Holly Hybrids is dedicated to keeping our customers on the cutting edge of sugarbeet news!

Sugar News

House Ag Committee starts on farm bill

By: Cindy Snyder Ag Weekly correspondent, Ag Weekly Online

5-7-2010

NAMPA, Idaho - The 2008 farm bill doesn't expire for another two years, but the House Agriculture Committee is already traveling around the country to listen to producers say is working or not working.

The second in a series of hearings was held in Nampa, Idaho, on May 1. Ten producers from Idaho representing commodities from apples to wool testified. Each producer was given five minutes for oral testimony and then the six House members attending the hearing asked questions.

Scott Brown, a barley and wheat grower from Soda Springs, said House Agriculture Chairman Collin Peterson wants to avoid the uncertainty that surrounded the last farm bill. The 2002 Farm Bill was set to expire in 2007, but lawmakers could not agree on provisions for the next farm bill and ultimately the 2002 bill was extended one year.

"Chairman Peterson doesn't want to go without a farm bill for a year again," Brown said.

But the House Ag Committee's early start has caught many producer groups unprepared. For example, the Idaho Grain Producers Association, will not determine what provisions the organization would like to see in the 2012 farm bill until its annual meeting later this year. The National Association of Wheat Growers and the National Barley Growers Association are just now polling members about what they'd like to see in the next farm bill.

Brown is the president of IGPA. He told Ag Committee members that IGPA is a grassroots organization and that policy decisions are made by the board of directors through a resolution process. "Every grower has an opportunity to become part of the process of writing the next farm bill," he said.

Although Idaho growers have liked the direct payments made under the 2008 farm bill, Peterson asked Brown if growers would be willing to give up direct payments in exchange for something else, perhaps beefing up the crop insurance program.

That's something Brown couldn't answer because IGPA hasn't taken a position on it yet, but he answered that direct payments are popular. "Direct payments have acted as an economic stimulus program for rural America," Brown said. Even though farmers are the ones receiving the direct payment, producers spend that money locally to buy everything from fuel, fertilizer and seed to food at the grocery store. "Farmers are merely the conduit to get money into the rural economy."

Grain producers would like to see the crop insurance program more robust with higher coverage levels. Farmers are only able to insure their crop at 75 percent of the value.

Sugarbeet growers also fairly happy with the 2008 farm bill.

"The provisions of the 2008 farm bill are working," Galen Lee told a panel of five committee members during a hearing in western Idaho last weekend. The farm bill expires in September 2008 and committee members are holding meetings around the country in preparation of drafting the 2012 bill.

"The sugar program operates at no cost to taxpayers and it gives sugar producers a chance to make a profit from the market," the sugarbeet grower from New Plymouth, Idaho, said. "Sugarbeet growers would like to see no changes made to the sugar provisions in the next farm bill."

Producers do not receive subsidy payments from the government. When the 2008 farm bill was written, sugar users argued for tax-payer sugar subsidies to keep domestic sugar prices lower. Given high sugar prices over the last year, growers are preparing to debate the issue again.

Adrian Boer, a dairy producer from Jerome, also testified. He is a member of National Milk Producers Federations (NMPF) and serves on the NMPF Strategic Planning Task Force.

In his written testimony, he pointed out things the next farm bill should not be. The next farm bill should not put one commodity at risk while enhancing another commodity as was done in the government ethanol subsidy programs that dramatically increased our input cost and were devastating to Idaho?s livestock operations.

It should not favor one region of the country over another region. And it should not discriminate based on operation size, nor should it camouflage market signals such as the MILC program currently does by encouraging over production at times when the market is indicating a reduction in production is needed.

While each of the producers addressed issues specific to the commodities they represented, the need for immigration reform was a common theme among the presentations.

Through their questions and comments, House Ag Committee members also acknowledged shortcomings of past farm bills. Congressman Walt Minnick, host of the hearing, said the current farm bill does a poor job of protecting producers in times of stress.

Chairmen Peterson said farm programs should give people who want to farm the ability to manage their risk. All of the committee members recognized that the base line appropriations funding for the 2012 farm bill will be substantially lower than the current farm bill. The net result might be a decrease in payments going out to producers.