While Washington fights the battle of the budget, a farm bill
that will lead the
nation’s agriculture into the next century is caught in the
crunch.
And failure to pass a farm bill sends the nation’s
agricultural programs whirling back
almost 50 years.
"The deadline was to pass a farm bill was, legally, Jan.
1," said Bill
Thomas, an economist with the University of Georgia Extension
Service.
"We are now facing a situation where a few Georgia
crops, such as peanuts, cotton
and dairy, have had some legislation that extends those programs
through ’96 or ’97,"
Thomas said.
Federal law stipulates that failure to pass a new farm bill
or vote an extension on the
previous farm bill forces the 1949 Agricultural Act into law.
Secretary of Agriculture Dan Glickman has promised to
reinstate the 1949 act if
Congress doesn’t approve a new farm policy by Feb. 15.
Under the 1949 act, support prices would be based on parity,
which Glickman said would
raise support prices to about $7.82 per bushel for wheat and
$5.50 to $5.75 per bushel for
corn — far higher than Congress has ever authorized and almost
twice the current market
prices.
The final price-support rates would be set by the middle of
April for wheat, barley and
oats. At the same time, a decision would be made whether
marketing allotments will be
required for the 1997 wheat crop.
"Congress now has three options," Thomas said.
"They can pass a farm
bill with the rest of the budget package that will carry on for
five to seven years; they
can vote for a two-year extension on the previous farm bill, or
they can vote a one-year
extension."
Thomas’ bet: a two-year extension.
"Most congressmen will be running for re-election this
year," he said,
"and they don’t want to have to talk about a farm bill that
has cuts when they’re
running for re-election."
While Congress continues its tug-of-war over cuts and
spending in Washington, south
Georgia farmers are getting ready to plant their fields in few
weeks.
To make time even more of the essence, Congress was scheduled
to break for winter
recess Jan. 26 and won’t return to Washington until Feb. 20.
"That’s too late for many farmers," Thomas said.
Rep. Pat Roberts (R – Kan.), chairman of the House
agriculture committee, introduced a
Freedom to Farm Bill, which didn’t get through during the
original budget reconciliation
process.
"He has made some changes to the peanut program that has
made that acceptable to
the Republican congressmen from Georgia," Thomas said.
"Some of the other
commodities, like dairy, aren’t happy."
The Republican plan would give farmers wide power to pick the
crops they grow and
guarantee a payment for seven years. In exchange, farm funding
would be cut by one-fifth,
and there would be an annual cap — the first ever — on
spending.
"We don’t know if the 1996 farm bill will be this free-
standing Freedom to Farm
bill or a part of the budget reconciliation," Thomas said.
"It’s not about
dollars now."
The main thrust in the budget considerations for the industry
meant agriculture had to
come up with $13.4 billion in savings.
"That’s big to you and me, but not to Congress,"
Thomas said. "They’re
talking about a trillion dollars in expenditures over the next
seven years."
Whatever they decide has to be done in the next few weeks
before planting begins.
"After the law passes, it will take USDA another couple
of weeks to write
regulations," Thomas said. "The farmer will be sitting
on his tractor in south
Georgia waiting for someone to tell him the regulations before
he can plant his
crops."
