Senator Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga., chairman of the U. S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, admitted that the farm sector faces serious challenges as both Senate and House committees begin deciding what to do with farm legislation.
“I am pleased with the way the current farm bill is working,” Chambliss told witnesses and a sizeable audience at a farm bill hearing in Lubbock Texas.
“But we face challenges as we debate a new farm bill. The DOHA (collapse) has shifted the debate. Some domestic programs may not mesh with international trade.”
He said grain use for energy also creates a dilemma for livestock producers who need affordable feedgrains.
“Also the federal budget deficit will have an effect on farm bill funding, although we spent less on the 2002 act than expected.”
Chambliss said ag committee members are concerned with the drought that has hammered the South and Midwest this summer. “Some parts of Texas are considered in extreme or exceptional drought,” he said. “We are looking into a permanent disaster program as part of the farm bill,” he said.
Chambliss also praised Texas for a forward-looking water use plan that is “admired across the nation.”
Farm leaders who testified at the hearing encouraged Chambliss and his committee to maintain as much of the 2002 act as possible, with some minor adjustments.
Ted Higgbottom, president of the Western Peanut Growers Association, encouraged Congress to assure that the peanut program created in the 2002 act is administered properly.
“The U.S. Department of Agriculture has administered the repayment rate in such a way as to price U.S. peanuts out of the export market. USDA’s unwillingness to provide a market-clearing repayment rate has led to excessive peanut stocks that overhang the market.”
Tommy Womack, past president of the National Wheat Growers Association and the Texas Wheat Producers Association, said wheat farmers received little benefit from two key components of the 2002 farm act — the counter-cyclical program and the loan deficiency program.
He said both the loan and LDP are ineffective when growers do not make a crop. “And the target price on the counter-cyclical program for wheat was set considerably lower than market conditions indicated and severe weather conditions in some areas have created a short crop, which has led to higher prices in other areas. As a result, there has been little support in the form of counter-cyclical payments.”
Texas corn producers also weighed in in favor of maintaining the current far program.
“The 2002 farm bill is popular with farmers,” said Jimmy Wedel, Corn Producers Association of Texas. “I support extending the 2002 farm bill and its budget baseline.”
He agrees that some tweaking will improve the program.
He said the 2002 bill allow farmers to update counter cyclical payment yields and base acres. “This was a major improvement but left many producers stuck with low direct payment yields. But many farmers have direct payments for 27 bushels per acre when actual production is well over 200 bushels per acre.”
He said energy will be an important part of the next farm bill debate and should serve as a reminder of where agriculture does not need to go.
“We are dependent on the world for our energy; only sound agricultural policy will prevent us from following the same road in food and fiber.”
Ricky Bearden, speaking on behalf of the Texas Cotton Producers and the National Cotton Council, said the current farm program provides “a stable and effective national policy for our country.”
He said continuation of the marketing loan program is “our top priority. It triggers, when necessary, regardless of the cause of low prices and ensures that U.S. cotton farmers are not left as residual suppliers when they are unable to compete with the treasuries of foreign governments.”
Congressman Randy Naugebauer, who welcomed the committee and panel to Lubbock, the heart of his Congressional District, supports improvements in crop insurance as a substitute for frequent disaster programs.