 |
November 2008 |
 |
|
|
|
|
|
Farm Bill passes |
|
|
|
Friday, 16 May 2008 |
By WILLIAM LANEY
Staff Writer
WASHINGTON — The $290 billion Farm Bill of 2007 is far from perfect, but the legislation does move the nation forward, a U.S. senator and farm organization president say.
The legislation passed the Senate Thursday with an 81-15 vote, a day after passing the House by a 318-106 vote, both surpassing the mark to override a threat by President Bush to veto the bill.
U.S. Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer maintained the White House stance on a possible presidential veto.
“The bill passed today (Thursday) is a farm bill in name only,’’ Schafer said in a prepared news statement. “It does not target help for farmers who really need it, and it increases the cost and size of government.’’
U.S. Sen. Sherrod Brown, D-Avon, told the media during a teleconference call he believes Bush’s threat is real, but he expects the House and Senate to have enough votes to override a veto.
The Congressman from Ohio also said the legislation addresses some needs, but Congressional members need to keep looking forward and to moving the country forward.
“We need to do more, but this bill is a major step especially in regard to nutrition,” Brown told his fellow Senators while speaking on the floor before its passage. “This bill moves us forward — Ohio families need this farm bill, Ohio farmers want this farm bill, and Ohio rural communities deserve this farm bill.”
American Farm Bureau Federation President Bob Stallman voiced his support of the bipartisan legislation.
“The farm bill approved by the House yesterday (Wednesday) and the Senate today (Thursday) strikes a key balance,” Stallman said in a news release issued Thursday. “The bill provides vital support for nutrition, conservation, research, food safety and many other programs that benefit all Americans.
“Farm bills are most important in bad times,” he said, “and given the cyclical nature of agriculture and the vagaries of weather, American farmers and ranchers need a basic, no-frills safety net in place to fall back on as they work to provide food and fuel for the U.S. and the world.”
One of the most contentious areas of negotiations among Congressional negotiators centered on subsidies to wealthy farmers. Bush pushed for reducing the cap on payments to $200,000, while the 2007 Farm Bill would eliminate some federal payments to individuals with more than $750,000 in annual farm income or married farmers who make more than $1.5 million.
The legislation also would make individuals who make more than $500,000 or couples who make more than $1 million in non-farm income ineligible for subsidies.
Previously, there were no limits on farm-based income.
Stallman conceded on this section of the bill.
“No farm bill ever is perfect, but this bill includes substantial reforms,” Stallman said in a news release. “Members of the conference committee did an outstanding job addressing the administration’s concerns regarding financing. Moreover, in spite of a cut in the cornerstone support offered by direct payments, this is a good, solid bill for American agriculture, American consumers and the environment.”
Brown said the level of direct payment program improved by decreasing the amount available to corporate farms and the wealthiest farmers, but legislators did not go as far as he wanted.
“I think that number should be significantly lower, and I actually agree with the president, who wanted to bring that number down to the $200,000 to $250,000 range,” Brown said. “I supported those efforts and I still would rather it be that, but we were able to bring it down from current law.
“This bill is far from perfect and that is one of the most imperfect parts of it.”
During the teleconference, Brown focused his attention on six priorities which developed from round-table discussions held with farmers, conservationists and food bank managers throughout Ohio.
One of the six priorities is reforming farm programs to better protect Ohio farmers, which resulted in a program called average crop revenue election program (ACRE).
“It basically says if your farm income is significantly down because of low prices or low yields that the safety net is there for farmers,” Brown said. “This Farm Bill is more about safety net than it is about direct payments to farmers who are already big corporate farmers. We wanted less of that and more of a safety net for farmers.”
A second priority is investing in rural communities, which provides loans to improve waste and water infrastructure.
The third priority encourages farm-based renewable energy, while the remaining priorities include increasing benefit levels for food and nutrition programs, increasing consumption of fruits and vegetables and expanding critical farm conservation programs.
Two-thirds of the 2007 Farm Bill would pay for domestic nutrition programs such as food stamps and emergency food aid for the needy, according to The Associated Press. An additional $40 billion is for farm subsidies, while almost $30 billion would go to farmers to idle their land and to other environmental programs. |
|
Last Updated ( Thursday, 22 May 2008 )
|
|
|
|
