Farm bill could be delayed until April 2013: farm policy analyst

MILWAUKEE Mon Nov 5, 2012 8:00pm EST

Related Topics

MILWAUKEE (Reuters) - The Congress could delay passage of a new five-year farm bill until spring planting given the full plate of legislation needed after the election to avoid a fiscal cliff with its mandatory U.S. budget cuts, a top farm policy expert said on Monday.

"My prediction is that we will get a farm bill by April 2013. It will look very close to the Senate version," Barry Flinchbaugh, a Kansas State University agricultural economist who advises legislators on shaping U.S. farm bills, told an agricultural bankers meeting.

The farm bill is the master legislation that directs government supports and food aid programs.

Squabbling over political issues, the divided Congress adjourned in September without passing a new bill before the old one expired on October 1. That fed more anger in U.S. farm country - which is still reeling from the worst drought in half a century - against partisans in Congress.

Any fallout from the failure to pass a farm bill will be seen in the U.S. farm belt from Ohio to Nebraska and the Dakotas to Texas on Tuesday when voters go the polls for the national election.

Hardest hit by the drought were livestock producers and dairy farmers who lack the crop insurance that grain belt farmers enjoy, and continue to be squeezed by soaring costs to feed their animals.

"If the president is reelected we have more of a chance of getting a farm bill passed in the lame duck. If Romney is elected they are obviously going to want to wait until he can have some input," Flinchbaugh told Reuters on the sidelines of the meeting.

The Democrat-controlled Senate passed its version of the bill in June, which would replace traditional crop subsidies with an insurance-like program and cut food aid for the poor - food stamps - by $4 billion. The Republican-controlled House of Representatives splintered over demands by some conservatives to cut food stamps and farm programs even more.

Food stamp cuts would account for $16 billion of the $35 billion in savings proposed by the House agriculture committee. The Senate package would save $23 billion with crop subsidies providing half of the cuts.

Since the 2008 farm bill expired on October 1 government supports have been operating under the 1938 Agricultural Adjustment Act passed during Franklin Roosevelt's New Deal programs. The AAA brought back the concept of "price parity" from the 1900s and led to sharply higher guaranteed crop prices, Flinchbaugh said.

Most policy farm analysts expect Congress to extend the 2008 Farm Bill if they can't pass the new bill by December 31. But Flinchbaugh said Congress can do what it wants.

"In 1995 and 1996 they didn't" extend the earlier legislation, Flinchbaugh said.

He believes it will not be as easy to pass an extension as it may look now based on how farm bills are funded.

"If they try a one-year extension, I don't know where they are going to get the money," he said. "They might do a 30-day extension or 60-day extension until they get the new one."

But the farm bill is the minor issue compared to the fiscal cliff the country is facing, Flinchbaugh said.

Under a contentious budget compromise in 2011 neither side liked, Republicans and Democrats locked themselves into massive mandatory budget cuts and tax increases in January 2013 to avoid raising the U.S. debt ceiling after last year's first-ever U.S. debt downgrade by rating agency Standard & Poor's. Economists say such automatic drastic measures will likely push the economy back into recession.

"I'm pleading for horse sense," Flinchbaugh told Reuters. "If Congress attempts to kick the can down the road one more time -- by spring we will have federal Treasury bonds rated BB, versus AA now."

(Reporting by Christine Stebbins; Editing by Peter Bohan and Carol Bishopric)

FILED UNDER:
We welcome comments that advance the story through relevant opinion, anecdotes, links and data. If you see a comment that you believe is irrelevant or inappropriate, you can flag it to our editors by using the report abuse links. Views expressed in the comments do not represent those of Reuters. For more information on our comment policy, see http://blogs.reuters.com/fulldisclosure/2010/09/27/toward-a-more-thoughtful-conversation-on-stories/
Comments (1)
PowerOfChoice wrote:
Our government at any time can choose to supersede any support for all past Agricultural Adjustment Acts or any other legislation passed previously regarding a “Farm Bill”. It is not only Congress kicking any can down roads but also the Senate.

The Democrat Senate Farm Bill should NOT be passed with this section still added: SEC. 12211. DEFINITION OF RURAL AREA FOR PURPOSES OF THE HOUSING ACT OF 1949 would increase the pool of recipients and increased rural community population requirement to 35,000. This population level would be a small City not a true rural community. Changing the Census date to 2020 insures those who have already received fair share of benefits over past years and now self-sufficient to continue receiving such benefits. The purpose of rural programs is to help very small struggling communities grow and become self-sufficient, not to become a Welfare System for self-sufficient communities who have already received past benefits wanting more.

This section in the Senate Farm Bill and also in other bills such as House Bill H.R. 273 is Legislative Back Scratching just for the purpose of continuing to feed funding to self sufficient city governments. Given the U.S. current deficit and debt how does increasing the pool of recipients by adding those who have already had their fair share in the past being greedy and wanting more, serve the best interest of true rural communities?

Again, we are 16+ Trillion in debt and it is time to separate the trash from all legislative bills to move forward. A Farm Bill should only be for farmers to insure proper Food Supply for our citizens and insure all farmers have access to proper insurance the same as any other business. Items need to be separated out and those needed stand alone which would eliminate the petty bickering in the future such as now with farm needs vs. food stamps. A farm bill should not contain items for energy, broadband, housing, welfare, etc. Amendments were meant to tweak a bill to insure what is passed is the best for the people for that item (Farm Bill = Food Supply) and not meant to add back scratching garbage by legislators seeking campaign money. This is why we are in financial crisis and enough is enough!!!

Nov 06, 2012 12:09am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.