| Washington - The Bush administration's resolve to control farm spending
will be tested when the Senate moves ahead with a bill that critics say
will stimulate crop surpluses and primarily benefit big producers.
The White House says it does not want to do either.
To get the bill out of the Senate Agriculture Committee, majority
Democrats raised grain and cotton subsidies higher than a House-passed
bill did, dropped proposed payment limits and threw in a dairy program
that could raise retail milk prices.
The bill also could exceed the spending caps in this year's
congressional budget agreement.
"This goes so far against what the administration has said in
terms of cost, market distortion and lack of payment limits that they
would have to veto this," said Bruce Babcock, director of Iowa State
University's Center for Agricultural and Rural Development.
The full Senate could take up the farm bill the week after
Thanksgiving.
The administration will push a Republican alternative that was rejected
in committee, said Dale Moore, chief of staff to Agriculture Secretary Ann
Veneman. "There is a new, broader audience to make the case to,"
he said of the Senate.
The GOP bill would steer some subsidies into vouchers that farmers
could deposit in IRA-style savings accounts, which they could draw from
when their income is down. All farmers, including fruit and vegetable
growers, could participate.
It is not clear how hard the administration is willing to fight.
In September, Veneman issued a stinging critique of farm programs that
said subsidies are tilted toward big grain and cotton farms and encourage
excess production. The House bill did not fix those problems, the White
House said.
The White House urged the House, then the Senate, to put off action on
their farm bills until next year, saying more time was needed to develop
good legislation.
Now, the White House has hired a longtime congressional aide, Chuck
Conner, to work with lawmakers. Conner helped Republican senators develop
the subsidy proposal that was ultimately rejected by the Senate committee
on a party-line vote.
"We are committed to getting a good consensus farm bill,"
Moore said.
Farm groups are pressing Congress to enact new programs before the end
of the year because they fear there will not be as much money available
for agricultural spending if lawmakers wait until 2002. Existing programs
expire next fall.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, estimates the
Senate bill would cost $174 billion over 10 years - $4 billion more than
the House bill, which its authors said just fit within the budget
agreement.
Republicans say the actual price tag of the Senate bill is likely to be
much higher after congressional budget analysts finish adding up the
costs.
"We took a step forward in passing a bill before Thanksgiving, but
we took a half step backward by passing a bill that is very different than
the House version," said Mary Kay Thatcher, a lobbyist for the
American Farm Bureau Federation. |