Iowa Farmer Today
03/04/06
Challenges ahead in farm bill debate
By Gene Lucht, Iowa Farmer Today
BROOKLYN -- Craig Lang is acutely aware of the challenges facing farmers as
they begin talking about the next farm bill.
As a farmer and as president of the Iowa Farm Bureau Federation, he knows
what the legislation means to his business and his family.
Also, as the person who often tries to bring state and national Farm Bureau
members together, he knows there are big regional differences in perspective.
“As farmers, we need to make decisions based on what’s good for the next
generation,” he said. “I don’t think that’s happening today.”
He sees the need for change.
Others don’t see it that way. Some farm groups are happy with the status quo on
farm programs and policy. There even has been a move to extend the 2002 farm
bill for four or five years.
Lang doesn’t see that happening. Too many issues need to be resolved now, he
said.
But, the farm bill debate, which traditionally happens about every five years, is
going on now. And, it’s happening against a backdrop of uncertainty.
For example:
= Many farm policy activists from a variety of farmer and commodity groups say
they aren’t sure how to proceed on policy until trade negotiators come up with an
agreement in the current World Trade Organization (WTO) talks.
= The original WTO deadline was 2½ months ago in December. But, even the
optimists say trade discussions rarely come to a nice, clean end and on time.
They hope perhaps an agreement can be reached this summer. Until it is
finalized, they are hesitant to agree to a farm bill that cuts commodity payments,
even though they might support that idea in principle.
There is also a divide between Southern and Northern interests on the structure
and size of farm payments. Nowhere is this divide more pronounced than on the
issue of payment limitations for farmers.
Leaders of the cotton and rice producer groups have balked at stricter payment
limitations, calling them an attack on their way of life because the cost of
production per acre is higher for their crops.
Many Midwestern and Northern farmers have argued too much of the money
goes to too few farmers. And, in many ways the discussion has essentially been
delayed until Congress debates the new farm bill.
Farmers have talked for 20 years about how public sentiment, tight budgets and
trade negotiations will force them to do something different. In some ways, that
idea led to conservation compliance in the mid-1980s.
It certainly led to the so-called 1996 Freedom to Farm bill. It also helped lead to
the Conservation Security Program (CSP) in 2002. Today, federal lawmakers are
debating cuts to ag programs in light of federal budget deficits and higher
defense spending.
Yet, farm spending generally has remained steady and strong, leading many
farmers to ask for more of the same.
The number of farmers continues to drop, feeding both the idea of putting
together programs to encourage young farmers and the idea of changing from a
commodity-based approach to a rural development approach in farm policy.
So, what happens now?
“We’re not going to write the farm bill this year,” predicts Mary Kay Thatcher,
director of public policy for the American Farm Bureau Federation. “We won’t
write the farm bill until after we know what happens with the WTO this summer.”
If there is a WTO agreement this summer, she said, there will be time for
Congress to write a bill and have it take effect before the end of 2007.
If it takes longer to reach a WTO agreement, she expects Congress to pass a
one-year extension of the present farm bill.
That doesn’t mean Farm Bureau supports an extension, she quickly adds. It just
means an extension could be the direction Congress takes.
Even that doesn’t preclude some preliminary action by lawmakers. The U.S.
House Agriculture Committee, led by Rep. Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., has held
several field hearings in recent weeks.
The Senate Agriculture Committee, led by Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., could
hold hearings this spring or summer.
The USDA under Mike Johanns, an Iowa native and former Nebraska governor,
held a series of farm bill forums this past year. During an appearance at an Iowa
forum, Johanns said he was not ruling out the possibility the Bush administration
might put forth its own farm bill proposal.
Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, was chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee in
2002, when the last farm bill was written. He said Westerners and Midwesterners
will be in the thick of the farm bill debate in Congress but reminds farmers
Southerners
lead the House and Senate Agriculture committees.
Those two chairmen will have some power over the type of legislation emerging
from their committees, meaning issues such as payment limitations might have
trouble.
It is possible, Harkin said, those Southern chairmen might be more inclined to
support the status quo in farm programs than some of their Northern
counterparts.
Even many proponents of major changes in federal farm policy don’t generally
suggest eliminating all present farm payments overnight.
“Doing that cold-turkey would be catastrophic,” said Mike Duffy, Iowa State
University economist. Land prices would nosedive, he explained.
But, Harkin suggested programs, such as the CSP, could still provide a
framework for the future.
Others, such as Chuck Hassebrook, executive director of the Center for Rural
Affairs in Lyon, Neb., say there should be a switch in emphasis away from crops
and bushels toward farmers and rural residents.
That could mean more conservation payments, payment limits, rural job
programs, or beginning farmer programs that are more than today’s interest buydown programs.
“It’s an absolutely critical time,” Hassebrook said.
“It’s no secret that farm populations are dropping. We don’t want another farm bill
that destroys family farms.”
Many other farm leaders disagree with Hassebrook’s assessment of past farm
legislation.
Thatcher noted 89 percent of Farm Bureau members surveyed support the
present farm bill. Many of them, she said, would love to see it continue.
However, Iowa farmer Lang isn’t excited about more of the same.
He’s accustomed to the battles between Iowa Farm Bureau members and the
national organization over farm bill issues. He even wonders out loud if farmers
might be better off without a farm bill. Lang also is concerned so many farmers
seem to think they are entitled to federal farm payments.
He agrees it will be important to get a WTO agreement on ag spending
worldwide, adding “protectionist attitudes have kind of crept into the country.”
Lang he said lawmakers should be talking about issues, such as how farm
payments often get capitalized into land prices instead of going to put more
farmers on that land.
“We need so many warm bodies to make our rural communities and civic
organizations work,” he stressed.
So, the debate into the next farm bill begins. The timetable may include a oneyear extension .
Apparently, many farmers want to keep what they can for as long as they can
while their friends and neighbors are pushing for dramatic changes.
It’s time to get started.