New Farm Bill Divides Bush And Lawmakers

[Bukowski Fan]

WASHINGTON - Lawmakers begin work on a new multibillion-dollar farm bill at odds with
President Bush over whether big changes really are needed.

The two sides are far apart. Just how far, farmers saw for themselves during the American Farm Bureau Federation's recent meeting in Salt Lake City.

"I think the bill could look a lot like what we have now. What I think we're going to end up doing, you could say, is extending the farm bill," Rep. Collin Peterson (news, bio, voting record), D-Minn., chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, told farmers.

Contrast that with Bush's agriculture secretary, Mike Johanns, who said at the meeting that farm programs need an overhaul.

Link

This is my first LBN post, so let me know if I screwed it up.

Personally, I really hope there is a long, drawn out fight over this, and the Democrats get behind increased spending. This could really help us carry some Western states, especially with the convention in Colorado.

[tanyev]

1. Yeah, that whole terrorism policy needed a big overhaul, too.

No more swatting flies, etc. Look how well that worked out.

[sasha031]

2. i would like to see the farm subsidies eliminated

they all go to the cooperate farm boys, you have to qualify with a certain amount of millions of $ to even get it.

the family farm is dead in the US, they are lucky, if they can grow enough food so they can survive.

i don't recognize this country anymore.

[appal_jack]

4. au contraire...

There is a small farm revival going on that will hopefully foster the future of family-farming.

Can a family survive growing GMO corn and soybeans on 200 acres, selling the harvest to the local grain elevator? Probably not. But with diversified farm products that are sold direct-to-consumers, families are at least making ends meet on 10-15 acres. Some combination of vegetables, pasture-raised meats, small fruits (blueberries and raspberries are big where I'm at), and seasonal specialties such as pumpkins can pay the bills if sold retail at a farmers' market or similar outlet.

The debate about the Farm Bill will center around whether Federal Subsidies will continue to be targeted toward the corn/soybean commodity farms (and the factory-animal-nightmares the corn & soybeans feed), whether the subsidies could be tweaked to support conservation, diversification, and added value on these new small farms.

If you are interested in this newer model that the family farm is moving toward, google Joel Salatin, Polyface Farm, "Growing Small Farms" (an excellent Chatham Co. NC website created by that county's _Extension_Agent_!), newfarm.org, etc. and follow the links from there. I think you'll find some hopeful stuff there.

-app

[OKthatsIT]

7. agreed

[OKthatsIT]

6. agreed

[MadMaddie]

3. Yes, there needs to be a drawn out fight for everything that

this administration supports. We need to support and protect one of the US's most important infrastructure needs.

And you did great for your first post.:7

Welcome to DU! :hi:

[rodeodance]

5. if the money went to small farms --but so much goes to Agribusiness.

"I will be the first to argue that the 2002 farm bill was good policy for its time," Johanns said. "But the agricultural and economic realities that influenced the development of the '02 farm bill — they simply don't exist."

The farm bill — really a series of federal programs — gives farmers payments and other help to supplement their incomes, support crop prices and manage supplies.

Near $18 billion in public money was spent on these programs last year. The current farm bill, written in 2002, expires at the end of this year.

Congress and the administration disagree mightily on what the new farm bill should look like.

[seasat]

8. I hate to agree with Shrub Inc but it does need a major overhaul.

Firstly, Shrub Inc is not approaching this from some sort of moral high ground. They know that the farm bill is pure pork. The Repugs passed it and un-did all the reforms that were made during the Clinton administration to buy votes. Shrub Inc supported it then because it benefited Repugs. He opposes it now because the pork will benefit Democrats. However this type of money laundering for campaign contributions is not right even if it buys us a few votes, IMHO.

Tom Daschle had the right idea but was defeated on the last farm bill. He proposed a lower cap on the maximum payout to an individual farm. There also should be a limit on "Gentleman" farms. These are farms owned by the wealthy basically as a vacation home that qualify for subsidies.

Some of the subsidies are plain out criminal. The sugar subsidy benefits two large family owned corporations here in Florida. In '98 a study estimated that the Fanjul family received over 65 million in subsidies alone. They used that money to influence the Florida elections. They spent almost 5 million in attack ads to keep Democrat Jim Davis from being elected as governor. They've spent millions in lobbying and donations to stymie the Everglades restoration. They even spent big lobbing the WHO to try to keep them from suggesting that kids should consume less sugar in their diets. I'm sure there are similar stories about corn and other agricultural products.

The price supports in the farm bill harm some of the poorest by raising the cost of basic food items. It also hurts in trade agreements because the tariffs and subsidies are barriers to entry for imported produce. It can be overhauled so that it continues to support small family owned farms without all the vote buying pork.