House Agriculture Committee Chairman and leader of the Farm Bill Conference Committee Frank Lucas says farm bill leaders need to have a draft of the farm bill by the end of this week, if it?s to become law before the end of the year.
Senate Agriculture Committee Chair Debbie Stabenow seconds that position.
Lucas met with reporters Tuesday and admitted that, while he believes that there needs to be agreement this week, ?we are not there yet.?
He added that the conferees do not have ?a common number? on cutting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP). The cut has to be low enough for Democrats and the president to sign on, yet high enough for republicans to do the same.
?We?ve got to have real progress,? said Lucas, who met with food assistance progressive Rep. Jim McGovern, D-Mass., on the House floor for roughly 20 minutes while the vote was taking place. Lucas also said that the conferees ?have had some pretty thorough discussions of all parts of the farm bill.?
If the bill is not passed by January 1, the law reverts back to 1949, which includes parity pricing for milk, corn, wheat and cotton.
Nebraska Senator and former Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns sent a letter to the leaders of the farm bill conference committee Tuesday; as conferees aim to wrap up this week, Johanns says it?s crucially important to be more honest about the risks in the direction some are trying to take. Johanns says it will distort the ag economy, raise trade concerns and skew the market for farmers and ranchers for years to come. To that end, Johanns says even an extension of the current farm bill – something he has opposed – would be better than an outdated farm policy.
In a statement Tuesday, Iowa Senator Chuck Grassley also focused on the idea of re-coupling target prices to planted acres. Grassley says he?s heard Chairman Lucas and his staff are trying to convince people there is no reason to be troubled about concerns regarding planted acres, but Grassley counters that enacting the House commodity title, where extremely high target prices for some crops are coupled with planted acres, would take the U.S. back to a time when farmers planted for the government instead of the market.
Grassley also expressed surprise that negotiators are still talking about possible changes to “actively engaged” criteria and the use of planted acres or base acres in commodity programs. While Grassley claims the current “actively engaged” law isn’t working, he notes the Government Accountability Office recently said language in the Senate-passed farm bill would be an appropriate fix. Given that the “actively engaged” provisions are the same in the House and Senate bills, Grassley thinks there?s no reason for these provisions to be part of the discussion.
