Reaction is mixed to 2007 Farm Bill
The Senate has passed the Food and Energy Security Act of 2007, and reaction is mixed.
Some farm groups expressed their pleasure with the bill.
“Corn growers nationwide are pleased by the Senate’s support for advancing an optional revenue-based safety net for farmers,” said the National Corn Growers Association President Ron Litterer.
According to a statement released by the NCGA, the adoption of the Average Crop Revenue program in the Commodity Title incorporates a more market-oriented farm safety net program that better meets the needs of producers in today’s economic environment. ACR is scheduled to be available beginning 2010 and is designed to deliver more efficient support for producers who experience revenue shortfalls.
The American Farm Bureau Federation was also pleased.
“This legislation contains important provisions for all sectors of agriculture, including expanded marketing programs to encourage the consumption of fruits and vegetables, incentives for beginning farmers and ranchers and provisions to promote the production of home-grown renewable fuels,” said President Bob Stallman in a statement. “The bill also meets the needs of more of America’s farmers by providing new funding for specialty crop research, conservation and pest and disease programs.
Stallman said the bill benefits all Americans with important programs for nutrition, conservation, energy security and support for rural communities.
Not all farm groups were entirely pleased. Keith Bolin, president of the American Corn Growers Association, said his organization was withholding its endorsement.
“The bill crafted by the Senate provides a much better farm bill than present law, but there were opportunities missed that should have been acted upon,” Bolin said.
Bolin said the bills passed by the Senate and by the House of Representatives last summer are both better farm bills than the 2002 act, and he hopes the combination of the two measures will contain many of ACGA’s priority provisions such as the establishment of a standing disaster trust fund and the extension of the Conservation Reserve Program.
“The Senate bill is better than current farm law, but it still fails to address the core problems facing America’s farm families — unfair prices paid to farmers and the challenges of the over-and under-production cycles of crop production,” he said. “We have worked hard for inclusion of price floors for crops and reinstatement of the Farmer Owned Reserve to mitigate those core problems but Congress failed to address them. We still have a lot of work ahead of us to meet ACGA’s goals.”
On the other end of the spectrum, at least one environmental group was displeased with the bill.
According to a statement released by Environmental Defense, the Senate squandered a opportunity to reform farm policy, cut excessive subsidies, and strengthen vital programs to help farmers clean up the environment and improve public health.
“The farm bill passed by the Senate will continue to allow millionaires to collect unlimited farm subsidies while leaving conservation programs and other critical programs underfunded,” said Sara Hopper, spokesperson for the Environmental Defense. “This is bad policy under any circumstances, but makes even less sense in a year when prices are high and net farm income is breaking records.”
Hopper said a bipartisan majority of senators back real reform and a better, fairer farm bill.
“That’s something the farm bill conferees should take into account,” she said. “The president has threatened to veto both the House and Senate versions of the farm bill; if Congress wants to avoid a train wreck, the conference committee members must support simple, common-sense reforms that will benefit farmers, taxpayers and the environment.”
The bill now goes to the House and Senate conference committee. Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin (D-Iowa) has expressed hope that conference negotiations can be completed in January.
Comment on this story at www.bcrnews.com.
