|
|
Salazar seeks farm bill conclusionBy Larry Dreiling Saying there is still a long way to go before a farm bill becomes law, Sen. Ken Salazar offered that the Senate version of the bill offered a consensus on what a good farm bill is considering the nation's economic circumstances. Salazar, D-CO, made his comments before a district meeting of Colorado Wheat, held recently at the U.S. Department of Agriculture's Central Great Plains Research Center near Akron, Colo. "When you look at the vote in the Senate for the farm bill, this farm bill received more votes from both Democrats and Republicans than any other farm bill since 1972," Salazar said. "This bill received 82 votes, so there was a lot of consensus building into creating what we consider to be the very best farm bill that America has ever had. "It's a good bill for wheat. It's a good bill for agriculture overall and for rural America." No farms, no food Salazar slammed critics of the farm bill, saying they know little of how farm programs function to produce a secure food supply for the country. "Those of you who have been to my office know that on my desk when I was attorney general was a sign. It's since moved to my Senate office and it says 'No farms. No food,'" Salazar said. "I want to remind everybody from the secretary of agriculture to other senators that the food security of the United States is not something to be compromising on at all. "We have done that with energy and it's put the United States of America into the ditch with respect to our dependence on foreign oil. I think this farm bill will be one of the most important pieces of legislation I'll ever work on in my time in the U.S. Senate and it's a bill I'm very proud of." While complimenting the media in the room for their positive coverage of the farm bill, Salazar took a shot at big city media for what he considers to be inaccurate portrayals of the bill's commodity program title. "When you talk about The New York Times, The Denver Post, Rocky Mountain News, and others, they all slam us when it comes to the farm bill," Salazar said. "They say we're doing the wrong thing and that helping wheat growers and others is the wrong way to go. One of things I want you to do as champions of agriculture is to try and tell the correct story about how food security is so important for our country." Food spending Pulling out some charts that had been shown during the farm bill debate on the Senate floor, Salazar told the wheat producers to tell their big city friends--maybe the media--about how to look at the farm bill in context with overall federal spending as well as how the bill provides for a lower food bill for Americans. "In 1929, we were using 23 percent of our income for food. Since then, it's been a steady line downward to where it's now about 10 percent of our income," Salazar said. "In Malaysia, 55 percent of their incomes go for food. In the Philippines, it's 38 percent. In China it's 26 percent, France is 15 percent and Japan is 14 percent. "Why are Americans spending that small amount of money for food? They're spending it because of the ingenuity and productivity of the American farmer and rancher. It's something that we should all celebrate. Not just farmers and ranchers but everyone ought to say thank you for what you have been able to do to bring down the cost of food to America." Not much in that pie Salazar went on to tell how farm bill spending represents just 1.9 percent of total federal outlays, that it's more than food security it's conservation and nutrition, too. Commodity program spending is about .25 percent of the total federal budget. Even with this small outlay, Salazar complained about people who complain that too much money is spent on commodity programs. "If you look at the whole farm bill pie there isn't much in that pie for commodity programs," Salazar said. "This farm bill creates the safety net wheat growers and other commodity growers need. It's not as much as previous farm bills, but it is something that producer organizations have been supportive of." Salazar reminded the producers that 67 percent of the farm bill pays for nutrition programs like school lunches and school breakfasts, compared with 13 percent for commodity programs. "This way, our kids won't have to learn on empty stomachs. It goes to support food stamps to help the most vulnerable of Americans," Salazar said. "If you look at the Beatitudes in the Bible, it talks about taking care of the poor and hungry. These programs do that." Bioeconomy view Conservation programs, like CRP and EQIP, take up nine percent of the farm bill budget, while crop insurance is 7.8 percent of outlays. "The new farm bill puts significant amounts of new money, $3 billion, into conservation programs," Salazar said. "We also will have about $3 billion that--for the first time--we will be able to pump significant dollars into the biofuels economy of our nation. "In the energy bill signed by the President in the last days of December, I included a provision that names as a national goal that we will produce 25 percent of our energy from renewable resources by the year 2025." Salazar said this legislation is vital for several reasons. "We need to deal with the national security implications of our overdependence on oil from the Middle East. We need to deal with the environmental issues created by global warming," Salazar said. "We also need to see the huge opportunity for rural America, which we've seen with the ethanol plants that have sprouted up across the eastern Plains in the last few years, along with opportunities for solar and wind energy that will help us deal with these other issues." Research funding Salazar also said that funding also is included in the farm bill that will ensure the continuation of work at the Akron research station, which is jointly maintained by USDA's Agricultural Research Service, Natural Resources Conservation Service and Colorado State University. "We've been trying to figure out ways of upping the budget for this research station," Salazar said. "We know as we move forward with new opportunities in agriculture, that the investments we're making in research, whether they're energy crops, or more disease-resistant crops, the work that (director Merle Vigil) and the staff are doing here is important as we move forward into these new frontiers in agriculture." Then again, there still remains a conference committee to work out differences between House and Senate versions of the farm bill. "Hopefully we'll get a bill to the president that he can sign," Salazar said. "There is not quite a threat of a veto. It's more of a threat to issue a veto threat. My hope is we'll pass a farm bill you will be proud of." Larry Dreiling can be reached by phone at 785-628-1117 or by e-mail at ldreiling@aol.com. 2/11/08 Date: 2/6/08
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 |
|
