Archives for the '2012 Farm Bill' Category
Grassley-Feingold Re-Introduce Commodity Cap Bill
Wednesday, August 4th, 2010
On Wednesday, August 4, Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Russ Feingold (D-WI) introduced legislation to reduce farm program payment limits and close the loopholes that are being used by mega farms to game the system and soak the taxpayer.
The Rural America Preservation Act (bill number not yet assigned) would cap commodity payments at not greater than $250,000 a year for any one farm. It would reduce the annual cap on direct payments from $80,000 to $40,000 per farm and the annual cap on counter-cyclical payments from $130,000 to $60,000 per farm. ACRE payments would be scaled back by comparable amounts. Marketing loan gains and loan deficiency payments would be capped at $150,000 per farm per year.
Under current law there is no limit at all on marketing loan gains and loan deficiency payments and no effective limit on direct and counter cyclical payments or an the ACRE payment option.
The new bill proposes to close a variety of loopholes that allow mega farms to collect far higher payments than current law would otherwise seem to allow. One of the major ones would force USDA to adopt a measurable standard to determine whether recipients are actively engaged in farming.
The 2008 Farm Bill provided USDA with the opportunity to adopt just such a measurable standard, but the Obama Adminstration made the political decision last January in issuing the final rule to keep the current loophole locked in place and thus to continue providing high six and seven figure annual payments to the nation’s largest farming operations.
The new bill is patterned very closely on previous versions of the same bill offered by Grassley with Senator Byron Dorgan (D-ND) as the principal Democrat on the bill. Dorgan is retiring from Congress this year, opening the door to Feingold moving up to become the lead Democrat on the measure in its latest iteration.
The Dorgan-Grassley bill won majority votes on the Senate floor in each of the past two farm bill debates, but did not in either instance become part of the final farm bill adopted into law.
NSAC and NSAC member groups have worked very closely with the bill’s champions on the development and advocacy of this bill over many years. We continue to urge its adoption.
In introducing the bill, Senator Grassley noted, “The farm program was never intended to help big farmers get bigger, instead it was created to help those who couldn’t withstand the political whims of Washington or the fierce reckonings of Mother Nature.”
Added Senator Feingold, “For too long large agribusinesses and non-farmers have gamed the limits on farm subsidy programs, taking limited and critical resources better used to support our family farmers that are facing numerous challenges in the current economic climate…Our legislation is a common sense, bipartisan approach to support… family farms, while saving taxpayer dollars.”
Specialty Crop and Organic Producers Testify
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
Specialty crop and organic producers are “classic entrepreneurs” said Subcommittee Chair, Dennis Cardoza (D-CA). Rep. Cardoza spoke on Wednesday, July 21st at the House Subcommittee on Horticulture and Organic Agriculture hearing to review specialty crop and organic programs in preparation for the 2012 Farm Bill.
Cardoza began the hearing with praise for specialty crop producers, noting their entrepreneurial ability to produce half the value of America’s crops. Cardoza also spoke to the importance of this sector for providing the fruits and vegetables that nourish our families.
Block Grants
All seven producers on the panel testified to the crucial role that the Specialty Crop Block Grant Program (SCBG) plays for specialty crop production across the U.S. They emphasized the need to extend and expand this program in the 2012 Farm Bill and applauded the flexibility the SCBG program offers to State Agriculture Departments for awarding grants. It was clear from their testimony, however, that some states do a better job than others in including farmers in the state decision-making process. In general, most witnesses also favored moving the application and decision-making process t
o earlier in the year, centered around the off-season.
Dr. Margaret Smith Testifies
NSAC hosted Margaret Smith, from Ash Grove Farm in Iowa and Extension Agent at Iowa State University (ISU), as the sole female and organic producer voice on the panel of witnesses. Click here to view her testimony.
Margaret and her husband Doug farm 950 acres of organic corn, soy, oats, wheat barley and and pasture and run a beef cow herd. They market their crops to various food, feed and seed markets. They began their transition to organic systems in 1994 and reached 100 percent organic production in 2007.
As an extension agent at ISU, Smith works with fruit and vegetable producers in the Value-Added Agriculture Extension Program in addition to co-facilitating the Iowa Fruit and Vegetable Working Group.
Smith began her testimony to the Subcommittee with data pointing to the rapid growth in the organic industry, both in terms of number of farms and value of sales. Organics offer a critical marketing niche for small and beginning farmers. In light of the important role of the organic industry, Smith made sure the Subcommittee understood that the Organic Research and Extension Initiative (OREI) is under-funded, even with the 2008 Farm Bill funding increase, citing that only about 20% of the applicants receive OREI funding.
Smith also expressed strong support for the National Organic Certification Cost Share Program, the Conservation Stewardship Program and the Environmental Quality Incentives Program’s Organic Initiative.
Smith urged the Subcommittee to improve the crop and revenue insurance policies and rules for specialty crops and for organics. As she explained, “In Iowa, there is no satisfactory crop insurance available for fruit and vegetables. When compared with crop insurance options for corn and soybean growers, this seems a gross oversight and neglect of these important crops and crop producers.”
She went on to explain the risk management struggle confronting diversified, small to mid-sized producers: “Not only is there no safety net in the event of weather, crop disease, or insect yield reductions, but lenders are wary of working with growers of non-traditional commodities if they have no guarantee of some minimum income level.”
Chairman Cordoza applauded Smith’s work and testimony and brought the hearing to a personal level, disclosing his preference grass-fed beef. He also noted the profit opportunities offered by grass-fed beef production, a strategy that raises fewer cattle in a more productive system.
The hearing also ended on a personal note, and a strong note for organics. Ranking Member, Jean Schmidt (R-OH), confessed that her daughter and husband, despite the price differential, buy and eat exclusively organically produced foods.
“The organic voice is small,” she said “Lets raise that voice!”
Other Highlights
Robert Jones, a fruit and vegetable producer from Ohio’s The Chef’s Farm, spoke about the ineffectiveness and inappropriateness of what he described as a “one size fits all” National Leafy Green Marketing Agreement proposal. In response to a question from Chairman Cardoza, Jones also applauded the USDA’s Know Your Farmer, Know Your Food Program for improving consumer awareness and bolstering the local food movement.
Testifying on behalf of the nursery industry, Bernie Kohl, Jr. of Angelica Nurseries on Maryland’s Eastern Shore told the Subcommittee that the Biomass Crop Assistance Program (BCAP) started by the last farm bill was doing great harm to the nursery crop industry. He explained that trees and shrubs grown in containers are grown in a substance that is primarily bark. He explained that 83 percent of softwood bark and 70 percent of hardwood bark is already used for energy generation and removing more of it through BCAP subsidies to energy uses could devastate the nursery industry. Similar arguments have been made by the forest products industry. Kohl called the BCAP collection, harvest and storage incentive payments “a solution in search of a problem.”
Paul Platz, a farmer from Lafayette, Minnesota, spoke about growing vegetables for processing. He urged the Committee to ease and simplify the rules for the “farm flex” pilot program created in the last farm bill allowing certain counties in certain states to produce vegetables for the processing industry on farm program base acres. Platz noted that he was able to start growing sweet corn and green peas in 1993 because the planting restrictions against growing fruits and vegetables on program acres that started with the 1996 Farm Bill were not in place yet. He urged a movement back in that direction, at least for processed vegetables.
Several witnesses expressed disappointment with the Specialty Crop Research Initiative (SCRI) for not addressing the most pressing concerns of specialty crop growers. Chairman Cardoza sympathized with the concern and said he would follow-up with the Subcommittee with jurisdiction over USDA research.
Margaret Smith cautioned the Subcommittee to remember that the most important research to help fruit and vegetable producers will be long-term systems research that will take time to conduct. Smith also suggested that the SCRI is too focused on big multi-state, multi-institution projects and needs to be more balanced between local, regional, and national concerns.
Senate Deliberates On Rural Development and Energy in the Farm Bill
Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
On Wednesday, July 21, the Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry convened to hear from several witnesses regarding rural development and the farm bill. The hearing centered on the potential benefits of alternative fuels production and research both for developing rural communities and for strengthening national security. A list of witnesses and a link to an audio replay is available here.
Agriculture Committee Chair Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) commenced the hearing with an optimistic forecast of job creation and reduced dependence on foreign oil, both of which she said will stem from a growing rural enthusiasm to play a role in reviving the national economy and ensuring energy security.
USDA Rural Development Undersecretary Dallas Tonsager showed support for fuel diversification, which he identified as an opportunity for investment in rural communities. Accordingly, increasing confidence in the advanced biofuel industry has become a primary goal for the USDA.
The Committee warned against bureaucratic attempts to “improve legislation” and encouraged the USDA to coordinate with multiple agencies, such as the Department of Energy and the Environmental Protection Agency, to ensure that energy regulations do not inhibit rural development.
Growth Energy Co-Chair General Wesley Clark strongly emphasized the effects that energy independence will have for job creation and national security. “We do not need to be spending $300 billion a year on foreign oil,” Clark asserted.
Clark strongly advocated for the diversion of a portion of the ethanol blender’s tax credit toward development of ethanol infrastructure—namely blender pumps, flex-fuel vehicles, ethanol pipelines, and an increased blend wall to E15—to support a strong market for corn-based ethanol. “We have to work on the demand side, and the supply side will follow.” According to Clark, once the government provides demand stimulation, market innovation will lead the way toward an advanced renewable energy future.
With respect to the next farm bill, Senator Mike Johanns pointed out that the budget for the Energy Title of the next bill will be only $500 million compared to the $1.9 billion energy title from the 2008 Farm Bill. Johanns questioned how a strong renewable energy and biomass package could be put together with so many fewer dollars.
This hearing was the second of a series that will continue to review the implementation of the 2008 Farm Bill in preparation for the 2012 reauthorization.
Farmers Agree, Mr. Vilsack: Farm Bill Should Emphasize Beginning Farmers
Thursday, July 8th, 2010
By Anna Jones-Crabtree from Vilicus Farm
On July 1st, NSAC posted a blog to applaud Secretary Vilsack’s plea to Congress to support beginning farmers and to encourage USDA to walk the talk.
Farmers agree. Here is how Anna Jones-Crabtree from Vilicus Farm in Montana responded to our blog:
We would not be farming if it were not for some of the Farm Service Agency’s (FSA) beginning farmer programs. However, all of the points made below are right on….. USDA and the farm bill continues to talk the talk about beginning farmers but we aren’t seeing the walk.
Access to land, financing/credit, and time are the three biggee’s for beginning farmers. There are minimally supportive programs for financing and access to land. The time issue isn’t even dealt with since most of us are working two jobs to support the dream of farming.
It’s clear to us; we need systematic reform.
We need to rework the risk structure system so we can get crop insurance on ’specialty crops’ like flax and spelt in our first year of production since we choose to not follow the recipe of a simple wheat/fallow/spray rotation. Society needs to provide farmers with health insurance so we don’t have to work second jobs. We need a formal farmer mentorship program to ask questions like how deep do you set your blade plow? Or, at what stage does mowing your cover crops work?
We need a much more robust, creative and integrated research program at our universities. We need research that targets real life systems approaches to sustainable agriculture. We need researchers to inform and cooperate with the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) on their conservation programs. We need to value and compensate our farmers just as we do our doctors. We don’t ask our physicians to jerry-rig and duct tape the heart lung support machine– we ask them to be doctors. We need to ask our farmers to be farmers.
In my vision of the future, I see well-informed farmers captivated by the wonders of soil microbial action. I see farmers working with their communities to create biodiesel from their oilseed crops that they grew as part of their complex rotational — improving the sustainability of not only their operation but also their community’s. I see farmers growing vegetables for their local community. I see farmers, such as myself, growing grains and legumes, that change vast tracts of land into functioning robust ecosystems, that are not just based on ‘nature’ but also weave humans into natural systems. I see rigorous academic opportunities to study farming systems that produce farmers held in as high esteem as engineers.
My husband Doug and I are committed to this longer term vision. It has taken us 15+ years in other careers, saving money, and building good credit to even be able to entertain a return to farming. Even with all of our ducks in a row, it was not, by a long shot, an easy path.
We have to make the entry to farming easier. We have a whole generation who would relish the opportunity to farm but don’t know where to start. Their hands have spent more time text-messaging than shaking off hydraulic oil from an implement that just didn’t want to plug or from playing with the tractor. They need exposure to climate change science, business planning, skills to navigate USDA programs, agronomy, wildlife, moisture management along with the basics of growing carrots, or safflower, or buckwheat, or eggplant or, or, or…..
I was one of 100+ folks that applied for about 10 positions on that Beginning Farmer and Rancher Advisory Committee. The Committee was supposed to be in place by the end of last calendar year. I spent a lot of time on that application and had some wonderful letters of recommendation. Try as I might to call, ask, probe, USDA is moving slower then molasses in December on our farm in north central Montana.
I would welcome a spirited conversation about what we can do in Montana and elsewhere to grow our next generation of farmers in a way that creates the systemic change I think we all hope for. We need a dialog with all the parties in the food system – the farmers, the buyers, the consumers and the retailers- about the challenges inherent in the current system and how we change it for the better – for all of us.
We need to start somewhere. At some level, I believe we as a society have written our farmers off… it’s not something our best and brightest strive to become. It’s not a career you go into if you are smart. All that has to change if we have any hope of creating a sustainable way of living on this planet.
And heck, if the Beginning Farmer Rancher Committee ever gets appointed and I get the chance to be on it, I would welcome a way to take the grounded, real life ideas from a bunch of Montanan’s to DC.
Vilsack: Farm Bill Should Emphasize Beginning Farmers
Thursday, July 1st, 2010
A funny thing happened on the way to a Senate Agriculture Committee farm bill hearing to review progress on implementation of the 2008 Farm Bill’s commodity, crop insurance, and disaster assistance programs. As the lead witness at the June 30 hearing, USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack did not read a single word or convey a single idea from his prepared written remarks on the day’s subject at hand. Instead, he used the opportunity to launch into an eloquent plea to focus significant attention in the 2012 Farm Bill on new and beginning farmers.
According to Vilsack, when a group at the Department started thinking about the farm bill earlier this year, he realized there was no firm vision for the future among the people who were gathered. He told the Committee that part of his vision is to increase populations and incomes in rural America, to improve prosperity and economic development and begin to restore lost political clout. Moreover, the Secretary said that increasing small and mid-sized farming operations has to be a subset of that broader goal, and that in order to make headway on the subgoal, significant attention needs to be paid to the needs of young, new and beginning farmers.
The Secretary noted there have been policy goals by previous Administrations and Congresses to increase the number of police officers and the number of teachers. Why not set a goal in the farm bill to add at least 100,000 new farmers in the next few years, he asked? What if we set up advisory committees in local communities to encourage new young farmers? What if we create a new venue to help provide entrepreneurial training for farmers and food system enterprises? What if we found ways to encourage transitions from retiring farmers to new farms? It is time, the Secretary said in so many words, to stop bemoaning the aging of American agriculture and to start an aggressive effort to reverse it.
The Secretary then concluded his brief remarks by moving from farmers back to small town residents, noting the high percentage of persistent poverty counties that are rural and the need to address those problems as he returned to his bigger theme of increasing rural populations and incomes.
Not exactly, perhaps, what the assembled Senators were expecting to hear at a hearing on commodity and crop insurance policy. But not ill-received either. In fact, later in the hearing, Senator Pat Roberts (R-KS), the former chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, noted that Vilsack’s opening statement was one of the best he has ever heard at any hearing in the House or Senate Agriculture Committees.
Ranking Member Saxby Chambliss (R-GA) noted in his remarks that equipment leasing is an ever more prevalent reality in farming and then pondered out loud whether there might be a creative way in the farm bill to incentivize equipment leasing for new farmers to help the beginners while helping agribusiness as well.
Senator Richard Lugar (R-IN) also noted his appreciation of the Secretary’s beginning farmer remarks.
True, the hearing then mostly went back to detailed discussions about ACRE, SURE, CCPs, SRA, WTO, and the rest of the alphabet soup of farm commodity policy, which is as it should be given the topic for the hearing. NSAC, though, greatly appreciates the Secretary’s choice to highlight a major theme which NSAC has pursued, sometimes virtually alone among farm interest groups in Washington, during the last four farm bills over the past two decades.
We also have some pertinent questions, the central one of which is this – if the Administration wants Congress to pay more attention to beginning farmer and rancher policy, what is USDA doing to get its own house in order?
For instance, the last farm bill authorized the creation of a new Office of Advocacy and Outreach to coordinate policy department-wide on beginning farmer and minority farmer issues, yet progress to get it off the ground has been very, very slow, and the office itself has been housed deep within the bureaucracy rather than directly under the Secretary as specified in the Farm Bill. Hopefully with staff about to be hired, the office will be full- functioning soon.
Or for instance, the last farm bill authorized the creation of a Beginning Farmer and Rancher Individual Development Account program to assist low income individuals to become farmers through matched savings accounts and financial training. Yet the USDA budget request to Congress this year did not request any money for the program, and, as a result, it is very uncertain if the program will get off the ground.
Or for instance, the last farm bill made an earlier pilot program linking retiring and new farmers through federal guarantees of private land contracts into a nationwide program, yet USDA has yet to implement the new program two-plus years after the farm bill became law.
Or for instance, the new Conservation Reserve Program Transition Incentive Program (CRP-TIP) was officially begun by USDA’s Farm Service Agency recently. It provides incentives for CRP contract holders who do not intend to get back into farming to sell or lease to beginning or minority farmers. With the rule for the program now in place, the question now is where is USDA’s plan to aggressively promote and do outreach on the program?
Or for instance, the statutory Advisory Committee on Beginning Farmers and Ranchers, whose charge it is to advise the Secretary on how USDA can better serve beginning farmers and adopt policies to create new farming opportunities, has ceased functioning during the first two years of the Obama Administration after never missing a year during the Clinton and Bush years. Why have no appointments been made and no meetings held?
As in the past four farm bills, NSAC will likely once again try to move a beginning farmer package, working closely with member groups around the country and with a wide and increasing array of congressional offices with a strong interest in the issue. We are quite heartened by the Secretary’s remarks and very much look forward to the increased attention and the future sharing of ideas with the Department. In the meantime, we will continue to try to hold the Department accountable to fulfill the promise of the last farm bill to the country’s growing cadre of new and beginning farmers.
Controversial House Subcommittee Hearing on Crop Insurance
Friday, June 18th, 2010
On June 17, in preparation for the 2012 Farm Bill, the House Agriculture General Farm Commodities and Risk Management Subcommittee held a hearing on U.S. farm safety net programs. Jim Miller, Under Secretary for Farm and Foreign Agricultural Services testified along with Jonathan Coppess, Farm Service Agency, and Bill Murphy, Risk Management Agency. You can view the Under Secretary’s opening statement here.
Subcommittee ranking member Jerry Moran (R-Kan.) challenged the Risk Management Agency’s plan to cut funding to crop insurance companies by $6 billion. The agency proposed to allocate some of those freed-up funds to the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). However, the CRP already receives mandatory funding in the 2008 Farm Bill legislation and concern was raised that the agency’s plan could jeopardize the 2012 Farm Bill baseline.
Representative Moran also raised concern about the timing for CRP sign-up. Miller said that the USDA would publish an Environmental Impact Statement (EIS) in the Federal Register early next week, which would be followed by a 30 day “no action” period. For farmers with expiring CRP contracts, this timeline pushes re-enrollment back until August, at best. As Moran bemoaned, this leaves precious little time for farmers to tear up cover crops and plan for planting, if necessary, should they not be re-enrolled in CRP.
NSAC is extremely concerned about the Administration’s decision to pay for a new CRP sign-up through savings from the renegotiation with crop insurance companies. Congress already provided the funding for CRP in the farm bill. Having the Administration pay for it again via the crop insurance deal is, in essence, paying for the program twice. Were it to become a precedent, it would in essence mean USDA and the White House could ignore conservation (or other) funding decisions made by Congress and simply cut funding administratively. This is very bad policy, and our hope is the Agriculture Committees and congressional leadership will make it clear to the Administration it should not happen again.
Farm Bill Hearings to Commence In Senate
Friday, June 4th, 2010
This Tuesday, June 1, Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman, Blanche Lincoln (D-AR) announced that the Committee will begin hearings on the 2012 Farm Bill at the end of this month.
The first hearing will be held in Senate Agriculture Committee Room at 9:30am on June 30, 2010 on the topic of “Maintaining Our Domestic Food Supply through a Strong U.S. Farm Policy.” The dates and times of the three additional hearings on the topics below will be announced in the next few weeks.
- Revitalizing the Rural Economy through Robust Rural Development
- Promoting Conservation Practices that Preserve Our Natural Resources and Wildlife Habitat for Future Generations
- Ensuring Agriculture is Part of Our Nation’s Energy Future
While the Senate planned to begin work on the 2012 farm bill next year, the Committee moved up its plans in response to the early start by the House Agriculture Committee, led by Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN). The House kicked off with a hearing in the Capitol in late April and held a series of eight field hearings on a variety of topics through the first half of May. Opening statements of all the field hearing witnesses, primarily farmers representing the major commodity and livestock associations, are posted on the committee’s website. Chairman Peterson has said he plans to begin writing a bill in early 2011, with hopes of having it on the House floor before the end of the calendar year, a year prior to the end of the current bill.
Times may be tough, but there’s room in the Farm Bill tent
Friday, May 14th, 2010
Thursday’s hearing in the House Agriculture Committee brought in two panels of farm and food policy experts to continue the conversation kicked off on late April in preparation for the 2012 Farm Bill.
As in the first hearing in late April, the witnesses’ testimony and Representatives’ questions covered a wide range of topics, but consistently came back to two underlying themes. First, the 2012 Farm Bill will need to shift “business as usual” especially with regards to farm safety net programs like crop insurance; and second, Congress will need to make these changes within a tough budget context. Committee Chairman Collin Peterson (D-MN) has been calling the 2012 Farm Bill a “baseline” bill, but in the hearing, it was apparent that even a baseline level of funding is not guaranteed.
These themes played out in a back-and-forth on approaches to rural development. Professor Neil Hamilton of Drake University testified on the importance of continuing to support federal programs that promote the development of local and regional food systems alongside existing national and global commodity agriculture. This analysis was in line with prior comments from Chairman Peterson and Secretary Vilsack, but with overall funding for the Farm Bill likely to be limited, some in Congress feel threatened at what they perceive as an increasing emphasis on new and alternative markets.
In response to Professor Hamilton’s testimony, Rep. Jerry Moran (R-KS) expressed concern over what he saw as a “growing emphasis” on “lifestyle” agriculture over “production” agriculture and said that “a prospering mainstreet” would not come as a result of this “lifestyle” farming.
Hamilton countered by citing the potential for local and regional production to keep more dollars in rural communities and keep farmers on the land. In his written testimony, Hamilton also emphasizes support for “Agriculture of the Middle” – farmers and ranchers who rely heavily on farming income, are too large to sell into direct markets, but too small to compete effectively on the commodity market but are finding new high value regional markets.
Fellow Iowan Rep. Leonard Boswell (D-IA) reiterated that there was room in the tent for everyone: ‘There is not a threat to production agriculture,’ he said. ‘There’s room for both.’”
Four more field hearings remain:
Friday, May 14th – 1:30 p.m. EDT
National Archives Southeast Region
Morrow, GA
Saturday, May 15th – 1:00 p.m. CDT
Cattlemen’s Park
Pike County Cattlemen’s Association
Troy, AL
Monday, May 17th – 9:00 a.m. CDT
Texas Tech Museum
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX
Tuesday, May 18th – 8:00 a.m. CDT
2nd Floor Theater
Edith Mortenson Center
Augustana College
Sioux Falls, SD
NSAC to host Ag of the Middle Briefing on June 8
Tuesday, May 11th, 2010
Click here to forward on the invitation to colleagues.
On June 8, 2010, NSAC, Farm Aid, Organic Valley, and Heifer International US Country Program will host a congressional briefing on Agriculture of the Middle: New Strategies to Support America’s Mid-sized Family Farmers.
In recent decades, many mid-sized farmers and ranchers who rely on farming as a main source of income have been severely challenged in the marketplace. Too small to compete individually in international agricultural commodity markets, they are also not often well-positioned to market directly to local consumers. While the number of very small and very large farms and ranches has increased, mid-sized family farms continue to disappear. Arguably the backbone of America’s rural communities and economies, this loss of mid-sized family farms has a detrimental impact that extends well beyond the farm.
The briefing will be free and open to the public and will feature four producer-entrepreneurs discussing innovative business models and marketing approaches that are succeeding in creating new opportunities for mid-sized farmers in many parts of the country. They will also discuss ways in which existing federal programs can support these efforts by providing the research, credit, and infrastructure investments necessary to scale up and expand their models.
WHEN: June 8, 2010 | 2:00-3:00 pm
WHERE: Senate Agriculture Committee Room, Russell 328-A
To more information and to RSVP, reply to Jess Daniel, policyintern(at)sustainableagriculture.net.
Click here to forward on the invitation to colleagues.
Click here to access a PDF version of the invitation.
Farm Bill 2012: Additional Field Hearings Scheduled
Thursday, April 29th, 2010
Ranking Member Frank Lucas (R-OK) described last Wednesday’s House Agriculture Committee Hearing on the Farm Bill as “two-and-a-half hours to kick off two-and-a-half years.”
The hearing was the first of Committee Chairman Collin Peterson’s (D-MN) meetings to get a head start on planning for the next Farm Bill, scheduled for completion in 2012.
Over the past few months, Rep. Peterson’s comments to the press have suggested that he is ready for change in all areas of the farm bill, but particularly to improvements in the structure of the farm safety net that dates from the Depression. He has questioned the effects of direct payments on increasing land values, which may make it more difficult for beginning farmers to get started. And on the issue of crop insurance, he has mentioned the possibility of whole-farm crop insurance policies tied to revenue rather than yield that could be more equitable for small and mid-sized diversified operations.
USDA Secretary Tom Vilsack testified at the hearing and focused his opening statement on two priorities: creating more opportunities in rural America, and improving the farm safety net to bolster the number of farmers able to participate in production agriculture.
Additional field hearings have now been added to the schedule:
AGRICULTURE COMMITTEE SCHEDULE
April 29, 2010
Friday, April 30th – 1:00 p.m. CDT
Iowa State Fair Grounds
Penningroth Sale Center
Des Moines, Iowa
Full Committee on Agriculture – Public Hearing
RE: To review U.S. agriculture policy in advance of the 2012 Farm Bill.
Saturday, May 1st – 1:00 p.m. MDT
Northwest Nazarene University
Old Science Lecture Hall
Nampa, ID
Full Committee on Agriculture – Public Hearing
RE: To review U.S. agriculture policy in advance of the 2012 Farm Bill.
Monday, May 3rd- 9:00 a.m. PDT
Fresno City Hall Council Chambers
2nd Floor
Fresno, CA
Full Committee on Agriculture – Public Hearing
RE: To review U.S. agriculture policy in advance of the 2012 Farm Bill.
Tuesday, May 4th- 8:00 a.m. MDT
Laramie County Community College
Center for Conferences and Institutes
Centennial Room 130
Cheyenne, WY
(NEW)
Friday, May 14th – 1:30 p.m. EDT
National Archives Southeast Region
Morrow, GA
(NEW)
Saturday, May 15th – 1:00 p.m. CDT
Cattlemen’s Park
Pike County Cattlemen’s Association
Troy, AL
(NEW)
Monday, May 17th – 9:00 a.m. CDT
Texas Tech Museum
Texas Tech University
Lubbock, TX
(NEW)
Tuesday, May 18th – 8:00 a.m. CDT
2nd Floor Theater
Edith Mortenson Center
Augustana College
Sioux Falls, SD