| WASHINGTON (Reuters) - U.S. farm subsidies would get a new purpose --
land stewardship -- under a proposal expected to be the centerpiece of
House of Representatives debate on Wednesday on a $73 billion overhaul of
agriculture spending.
Backers said they expected a close vote on their amendment to take $19
billion now earmarked for traditional crop subsidies and use it for a vast
expansion of land, water and wildlife conservation.
The degree to which spending on conservation should be expanded has
become the major dispute as Congress considers the farm bill,
overshadowing calls for a stronger farm safety net after four years of low
grain prices.
A fight also was expected over an amendment to reduce sugar supports by
16 percent.
Written every few years, farm bills set federal policy on crop
subsidies, public nutrition, exports, conservation, food safety and
agricultural research programs. The Senate has yet to finish writing its
version of a farm bill.
"We think this policy change is long overdue," said Wisconsin
Democrat Rep. Ron Kind, co-sponsor of the conservation proposal. "We
can provide economic assistance to producers ... but we also derive
certain societal benefits."
House Agriculture Committee Chairman Larry Combest, Texas Republican,
has said he would pull the bill from debate if the conservation amendment
was adopted. It would use 40 percent of the $45 billion allocated for
higher grain, cotton and soybean subsidies.
The bill also would send more money automatically to growers if returns
from crop sales and government supports fell below the "target"
prices selected by Congress. It would keep farm income at the near-record
levels of the past few years, when Congress enacted $30.5 billion in farm
bailouts.
Combest said the so-called counter-cyclical payments would
"eliminate the need for ad-hoc economic assistance."
He also pointed to the $16 billion increase in conservation spending
that was part of the committee bill, roughly an 80 percent increase from
current funding.
Kind and co-sponsor Sherwood Boehlert, New York Republican, would boost
conservation spending to an average $5.4 billion a year, roughly triple
the current level.
Both approaches would expand the long-term Conservation Reserve to idle
fragile land, the Wetlands Reserve to preserve wetlands, the Environmental
Quality Incentives Program to share the cost of reducing manure and
pesticide runoff, the Farmland Protection Program to buy easements to
prevent sprawl and the Wildlife Habitat Incentive Program to share the
cost of improving wildlife cover.
But in each case, Boehlert and Kind would spend more money.
Both proposals called for a Grasslands Reserve, the committee at two
million acres and Boehlert-Kind at three million acres. Boehlert-Kind
would create a Watershed Quality Incentives Program to protect wellheads
and drinking-water supplies.
One innovative provision -- payments to farmers for practicing
conservation on "working" lands -- was deleted as the Boehlert-Kind
amendment was finalized. Michigan Democrat John Dingell, a supporter, said
"we had a certain amount of money with which we could deal," so
some items were cut.
"Green" payments on working lands are a pet idea of Senate
Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, Iowa Democrat. His committee
was not expected to begin work on its farm bill before the end of October. |