Farm Bill Digest #5, Posted July 25, 2007
The Farm Bill Digest is a weekly news alert that tracks the National Campaign's 2008 Farm Bill Priorities.
In this issue of the Digest:
-
Farm Bill Going to the House Floor.
The Farm Bill passed out of the House Agriculture Committee on July 19 is scheduled for debate on the House Floor tomorrow, July 26th. -
Meaningful Farm
Bill Reform?
Chairman offers weak payment limitation reform. -
Summary of Provisions
in HR 2419
HR 2419 and livestock, CSP, rural development, beginning farmers, and CFP. -
Victories in House and Senate Agricultural Appropriations
FY 08 funding for SARE and ATTRA and other key sustainable agriculture programs fare well in the agricultural appropriations process.
FARM BILL DIGEST #5
Meaningful Farm Bill Reform?
After pressure from the House Democratic leadership to bring a Farm Bill to the House Floor that included “meaningful reform,” Chairman Peterson presented to the House Agriculture Committee late on July 17th a Manager’s Amendment that includes payment limitation provisions for both commodity and conservation programs. The amendment was accepted by the Committee.
Peterson’s amendment which is expected to save just $522 million over 10 years was described by Peterson as going “maybe further than some people want to go.” It doesn’t, however, go as far as many would like, certainly not as far as the Dorgan-Grassley payment limitation proposal now pending in the Senate and described in the June 5, 2008 Farm Bill Digest. http://www.sustainableagriculture.net/farm_bill_digest3.php
On the plus side, the Peterson amendment:
Excludes from eligibility individuals whose average adjusted gross income exceeds $1 million.
Excludes individuals whose average adjusted gross income is between $500,000 and $1 million unless two-thirds of their income is “agriculturally related.”
Eliminates the three entity rule which has allowed large farms to form up to three separate farming entities, effectively doubling the payment limitation.
Establishes direct attribution rules so that payments received by entities will be attributed directly to individual shareholders, partners or members.
On the negative side:
Peterson’s amendment actually raises the nominal cap on Direct Payments from $40,000 to $60,000 (effectively $120,000 for married couples.) The current cap of $65,000 ($130,000 for married couples) on Counter-cyclical payments is maintained.
The amendment fails to fix the “active management test” or to limit payments to working farmers. Dorgan- Grassley would limit payments to working farmers by requiring that labor and management be provided on “a regular, substantial and continuous basis.”
Worst of all, rather than close the current loophole in the $75,000 payment limitation on Loan Deficiency Payments, the Peterson amendment simply eliminates the payment limitation altogether. The amendment provides no payment limitation whatsoever for the Farm Bill’s primary mechanism for providing price support.
With no cap whatsoever on LDPs the Peterson amendment provides no effective overall cap on total farm program payments. Dorgan-Grassley sets a hard cap of $250,000 on total payments.
Peterson also included new payment limitation provisions for Conservation programs. He set a cap of $60,000 annually for any one conservation practice payment - or - $125,000 annually if the producer is participating in more than one conservation program. For farmers participating in EQIP and at least one other conservation program this effectively increases the already astronomical EQIP payment limitation of $450,000 over five years to an even bigger $625,000.
Speaker Pelosi and other members of the Democratic leadership in the House need to hear that this isn’t the kind of Farm Bill reform we had in mind – and it shouldn’t stave off more effective reform measures to be introduced on the House floor.
Summary of Provisions in HR 2419
This is a quick and dirty summary of some of the key provisions in HR 2419 as it heads to the House Floor. There are likely to be additional amendments to the bill before it actually gets to the floor so consider this summary “subject to change”.
Conservation Security Program
HR 2419 cuts $3.2 billion from the CSP and effectively puts the program on hiatus for 4 years until 2012. An amendment offered by Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand to restore at least a portion of these cuts was included in the en bloc amendment – a portion of the bill that requires that funding offsets be found by the time the bill reaches the House Floor. Whether offsets for CSP can be found – a chore the Chairman left to the House Speaker, Nancy Pelosi, is uncertain.
Community Food Projects
Community Food Projects receive $30 million in discretionary funding, expanding the program but at the mercy of a very tight and difficult agricultural appropriations process. Proponents are hopeful for a House Floor amendment to provide mandatory funding.
Livestock Provisions
HR 2419 includes a provision allowing the sale of state inspected meat and poultry in interstate commerce where the state’s inspection program standards are identical to the federal standards.
Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) is to be implemented by September 30, 2008. Only animals born, raised and slaughtered in the US are to be labeled “Product of the U.S”. Animals born in another country and raised or slaughtered in the U.S. are to be labeled as products of that country and the U.S.
The current prohibition on the use of mandatory National Animal Identification System to verify country of origin is retained in HR 2419.
The provision preempting state and local food safety laws was stripped from the bill even before it went to full House Agriculture Committee markup. It may reappear on the House floor, however.
The House Agriculture Committee bill goes to the House floor with not one piece of the Competition Title. The amendment offered by Leonard Boswell in subcommittee prohibiting mandatory arbitration clauses was stripped from the bill after Representative Rogers (R-AL) offered a substitute amendment giving USDA the authority to regulate mandatory arbitration standards. Alternatively, farmers could seek relief in disputes involving contracts worth hundreds of thousands of dollars in small claims court.
The Farmers Market Promotion Program gets a new name in the House bill. It will now be called the Farmers Marketing Assistance Program to better reflect the full range of activities the program supports. It also received $25 million in mandatory funding.
The § 2501 Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Program received $15 million in annual, mandatory funding.
The Value Added Producer Grant Program received $20 million in annual, mandatory funding.
An amendment offered by Rep. Kirsten Gillibrand (D-NY) establishes a priority for projects which strengthen local and regional food enterprises within the Business and Industry Loan Program.
Organic Provisions
For a summary of the organic provisions in HR 2419 go the latest organic update on the Campaign’s website at http://www.sustainableagriculture.net/organic.php
Beginning Farmers and Ranchers
HR 2419 provides $15 million in mandatory funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program. Loan limits for FSA direct operating and farm ownership loans are increased to $300,000. There is also a new emphasis on beginning, immigrant, and socially disadvantaged farmers under the Risk Management Education Program. The bill does not include the Individual Development Account pilot program.
Rural Development
HR 2419 establishes Rural Entrepreneurs and Micro-Enterprise Program but provides only discretionary funding with an authorization at $20 million per year. The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA) program received a permanent authorization shedding its difficulties with earmark status.
Victories in House and Senate Agricultural Appropriations
This may be the “Farm Bill Digest” but several important victories on the agricultural appropriations front deserve mention and celebration. Last week the House Agricultural Appropriations Committee voted on FY 2008 funding levels for agricultural programs. The Sustainable Agriculture Research and Education (SARE) received an increase of nearly $2 million over current levels at $18.2 million. The Appropriate Technology Transfer for Rural Areas (ATTRA) program was set at $2.74 million, an increase from its current $2.5 million level, and a vast improvement over the severe cuts (to $935,000!) suffered earlier this year; and the Conservation Security Program (CSP) made it through without payment caps that in the past have forced it into budgetary quicksand.
Similarly, the U.S. Senate agricultural appropriators voted to protect funding for these three top priorities for the sustainable agriculture community. They funded ATTRA at $3 million and kept any caps off the CSP. And the funded SARE at $20 million.
Thanks are due to the Agricultural Appropriators who voted for these funding levels in spite of a very tight federal budget.
© 2007-2008 National Campaign for Sustainable Agriculture.