News & Events - Archived News

[ Up ]

 

Senate Panel OKs $174 Billion Subsidy 'Nudge'

By Philp Brasher, News Headlines From 1st
November 16, 2001
 
WASHINGTON -- Democrats forced a new farm bill through a Senate committee Thursday after giving Southern senators more money for big farms and adding a dairy program that could raise retail milk prices.

Republicans said the spending will stimulate price-depressing surpluses of subsidized crops and may break the budget.

The Senate Agriculture Committee approved the bill's subsidy section 12-9 with the support of one Republican, Tim Hutchinson of Arkansas, who is up for re-election next year in a major agricultural state. The panel rejected a Republican alternative backed by the Bush administration.

Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, a fierce critic of the Republican ''Freedom to Farm'' policy enacted five years ago, called the Senate bill a ''nudge'' to existing subsidy programs.

''We're not going to make any sharp turns. We have to keep our farmers going,'' the Iowa Democrat said.

Sen. Pat Roberts, R-Kan., said the bill was a ''step back to the past.'' Increases in subsidy rates are bound to encourage overproduction, he said.

The legislation could go to the Senate floor the week after Thanksgiving. It faces a series of amendments there, including one that would shift billions in crop subsidies into conservation programs.

The legislation would cost $174 billion over 10 years, by Harkin's estimate, $4 billion more than a farm bill passed by the House last month. Both bills would continue to direct the bulk of subsidies to farmers who grow wheat, corn, cotton, rice and soybeans and add new crops such as peanuts.

The Senate bill has more spending for conservation programs and food stamps.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Larry Combest, R-Texas, said the Senate measure exceeded the spending limits in this year's congressional budget agreement. Harkin denied that, but congressional budget analysts have not finished totaling the cost of the Senate bill.

To win approval of the committee's southern Democrats, Harkin dropped his effort to cut payments to big grain and cotton farms, added money for rice and peanuts and offered new subsidies for lentils and chickpeas.

Under the bill, farms will still be allowed to collect crop subsidies in unlimited amounts, and they could get another $200,000 in payments under two other income-support programs.

Critics of farm subsidies, including the Bush administration, say they encourage overproduction and drive up land rents, which they contend makes it difficult for small farms to survive.

''We're just moving in the direction of subsidizing big farms to drive other farmers and ranchers out of business,'' said Chuck Hassebrook of the Center for Rural Affairs, an advocacy group.

The dairy program, added to the bill to win the support of Sen. Patrick Leahy, D-Vt., probably will generate wide opposition.

The program would guarantee dairy farmers minimum returns for their milk in every region of the country, much as a pricing system did in New England before it expired in September. One independent analysis estimates the system would cost consumers $1.8 billion more a year.

Both the Senate and House bills set up new ''countercyclical'' subsidy programs that provide special payments to farmers when commodity prices are below target levels. The Senate measure would guarantee wheat farmers $3.45 a bushel, corn growers $2.35 a bushel, cotton growers 68 cents a pound and soybean farmers $5.07 a bushel.

The 1996 farm bill ended a Depression-era system of production controls and scaled back on price-based subsidies. Commodity prices dropped sharply in 1998, and Congress has responded with billions in additional assistance each year.

The Republican plan proposed Thursday by Roberts and Sen. Thad Cochran, R-Miss., had lower price guarantees than the Democrats' but offered higher fixed payments and also would have given farmers money to deposit into IRA-type savings accounts.

The Senate committee narrowly approved an amendment by Sen. Paul Wellstone, R-Minn., that would require meat, lamb and produce to be labeled with the country of origin. U.S. farmers believe the labels would discourage consumption of imported food.