|
|
Senator Roberts, farm state senators express concerns with weakU.S. Senators Pat Roberts, R-KS, Chuck Grassley, R-IA, John Thune, R-SD, Mike Crapo, R-ID, and Thad Cochran, R-MS, sent the following letter to Senate Agriculture Chairman Tom Harkin, D-IA, and Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss, R-GA: "We write to express our concerns with farm bill proposals that would weaken the safety-net for producers with significant crop losses, or no crop to harvest, during an individual crop year. "During the five years since the 2002 farm bill was enacted, many producers have suffered complete crop losses, often in multiple years, due to a host of weather calamities. This year, many areas of the south, west, plains states and upper Midwest have suffered significant crop losses due to drought, flooding, or freezes. Producers without crops to harvest will likely receive no benefits from the loan or counter-cyclical programs due to high prices. However, they will receive benefits from direct payments. Under these circumstances, why would we want to cut direct payments? "Although we have seen no draft proposals from the committee, we are concerned with news reports indicating that direct payments could be cut or placed on a triggered, sliding scale in order to pay for other programs in the bill. Cuts to direct payments, while raising target prices and loan rates, makes absolutely no sense for those producers without crops to harvest. If target prices and loan rates are increased in proposals brought before the committee, we believe that direct payments should undergo a similar increase. "In addition, direct payments are currently the most World Trade Organization, compliant section of the farm bill. We are especially concerned that any effort to couple direct payments to current year prices from this point forward will ensure a violation of our WTO obligations and increase the risk of further international challenges to our farm program. This will not benefit any United States producers. "We are also concerned with proposals to undertake budgetary cuts in the crop insurance program. While we know budgets are tight, we ask that careful consideration be given to the potential impact on coverage to producers and the future delivery of the program before any reductions in program spending are made. "Let us be clear: We are not opposed to the counter-cyclical and loan programs. They are a strong component of the farm bill. However, they should not be strengthened at the expense of direct payments and crop insurance and to the detriment of many producers without crops to harvest. "We thank you for your attention to these concerns and we look forward to working with you to write a strong farm bill on behalf of America's farmers and ranchers." Date: 10/25/07
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 |
|
