Prospects for a different kind of Farm Bill got nowhere in the commodity subcommittee of the House Agriculture Committee this week. The panel rejected proposals “that gave cotton and rice growers an almost allergic reaction: new restrictions that would have tracked farm program payments to individuals,” reports Agri-Pulse, a farm-policy newsletter. “Also eliminated: reductions in the percentage of base acres used to calculate direct payments and upward adjustments in support prices. Both provisions had been included in a chairman’s discussion draft that was circulated last Thursday but attracted so much opposition that provisions were changed several times before being dropped prior to Tuesday’s session.”
Only one member of the subcommittee voted for a Bush administration plan that “would have emphasized guaranteed payments to farmers, as opposed to those contingent on market prices," wrote Andrew Martin in The New York Times. “By opening such a wide chasm between themselves and the advocates of change, the members of the panel appear to have increased the chances that the Farm Bill will stir a fierce debate.”
Despite the 18-0 vote, the bill does not seem to be on a fast track. “What happened today was a placeholder,” ranking Republican Bob Goodlatte of Virginia said soon after the committee adjourned. “We’re going to have to revisit all of these issues again in full committee.”
Sara Wyant of Agri-Pulse reports, “Reform-minded interest groups were none too pleased with the outcome. For example, Bread for the World said the panel "ignored calls from thousands of constituents and a broad coalition of groups saying that it is time for broad reform." American Farmland Trust President Ralph Grossi said, “The committee shouldn't try to design the future of U.S. agriculture policy by looking in the rearview mirror. Agriculture has changed and it’s time for forward looking policies.”
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin told Wyant likewise in an interview. “We need to get agriculture looking ahead, not looking back,” he said, but Wyant reported, “Many veteran farm policy observers believe that he’ll have a tough time getting any major changes out of his own committee.”
The House committee's Farm Bill web site provides a section-by-section summary of the legislation. For more background and commentary on the bill, see the Institute for Agriculture and Trade Policy.
No comments:
Post a Comment