Washington Week: Student Voices (O)

Proposed farm bill creates debate
By Derrick Perkins
Massachusetts Daily Collegian (U. Massachusetts)
02/12/2007

(U-WIRE) AMHERST, Mass. — The Bush Administration proposed a new multi-year farm bill last month that would reduce government subsidies by $4.5 billion over the next decade and end federal funding for wealthy farmers.

The bill, proposed by Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns on Jan. 31, is designed to tighten loopholes in the current farm bill and reduce agricultural spending by the federal government, according to The Washington Post. The current farm bill, passed in 2002, expires on Sept. 30, 2007.

The proposed new bill would end government subsidies for individuals with an adjusted gross income of over $200,000, close a loophole that allowed non-farming landowners to receive subsidies and end loan deficiency payments that ensured government-guaranteed prices for commodities farmers, according to The Washington Post. Subsidies would end all together for about 80,000 individuals if the bill passes in its current form in both the U.S. House and Senate.

The current cap on federal payments received by any one eligible individual would remain unchanged at $360,000, according to The Associated Press.

Johanns told members of the press that the proposal reflected the savings resulting from the rise in prices and export rates of corn and other farming commodities since 2002.

"The 2002 Farm Bill, I believe, was the right policy for the times," Johanns said. "But like everything the times do change, and times have changed."

Agriculture industry groups have pushed for a minimum of changes between the 2002 bill and the newly proposed Bush Administration bill in the structure of federal programs and spending.

"Farm Bureau members from across the country have repeatedly and strongly emphasized the need to keep the 2007 farm bill consistent and very similar to the concepts in the current bill," said American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman in a statement released last month. "We are keeping an open mind about the administration's proposal and intend to give it full consideration."

Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, Chairman of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry committee, criticized the proposal for failing to include ample funding for the full range of agricultural programs affected by the farm bill.

"While it's positive, the proposal takes significant steps in the right direction, it falls short of the investment levels needed to reach our nation's objectives," Harkin said, citing renewable energy, rural economic development and conservation as the nation's key agricultural goals in a Jan. 31 statement.

"While I support the rhetoric, I do not see adequate resources dedicated to backing it up," he said.

The proposed bill would cost $87.3 billion in the next five years, according to The Associated Press, an $18 billion reduction in federal agriculture spending. Ten billion dollars have been allocated for wetlands restoration, biofuel development and new conservation initiatives. A further $5 billion would be spent on increased government purchases of fruits and vegetables for school lunch programs, according to The Washington Post.

"Farm bills are so challenging because I will work with lawmakers from every region on the country, every crop you can possibly think of. The diversity in farm policy is just huge," Johanns said speaking of the varied responses in congress concerning the new bill. "We got a long way to go to the finish line."

Farmers in Massachusetts were eligible for $67.5 million in government subsidies between 1995 and 2005. The Commonwealth is ranked as 44 in the nation for receiving government farming subsidies. Hampshire County was eligible for $9.76 million of those subsidies during that period of time, according to the Environmental Working Group, a Washington-based organization that examines environmental issues. Between 1995 and 2005, the University of Massachusetts received $34,885 in federal subsidies, the 63rd highest amount in Hampshire County according to the EWG's Farm Subsidy Database.

[ Back to Student Voices ]