WASHINGTON - Momentum is building in Congress for overhauling farm subsidies because of tight budgets and increasing enthusiasm for renewable fuels and conservation programs.
Major change will not come easily. The current farm bill, which expires in September, provides payments and other help to supplement farmers' incomes, support crop prices and manage supplies. Any cuts in subsidies will face resistance.
President Bush sought similar reductions upon taking office. But he made little headway in the latest farm bill, which Congress wrote in 2002.
Since then, Democrats have regained control of the House and energy prices have skyrocketed, leading to more calls for ethanol, which is derived from plants. Record prices for corn and other crops have some people questioning the need for subsidies.
The government paid out almost $17 billion in subsidies last year, a drop of more than $10 billion from 2000.
"It's a different dynamic, there's just no doubt about it," Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns said.
Some lawmakers are rallying around a bipartisan proposal by Reps. Ron Kind, D-Wis., and Jeff Flake, R-Ariz., to wean farmers from government payments. Kind won 200 votes for a similar plan during the debate on the 2002 bill. At the time, one supporter was Rep. Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., now the House speaker.
Their proposal would replace subsidies with savings accounts that farmers could use to cover losses when crop prices are low or yields are poor.
Some subsidies would be diverted to biofuels, rural development and conservation programs that pay farmers for leaving land idle.
Rick Ostlie, a North Dakota farmer who is president of the American Soybean Association, said prices may be high now, but farmers will need a safety net if they drop. Kind's savings accounts "aren't going to help the average farmer who is having financial problems," he said.
Lawmakers from both parties who represent farm states expect some overhaul. They note that few extra dollars are available for conservation and energy programs and that Congress has much less money to work with this year. But there is little consensus on what changes are needed.
"There's a very strong but minority viewpoint that somehow you have to protect these largest commodity programs at all costs," Kind said.
In an interview with the Associated Press, Johanns said Kind has approached him two or three times about his proposal. While the Bush administration has put forward its own ideas and does not endorse Kind's plan, Johanns said the Democrat makes a compelling case.
"He certainly has ideas that I think everybody would like," Johanns said. "If the approach is let's just do it all over again like we did in 2002, those who want reform have nothing to lose by battling on the floor of the House."
A House Agriculture subcommittee took just that approach last month. It unanimously rejected Kind's proposal and approved a bill that would extend the 2002 law.
Despite that vote, one of the panel's members, Rep. Earl Pomeroy, D-N.D., agreed with Johanns that the committee must do something to please the wider House membership, many of whom represent urban districts. But Pomeroy also called what Kind and Flake want to do "death by reform."
Posted in State-and-regional on Saturday, July 7, 2007 7:00 pm Updated: 3:46 pm.
© Copyright 2009, BismarckTribune.com, 707 E. Front Ave Bismarck, ND | Terms of Service and Privacy Policy