Here is a recap of key amendments and votes from each farm bill markup session.  We will publish a brief analysis of the two bills next week, along with reports on consideration of the farm bill on the Senate floor, where it will be debated all week.

• Commodities and Crop Insurance
• Conservation
• Beginning, Veteran and Minority Farmers
• Local Food and Rural Development
• Research and Organic
• Harmful Amendments

Commodities and Crop Insurance

One of the biggest topics of discussion during the Senate farm bill mark-up (second only to the debate around cuts to SNAP and other nutrition programs), was regional differences over commodity policies in Title I.  In a stark contrast to last year’s markup, when Sen. Roberts (R-KS) held the position of Ranking Member of the committee, the debate around this year’s commodity title centered around the target prices (government-guaranteed prices, called “market distorting” by critics) that were included in this year’s bill at the request of Ranking Member Cochran (R-MS).  The complete reversal in committee support among Republicans for this year’s Title I was made evident as those members voting nay on the farm bill last year – representing mostly southern states – changed their votes to yea this time around.   The same was true for those members hailing from Midwestern and Plains states, some of whom did not support the final passage of the bill this year but previously supported last year’s bill.  That opposition came despite acceptance of an amendment to keep target prices for corn, soybeans and wheat low and maintaining high target prices solely for rice and peanuts.

Conservation compliance was another topic of much heated debated in the Senate.  The successful amendment offered by Sen. Chambliss (R-GA) on the Senate floor last year was initially included in this year’s draft farm bill, but it was promptly replaced with a compromise negotiated by commodity and wildlife groups with encouragement from Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI).  The compromise provides some additional common-sense elaboration on details of how conservation requirements would be re-applied to insurance subsidies, but it also include several major new enforcement loopholes.   Sen. Hoeven (R-ND) offered and brought to a vote several amendments that would have stripped or severely weakened the conservation compliance provision in the base bill, however each amendment was defeated by voice vote.

The Manager’s Amendment adopted at the outset of the markup included removal of the single crop insurance subsidy reform from the draft and last year’s Senate-passed bill, the  amendment championed by Sens. Durbin (D-IL) and Coburn (R-OK) that would reduce crop insurance premium subsidies by a modest amount for those farmers who have annual adjusted gross incomes of over $750,000, or $1.5 million for most married couples.  We expect to see this issue revisited as the farm bill moves to the Senate floor for debate.

On the other side of Capitol Hill in House committee markup, dairy and sugar were the two commodities that received the most discussion during consideration of Title I, provoked by Reps. Goodlatte (R-VA) and Scott (D-GA).  These measures failed on slimmer margins than in last year’s House Committee debate, and are very likely to be revisited once the farm bill is brought to the House floor.  Defeat of the Committee’s dairy provision on the House floor is one of several issues that could make finalizing a bill this year politically challenging.

On the crop insurance front, Rep. McIntyre (D-NC) offered an amendment backed by NSAC that would increase the per farm liability limit from $1 million to $1.5 million in the Whole Farm Diversified Risk Management Insurance product which would improve coverage and increase participation by diversified farmers, including specialty crops and mixed grain/livestock or dairy operations.  This amendment failed on a roll call vote of 22 to 22, with two likely yes votes momentarily out of the room, but a modified amendment that raised the limit to $1.25 million was later accepted by Chairman Lucas (R-OK).

Conservation

Several NSAC-supported amendments that support and expand conservation programs were adopted in the bill that was reported out of the Senate Agriculture Committee, including:

• Increased opportunity for conservation technical assistance (TA) by allowing USDA, rather than the Office of Management and Budget (OMB), to set TA rates.  It was championed by Sen. Heitkamp (D-ND),  and accepted as part of the manager’s amendment.
• Expanded eligibility for water and wastewater utilities to partner with landowners under the Regional Conservation Partnership Program (RCPP) to improve water quality.  It was championed by Sen. Boozman (R-AR), and accepted as part of the manager’s amendment.
• Support for pollinator habitat for honeybees through USDA conservation programs.  Championed by Sen. Heitkamp, passed by voice vote.
• Directing USDA to track the conversion of grasslands into cropland, as part of the nationwide “sodsaver” provision that was included in the mark.  It was championed by Sen. John Thune (R-SD), and accepted as part of the manager’s amendment.

Sens. Cowan (D-MA) and Leahy (D-MA) (and Rep. Kuster (D-NH) on the House side) offered and withdrew an amendment that would have eliminated the separate, much lower payment limit that organic farmers participating in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program (EQIP) Organic Initiative are subject to compared to the regular EQIP payment limit – an issue we expect to see as the Farm Bills head to the Senate and House floor.  The leadership of both Committees opposed the measure as upsetting an agreement they reached between themselves back in the Fall of 2011.

During mark-up of the House bill, Rep. Nolan (D-MN) offered two amendments that would have improved the Conservation Stewardship Program — USDA’s largest working lands conservation program.  One, which would have restored funding for CSP back to the level agreed upon by the Committee leaders in 2011 and still reflected in the Senate bill, was rejected by voice vote, and another amendment that would have simplified the program’s ranking criteria to focus on conservation outcomes and simplify the program for farmers and their local USDA conservation staff, was rejected on a very close voice vote.

Beginning, Veteran and Minority Farmers

Although there were several amendments filed by Sen. Harkin (D-IA) to expand credit and new farmer training programs for new farmers, none were ultimately offered or voted on by the Senate Agriculture Committee after being rejected for inclusion in the manager’s amendment..  We expect some of these issues to be reintroduced on the Senate floor, such as one championed by Sens. Harkin and Casey (D-PA) last year to establish a microloan program targeted to beginning and veteran farmers.

An amendment offered by Sen. Baucus (D-MT) to include a priority on veteran farmers and ranchers within the Value-Added Producer Grants Program and the Conservation Reserve Transition Incentives Program was accepted into the manager’s amendment.  We were also pleased to see increased funding levels for the Outreach and Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers and Ranchers Program in the Chairwoman’s mark.  The $10 million a year funding, while still just half of the level from the last farm bill, is twice the funding as was included in the Senate bill last year.  In addition to Chairwoman Stabenow, thanks for the increase are also due to Sen. Hagan (D-NC).

Beginning farmers fared better on average in the underlying House Committee bill, including increased funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program, now at $20 million a year, twice the level the House Committee bill included last year.  Chairman Lucas (R-OK) and Ranking Member Peterson (D-MN) agreed to that increase in the underlying bill, although the set-aside for socially disadvantaged farmers and farmworkers is still eliminated – an issue NSAC hopes will be addressed on the House floor or in conference.

Beginning farmer champion Rep. Gibson (R-NY) offered an amendment during House markup to raise the maximum loan amount on direct farm ownership loans to keep pace with farmland inflation, and several members spoke in support of doing whatever is needed to expand opportunities for new farmers, including Reps. Kuster (D-NH), Maloney (D-NY), and Walz (D-MN).  This amendment was ultimately withdrawn at the request of Ranking Member Peterson (D-MN) for further review and possible modification.  We hope to resolve this important issue regarding access to land for new farmers as the bill heads to the floor.

Both the Senate and House bills included amendments offered by Sen. Cochran (R-MS) and Rep. Fudge (D-OH) that would establish a socially disadvantaged farmer and rancher policy center.  Unfortunately, an amendment offered by Rep. Lujan Grisham (D-NM) to restore funding for training and outreach for minority, tribal, and veteran farmers was withdrawn during House markup, an issue we hope is resolved positively on the floor.

Local Food and Rural Development

During Senate markup, several NSAC-supported amendments were filed by key champions of local food and economic development, some of which were accepted and others offered but ultimately withdrawn.  These include:

• Sen. Cowan’s (D-MA) amendment to expand lending through USDA’s Farm Service Agency to farmer and ranchers producing for local and regional food markets.  It was accepted as part of the manager’s amendment.
• Sen. Brown’s (D-OH) amendment to give rural development programs more flexibility to support strategic regional community and economic development investment strategies.  It was adopted by voice vote.
• Sen. Brown’s amendment to restore funding to the levels included in last year’s Senate-passed bill for The Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP), Community Food Projects (CFP) and SNAP Employment and Training.  It was offered and withdrawn at the request of Chairwoman Stabenow – an issue we expect to see again, in whole or in part, on the floor.

On the House side, there were also several NSAC-supported amendments that were included in the final bill that was voted out of committee, including:

• An amendment offered by Rep. Negrete McLeod (D-CA) to clarify that the full range of direct-to-consumer markets (including road-side stands and CSAs in addition to farmers markets) can access EBT technology provided by SNAP retailers.  It was accepted as part of the manager’s amendment.
• An amendment offered by Rep. Courtney (D-CT) to direct USDA to conduct a study on how to increase data collection on the production and marketing of locally or regionally produced agricultural products, in an effort to better target programs geared towards expanding and facilitating local food systems.  It was accepted as part of the manager’s amendment.
• An amendment offered by Rep. Fudge (D-OH) which authorizes the Healthy Food Financing Initiative – a public private partnership that attracts private investment in food-insecure communities – and authorized the Appropriations Committee to potentially fund it. .  This passed by a narrow margin in a roll call vote.

Key rural development champion Rep. McIntyre (D-NC) offered an amendment during House markup that would have restored critical mandatory funding for the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program (RMAP) in order to continue to provide low-interest loan capital to small rural businesses.  Unfortunately, this amendment failed to pass by a vote of 20 to 25.

Research and Organic 

On the Senate side, an amendment filed by Sen. Harkin (D-IA) which would restore the Agriculture and Food Research Initiative (AFRI) to be a fully competitive research program by allowing a diversity of applicants to apply for funding, was accepted in the Manager’s Amendment.  This is an issue that NSAC and our allies have been working on since the program was created in 2008, and we will work to ensure this provision stays intact through conference.

There was much debate during both markups regarding amendments championed by Sens. Bennet (D-CO) and Gillibrand (D-NY) in the Senate, and Reps. Schrader (D-OR) and Ribble (R-WI) in the House, on whether or not to allow USDA to establish a research and promotion order (or “check-off program”) for organic producers.  The Senate amendment was accepted by voice vote and the House amendment passed 29-17.

Also on the organic front, Reps. Courtney (D-CT) and Kuster (D-NH) brought up an NSAC-supported amendment in the House that would have restored the mandatory funding that was eliminated for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiatives and the National Organic Program.  Rep. Costa (D-CA) also offered an amendment that would have striken the repeal of the National Organic Certification Cost Share Program in the House bill.  Funding for all three of these programs that are critical to the organic sector was provided in the Senate bill, however none of these amendments were brought to a vote during House markup.  We expect to revisit this issue on the House floor or during conference.

Harmful Amendments 

In addition to the key amendments that were voted on that support sustainable agriculture, rural communities and access to healthy food, there were several harmful amendments that were also debated during both markups.  One amendment offered by Sen. Roberts (R-KS) during Senate markup sought to exempt certain authorized pesticides from Clean Water Act regulation.  This amendment was ultimately offered and withdrawn due to the Chairwoman’s insistence that the issue was not germane to the Farm Bill.

Sen. Johanns (R-NE) in the Senate, and Rep. Austin Scott (R-GA) in the House, both offered amendments during markup that would eliminate the Country of Origin Labeling (COOL) for livestock and poultry products.  There were a few exchanges, mostly along party lines, from Republican members who claimed that COOL imposes restrictions on trade, and from Democratic members (including Brown, Heitkamp, and Baucus in the Senate, but also Rep. Noem (R-SD) in the House) who spoke up in support of COOL and a consumer’s right to know.  Both amendments were ultimately withdrawn, but they may return during floor debate.

Finally, an extremely harmful amendment offered by Reps. Conaway (R-TX) and Costa (D-CA) during markup of the House farm bill was approved by voice vote.  This amendment would repeal provisions in USDA’s Packers & Stockyards Act regulations that provide farmers with protection against deceptive and unfair practices in their dealings with meat and poultry packers and processors.  This amendment will also block USDA from taking any future action to issue regulations or adopt policies that would help level the playing field for farmers in their business dealings with packers and processors.  Although this is a major blow to livestock producers and contract poultry growers across country, NSAC and our allies will be working to fight this provision as the farm bill moves through the House and onto conference with the Senate.

USDA is evaluating all crops for the potential to establish organic price elections.  USDA estimates that 6-10 new organic price elections will be offered in 2014.  So far, oats and mint will be offered in 2014, and apricots, apples, blueberries, millet, and possibly other crops are under consideration.

USDA also announced that, beginning in 2014, contract pricing options will be available to organic farmers who grow crops under guaranteed contracts.  Under this option, farmers will be able to choose to use their contract price as their price election or use existing price elections.  Vilsack said that this option will be available for 60-70 crops beginning in 2014.

In his announcement, Vilsack noted that one of the biggest barriers to improved crop insurance options for organic producers was lack of data, and he emphasized the need to provide funding for the Organic Production and Market Data Initiatives (ODI) through the farm bill so that data collection on organic could continue.  ODI was one of the programs left stranded by the 9-month farm bill extension.  The farm bill passed out of the Senate Agriculture Committee this week provides funding for ODI at the 2008 Farm Bill level — $5 million in mandatory funding over the life of the bill with a $5 million annual authorization for appropriations — but the House Committee-passed bill does not provide any funding for organic data collection.

Additionally, Vilsack also announced that USDA is providing guidance to its agencies on organic agriculture.  The guidance directs USDA agencies to:

• Determine whether a valid National Organic Program certificate can suffice as third-party verification or proof of compliance for other practices or processes where compliance is required;
• Whether an Organic Systems Plan will satisfy certain requirements for land or livestock management practice documentation;
• Ensure that USDA employees are fulfilling goals on organic training;
• Review and report actions toward meeting USDA’s goals for growth in the organic sector, as laid out by USDA’s Strategic Plan;
• Identify data collection needs; and
• Respond to specific organic research needs, and examine organic production as a model in studies on the effects of different production systems.

The deadline is extended because USDA has additional funds provided for in the FY2013 Appropriations.  In the announcement of the extension, USDA indicated it would issue another official notice about the funding increase soon.

The Environmental Law and Policy Center has reported that the FY2013 funding level is raised from $20.8 million to about $60 million.  With the additional funding, USDA is also raising the cap on grants for feasibility studies to $350,000.

For more information, see our March blog on the original announcement of the REAP request for applications.

NSAC COMMENTS ON HOUSE FARM BILL MARKUP

Washington, DC, May 16 – The House Agriculture Committee late last night voted a new five-year farm bill out of committee by a vote of 36-10.  The bill includes a variety of major priorities of the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, along with several serious setbacks for farmers, natural resource conservation, and rural development.

In good news, it would restore funding for the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development Program and the Organic Agriculture Research and Extension Initiative and restore and increase funding for the Farmers Market and Local Food Promotion Program.  Funding for all three programs is higher in the new House bill than in the bill reported by the Senate Agriculture Committee earlier this week.

The new House Committee bill also improves upon the Senate version by adopting new Farm to School pilot projects for school districts in the USDA Foods and the Department of Defense “Fresh” programs.  Like the Senate bill, the new House bill would also direct USDA to create a new Whole Farm Diversified Risk Management insurance program for farms growing a diversity of crops and livestock.  The bill includes a variety of other provisions based on the Beginning Farmer and Rancher Opportunity Act and the Local Farms, Food, and Jobs Act.

“We applaud Chairman Lucas (R-OK), Ranking Member Peterson (D-MN), and the Committee for making these important investments in the future of American agriculture and new economic opportunities for farmers and rural and urban communities,” said Ferd Hoefner, NSAC Policy Director.  “We look forward to working with both Committees to secure the best provisions from both bills that support new farming opportunities, agricultural diversity, good food access, and rural economic and job growth.”

On many other scores the bill is a major disappointment.  Despite its name – The Federal Agriculture Reform and Risk Management Act – the bill includes no major reforms beyond the preordained elimination of direct payments.  It reinvests most of the savings from direct payments back into new commodity and crop insurance subsidies.  It increases the per farm commodity subsidy limitation by 92 percent and leaves in place current loopholes that allow individual farms to collect unlimited payments.  It places no caps whatsoever on farm insurance subsidies.

The new House bill also fails to include a national provision to reduce subsidies for plowing up native prairie and does not link receipt of insurance subsidies to common sense conservation practices to preserve the natural resources on which our long-term food security depends.  It would also reduce funding for the most innovative and forward-looking working lands conservation program, the Conservation Stewardship Program, by nearly a third.  The bill also fails to renew the very successful National Organic Certification Cost-Share Program.  By way of a voice vote last night, the House Committee bill now also repeals the historic 2008 Farm Bill livestock market competition and contract agriculture reform title and in a dramatic overreach directs USDA to essentially stop all enforcement of the Packers and Stockyards Act.

“There is little farm program reform in the Agriculture Reform bill,” said Hoefner.  “Not only does the House Committee bill fail to adopt many of the common sense reforms included in the Senate Committee bill, but it includes provisions to move in exactly the opposite direction, increasing subsidy limits, decreasing competition, weakening conservation, and driving agricultural policy further away from supporting family farms, rural communities, and the environment.  We intend to see that these failings get a second review when the bill heads to the House floor.”

A number of NSAC-endorsed amendments were agreed to during the markup.  These include provisions sponsored by a Representative Negrete-McLeod (D-CA) to better enable SNAP participants to use direct farmer-to-consumer markets, by Representative Courtney (D-CT) to initiate a USDA local and regional agriculture study and program review, by Representative McIntyre (D-NC) to improve technical assistance for rural community development loans and grants, by Representative McIntyre to increase the liability limit for Whole Farm revenue insurance, and by Representative Fudge (D-OH) to authorize a Healthy Food Financing Initiative at USDA.

“We thank the sponsors of each of these successful amendments,” said Hoefner.  “We also want to thank Representative McIntyre for attempting to improve rural development funding in the bill, including the Rural Microentrepreneur Assistance Program, which the bill sadly fails to renew.  We also thank Representative Nolan (D-MN) for leading the charge to restore funding and streamline the Conservation Stewardship Program, and Representative Kuster (D-NH) for attempting to remove discriminatory penalties against organic farmers in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program.  Thanks also to Representative Lujan Grisham (D-NM) for trying to restore full funding to the Outreach and Technical Assistance for Socially Disadvantaged Farmers program and to Representative Gibson (R-NY) for trying to improve Direct Farm Ownership loans.  These issues will be debated rigorously and hopefully resolved successfully before this farm bill debate is over and a new bill is signed into law.”

NSAC will continue to work through the reauthorization process to strengthen the farm bill so that it further expands opportunities for family farmers to produce good food, sustain the environment, and contribute to vibrant communities.

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.

###

A proposed RBOG project must ultimately benefit individuals residing in a rural area or businesses located in a rural area. The maximum grant award is $100,000.  Up to $2.6 million will be available for RBOG projects, with $919,820 reserved for project applications benefiting federally recognized Indian tribes and $790,303 reserved project applications for Rural Economic Area Projects until June 30, 2013.

No matching funds are required for RBOG grants.  Paper applications must be postmarked and mailed, shipped or sent overnight no later than June 28, 2013.  Electronic applications must be received by USDA no later than midnight June 24, 2013.

Organizations and institutions that are interested in applying for the grants should check out the notice for application as soon as possible.  Applicants must register with the federal government’s System for Award Management (SAM) and obtain a number from the Dun and Bradstreet Data Universal Numbering System (DUNS).  Contact information for these Systems is provided in the RBOG notice, along with other details about preparing and submitting a grant application.

As illustrated in an NSAC blog describing 2012 RBOG grants awards, RBOG funding can be used for  projects that help develop local food markets and provide assistance to beginning farmers and ranchers.

In addition to providing funds for traditional RBOG grants, USDA’s Rural Development Agency has chosen to use the RBOG program to initiate the first phase of a multi-agency “Investing in Manufacturing Communities Partnership” (IMCP) initiative, which is intended to accelerate a resurgence of manufacturing and create jobs across the country.  The first phase of the IMCP provides up to $100,000 in RBOG funding for projects targeted to regional development strategies to attract, retain and expand investment and spur international trade and exports.  These initial projects focus on collaboration at the local level that identifies a region’s comparative advantages and assets, with a plan for investments that appeal to manufacturers.  These grants can be used to help communities prepare for the second phase of the initiative, IMPC “Challenge” grants.  More information on USDA’s role in the IMCP initiative is provided in a May 9 press release.

NSAC COMMENTS ON SENATE FARM BILL MARKUP

Washington, DC, May 14 – The Senate Agriculture Committee today voted a new five-year farm bill out of committee by a vote of 15-5.  The committee bill maintains the historic reforms to commodity subsidies included in last year’s bill that limit payments to the operator and not more than one additional farm manager per farm operation.  The bill also retains certain improvements to crop insurance supported by NSAC, including a nationwide “sodsaver” provision to protect grasslands from conversion, re-linking soil and wetland conservation accountability to insurance subsidies, and better crop insurance options for diversified operations and for organic farmers.

“We applaud Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI) and Ranking Member Cochran (R-MS) for advancing a new farm bill that protects the common-sense payment limitation reforms made to commodity programs and adopted as part of last year’s farm bill,” said Ferd Hoefner, Policy Director for the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition.  “We are also pleased that the bill retains provisions to make crop insurance work better for diversified farms and for organic farmers.  Each of these provisions improves the farm safety net, making it more fiscally responsible and more accessible to diverse sectors of American agriculture.”

“We were disappointed by the removal from the bill of the subsidy reduction on crop insurance premiums for farmers and investors making over $750,000 per year, a measure that passed overwhelmingly on the Senate floor last year,” added Hoefner.  “We will continue to support the reauthorization of a full five-year farm bill, and will support amendments to target insurance subsidies and improve conservation accountability as the farm bill process moves forward.”

The committee bill also retains funding levels for beginning farmer, rural development, and marketing programs that were part of last year’s bill.  Many of these programs were left unfunded in the 9-month farm bill extension that Congress passed as part of the fiscal cliff deal in January.

“The Committee today renewed its commitment to investing in economic development and job-creation programs that provide opportunities for farmers and rural communities,” said Hoefner.  “Some of the funding levels for beginning and minority farmer programs, value-added agriculture, and rural development are lower than we would like, but nonetheless represent strong steps in the right direction that hopefully will be improved upon as the farm bill process moves forward.”

A number of amendments were agreed to during the markup, including one endorsed by NSAC on farmers growing for local and regional food markets.

“Thanks to leadership of Senator Cowan (D-MA) and Senator Brown (D-OH), the bill now ensures that farmers producing for local and regional markets will be better able to access operating credit through the Farm Service Agency,” said Hoefner.

Despite improvements, there were also missed opportunities for organic and beginning farmers.

Senator Cowan with Senator Leahy (D-VT) lead the charge to equalize payment limits in the Environmental Quality Incentives Program for organic farmers and those transitioning to organic production.

“We commend Senators Cowan and Leahy for seeking to improve the Environmental Quality Incentives Program so that organic farmers aren’t subject to a lower payment limit than all other farmers,” continued Hoefner.  “This is a much-needed improvement that after four years of program implementation has proven to be the top barrier to program participation by organic and transitioning farmers.”

Senator Harkin (D-IA) pushed for amendments to make credit and training more appropriate and accessible for young and beginning farmers.

“We are grateful for Senator Harkin’s (D-IA) continued commitment to ensuring the success of the next generation of farmers,” noted Hoefner.  “We regret that the Committee was not able to address improvements to credit and training for beginning farmers during markup, but hope they will be included in the bill as it moves to the Senate floor for debate and amendment.”

NSAC will continue to support reauthorization of the farm bill and will continue to work to strengthen the bill so that it further expands opportunities for family farmers to produce good food, sustain the environment, and contribute to vibrant communities.

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.

###

Contact: Ferd Hoefner, 202-547-5754

NSAC Endorses the Farm Program Integrity Act of 2013

Washington, DC – On Thursday, May 9, Representative Jeff Fortenberry (R-NE) introduced the Farm Program Integrity Act of 2013 (H.R. 1932) in the House of Representatives to restore integrity and fiscal responsibility to the commodity program portion of the farm safety net. This bill is identical to a Senate bill (S. 281) introduced earlier this year in the Senate by Senators Chuck Grassley (R-IA) and Tim Johnson (D-SD), and adopted by the Senate last year as part of the new five-year farm bill.

The Farm Program Integrity Act places a hard cap on farm program payments and closes current loopholes to ensure payments go to working farmers. Due to current program eligibility loopholes, mega-farms and absentee investors can currently receive an unlimited government check through farm commodity programs.

“Adoption of the Farm Program Integrity Act would put an end to widespread abuse in farm commodity programs,” according to NSAC Policy Director Ferd Hoefner. “In every survey and poll on this issue over the years, a strong majority of farmers in all regions of the country support payment limit reform. The measure has failed to become law due to the power and influence mega-farms wield in Washington. Times have changed, however, and fiscal pressures have turned much-needed scrutiny on farm programs. The current consensus is that unlimited taxpayer subsidies are no longer justifiable.”

The bill would allow for support payments to working farmers plus one additional manager per farm. The one additional manager provision is a reasonable compromise, forged in the Senate last year, that addresses the problem of eligibility loopholes – a problem that has plagued farm programs for far too long and that has fueled the consolidation and demise of family farms across the country.

NSAC and the farmers it represents urge the House of Representatives to support this bill and incorporate its policy reforms in the 2013 Farm Bill currently under negotiation. The House Agriculture Committee is not expected to endorse this common-sense reform, and is likely instead to maintain a commodity entitlement with no effective limits and wide-open loopholes when it writes its five-year farm bill next week. NSAC hopes the full House will see the matter differently and vote later this summer in support of family farms and fiscal responsibility by adopting Representative Fortenberry’s proposal.

“Under current law, the top ten percent of farm payment recipients collect nearly 70 percent of all payments,” said Representative Fortenberry. “The Farm Program Integrity Act seeks to level the playing field for farm families by establishing meaningful payment limitations on large farms and closing loopholes that currently benefit investors not actively engaged in farming. The savings from reforms established in the legislation would help ensure that the farm payments system is set on a more fiscally-sustainable path.”

“We applaud Representative Fortenberry for his leadership on this issue. We also thank the Senate for including this common-sense and fiscally responsible policy in the draft farm bill released Thursday by Chairwoman Debbie Stabenow (D-MI),” said Hoefner.

“While the measure introduced today by Representative Fortenberry is not all the reform that is ultimately needed, it is the critical and fundamental starting point for creating a sound and fiscally responsible farm safety net,” concluded Hoefner. “We encourage the House to adopt the Fortenberry proposal and to also place a similar cap on the other major part of the safety net – crop insurance subsidies — as it proceeds with its farm bill deliberations.”

The National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition is a grassroots alliance that advocates for federal policy reform supporting the long-term social, economic, and environmental sustainability of agriculture, natural resources, and rural communities.

###

The Senate Agriculture Committee will markup its farm bill on Tuesday, May 14, at 10 AM.  Chairwoman Stabenow (D-MI) released her draft bill yesterday, and amendments to the bill were due this afternoon.

The House Agriculture Committee will markup its farm bill on Wednesday, May 15, at 10 AM.  The draft bill was released today, and amendments are due by close-of-business on Monday.

The draft bills that the House and Senate Agriculture Committee leaders have released include many of the same provisions that were included in last year’s House Committee-passed and Senate-passed bills, respectively.  There are some big differences, especially in the new House bill.  We will provide further analysis on the details of the drafts next week.

It is expected that both Committees will vote to pass the bill out of committee, and then each bill heads to the floor of its respective chamber for further debate.  Senate Democrats continue to say that they are aiming to bring the bill for debate on the Senate floor before Memorial Day, anticipating that the Senate will spend much of June debating immigration reform, though that timing may still shift.  The House GOP leadership has included debate of the 2013 Farm Bill in its summer schedule, and there are indications that leadership would like to get a bill passed out of the House by July 4th  recess.

If the House and the Senate stick to this schedule, then there will be enough time for the two chambers to negotiate a compromise and pass a final bill by September 30, when the current farm bill extension expires.  There are many challenges to meeting that deadline, but two important steps in the process will happen next week when the Agriculture Committees debate their bills.

NSAC believes an agricultural immigration policy that treats workers as indentured servants and production inputs and not as members of families and social networks cannot be sustainable.  The Senate “Gang of Eight” proposal with respect to agricultural workers is in serious danger of repeating the same mistakes of past immigration reforms.

The Senators’ proposal mirrors past guest worker programs with its use of agriculture industry specific visas.  NSAC’s principles propose a new approach, namely a free labor market that provides all farm workers with full labor rights by creating a system to provide all farm workers with legal status.  NSAC’s immigration reform principles support legalization of all current undocumented individuals and a path to citizenship for those who continue to work in the United States.  NSAC supports the enforcement of labor law standards for farm workers and opposes industry-specific guest worker programs.  NSAC supports a federally run visa system based on actual labor demand instead of arbitrary quotas.

NSAC believes comprehensive immigration reform is absolutely necessary to end the problems associated with having undocumented workers in the United States.  Everyone in the country needs legal papers.  The goal should be to eliminate incentives for employment of undocumented workers.  This requires the legalization of the existing undocumented immigrants and a sufficient annual influx of legal immigrants at all skill levels.

In support of these principles, the Community Alliance with Family Farmers, an NSAC member, has put forth a proposal entitled the North American Visa Program.  The North American Visa (NAVA) program for manually skilled workers would be part of a larger comprehensive immigration reform that we assume would also address requirements for highly educated workers, alter country quotas, reform family reunification, and eliminate guest worker programs.  A summary of the NAVA proposal is attached to the principles adopted by NSAC member organizations.

The other cosponsors of the bill are Representatives Sam Farr (D-CA), Jim Moran (D-VA), Louise Slaughter (D-NY), Henry Waxman (D-CA), Jared Huffman (D-CA), John Dingell (D-MI), Ron Kind (D-WI), George Miller (D-CA), Barbara Lee (D-CA), Lois Capps (D-CA), and Rush Holt (D-NJ).

Senator Tom Udall (D-NM) is expected to introduce companion legislation in the Senate later today.

Like the farm bills passed by the House Agriculture Committee and the Senate last year, the Balancing Food, Farm, and the Environment Act streamlines twenty‐three conservation programs into eleven and prioritizes long‐term outcomes to use taxpayer dollars most effectively.  Additionally, the bill helps farmers address climate change, soil erosion, and water quality, while also providing them with resources to reduce antibiotic and pesticide use.

More specifically, the bill:

• Re-links federal crop insurance premium subsidies to wetland and highly erodible land conservation measures.
• Temporarily limits federal crop insurance premium subsidies on native prairie that is planted to crops.
• Combines the Wetlands Reserve Program, Grassland Reserve Program, and Farm and Ranch Land Protection Program into a consolidated easement program.
• Establishes a Regional Conservation Partnership Program to tackle local conservation needs and allow USDA to leverage the technical expertise of partners.
• Dedicates 10 percent of Environmental Quality Incentives Program funding for wildlife habitat conservation and improvement.
• Sets aside 600,000 acres each year for enrollment in the continuous Conservation Reserve Program and the continuous Conservation Reserve Enhancement Program to protect land adjacent to streams and wetlands to improve water quality and wildlife habitat.
• Refocuses the conservation easement programs on long-term and permanent easements to reduce long-term costs and provide more durable protection of critical natural resources.
• Streamlines the ranking and contracting process within the Conservation Stewardship Program, and strengthens stewardship requirements.
• Allows producers to seamlessly enroll expiring Conservation Reserve Program acres in the Conservation Stewardship Program.
• Provides support for ranchers using intensive rotational grazing techniques and for producers using or making a transition to organic production systems.
• Limits conservation payments that go to Concentration Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs), and modifies the Conservation Loan Program to help farmers finance larger, structural conservation projects.
• Provides new options to help livestock producers reduce their use of nontherapeutic antibiotics and improve the health of their animals.

The introduction of the Balancing Food, Farm, and the Environment Act is an important step toward making much needed improvements to farm bill conservation policy.  We will work to include these provisions in the 2013 Farm Bill as the process unfolds.