A kind congressional staffer just sent us news that the Farm Bill Conference Report has been posted online at the House Ag Committee's web site. We'll be taking a look after we finish reading the district newspapers this morning.
We recommend the title-by-title Fact Sheets for those wishing to gain a quick understanding of what's in the conference report that both houses of congress will have to consider.
Representative Walz serves on the House Ag committee.
Who will win --- Bush and his loyalist or a majority of Congress ?
Bush issued a press release stating “I am deeply disappointed in the conference report filed today as it falls far short of the proposal my Administration put forward. If this bill makes it to my desk, I will veto it. Congress wants to raise payment rates for most crops and create new subsidies which can be triggered even at very high prices. The bill fails to stop the practice of collecting subsidies even when crops are sold later at a higher price; it restricts our ability to redirect food aid dollars for emergency use in the midst of a global food crisis; and it falls short of the Administration's conservation proposals. By increasing trade-distorting subsidies, the bill undermines our ability to open foreign markets to American agricultural goods. The bill creates an egregious new sugar subsidy program that will keep sugar prices high for domestic consumers, while making taxpayers subsidize a handful of sugar growers. These are just a few of the reasons why I cannot support this bill.”
Five groups that oppose the farm bill -- Oxfam America, the Nebraska-based Center for Rural Affairs, the Citizens Against Government Waste, Taxpayers for Common Sense and the National Wildlife Federation -- because it does not contain strong enough payment limitations.
Meanwhile Chuck Grassley (R-IA) says that there are enough votes for an override. Grassley expects the White House will not push Republicans to sustain the expected veto. If Bush does push support for the veto, cautioned Grassley, he should expect "very weak loyalty in the Congress from his own party." Bush has said that some Republicans in safe seats who represent districts without agriculture might not worry about offending anti-hunger advocates by turning down the bill's $10 billion increase in nutrition programs. Grassley said today that such a scenario is the only way he could envision the White House getting enough House support to sustain a veto.
It will be interesting to see who Bachmann and Kline side with.
Ollie says: I, too, would like to see greater income caps, but the fact is that of the five organizations listed, only the Center for Rural Affairs has in good faith pursued a Farm Bill that seeks both caps on farm income and a safety net.
Posted by: MinnesotaCentral | May 14, 2008 at 06:44 AM