster bills, but would require producers to have had crop insurance in the year they opt to receive disaster assistance and would let producers choose among 2005, 2006, or 2007.

"As I understand it, I have an impression the legislation is still in flux," Moran said. "The package is included in the Democrats reduced funding of the war in Iraq, with benchmarks of a definite date of withdrawal of troops from Iraq. It faces a veto from the Administration and the bill doesn't have the votes to pass the House at this point." He added that if the Democrats would concede to change some provisions of the bill it might just come to a vote in the next week or so.

By coupling vital farm disaster assistance with a controversial legislation that takes a stand against the Iraq war, the Democrats are painting farm state legislators into a corner.

"This is the third time I've asked to pass disaster assistance," Moran said. "Although it appears to be successful in including disaster aid in this legislation, it's unlikely to be passed by the Senate and the President because it's so controversial. And, there's no opportunity to split it up at this time.

"I don't believe in staying the course as the right position to take, but it's not right to set a definite date of withdrawal either," Moran added. "If the bill is approved as it stands today, it's unlikely I'll vote for the bill. But, I'll continue to work to separate the issues."

Congressman Moran also updated news outlets on the rumblings in Congress about a new farm bill. There's a new push from some legislators to extend only the commodity provision title of the 2002 farm bill, while still tinkering with conservation and other titles.

"I've never been one for extending the farm bill because of WTO issues, but there may be value in extending just the commodity provision," Moran said. By doing so, it may get over the baseline budget hurdle, which would cut funding for the bill and ultimately cut the commodity price safety net for producers.

Jennifer M. Latzke can be reached by phone at 620-227-1807, or e-mail at jlatzke@hpj.com.

B

9

3/26/07

1 Star WK

Date: 3/22/07

	Web hpj.com

Copyright/Privacy
Copyright 1995-2008.  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