Congress Passes New Farm Bill

JUDY WOODRUFF:

The legislation passed by the House today is the first step toward approving a massive bill that shapes farm, food, environment, and even trade policy over the next five years. All told, it cost $286 billion.

Most of that money, $190 billion, is spent on food stamps and other nutrition programs. But one of the most controversial parts of the bill is the $42 billion it gives to farmers through crop subsidies, insurance, and other payments. There would be some changes in those payments: Subsidies would be banned for farmers if their income exceeds $1 million a year. Currently, farmers earning up to $2.5 million annually are eligible.

But many critics, including President Bush, say that change doesn't go far enough. Instead, the president proposes banning subsidies for farmers whose income exceeds $200,000 a year. He has threatened to veto the bill if the Senate does not make those changes this fall.

We get our own debate on whether subsidies are too generous. And for that, we turn to two House members who have been central in this fight: Paul Ryan of Wisconsin, the ranking Republican member on the Budget Committee; and Democrat Earl Pomeroy of North Dakota, a member of the Agriculture Committee.

Gentlemen, thank you for being with us.

And, Representative Ryan, to you first, you believe these subsidies should be done away with or sharply curtailed. Why?

REP. PAUL RYAN (R), Wisconsin: I think they should be sharply curtailed because, first of all, I don't think people making a million dollars should be getting almost unlimited payments. I supported the amendment to cap payments at $250,000.

The reason I do this is because I think the farm program ought to be a safety net for family farmers, not payouts to large corporate farms, number one. And, number two, the largesse of these subsidies will actually hurt us internationally in getting better trade agreements to open up our markets for our farmers.

The big problem with this bill as it passed is it doesn't help farmers when they're having a hard time. It sends them a check almost every year. They ought to get a check when they're having bad years, not almost every year.

JUDY WOODRUFF:

And, Representative Pomeroy, you think these subsidies should be continued. Why?

REP. EARL POMEROY (D), North Dakota: You know, agriculture involves exposing an awful lot of capital. You know, a family farmer puts everything on the table when they put a crop in, in the spring. And there are risks they can't control, prices collapsing, a crop getting wiped out.

The federal government's role is helping family farmers manage these risks. And that keeps family farming agriculture a central component of U.S. food production. You know, we've got a choice: We can go to massive, vast, corporate-style agriculture or keep family farmers front and center. And that's what this farm bill does.