By DAVID ROGERS
With the Senate nearing passage of its farm
bill, the House Agriculture Committee abruptly pulled back Wednesday from its
long-planned markup next week, amid signs that House Republican leaders want a
pause to consider how to proceed this summer.
House Chairman Frank Lucas (R-Okla.) told
POLITICO that he will move “hell or high water” on a farm bill when lawmakers
return after the July 4th recess. But he confirmed the change in plans, which
came after discussions with Majority Leader Eric Cantor (R-Va.).
Cantor’s involvement is an ominous sign for
farm bill advocates, but his aides insisted that the Virginia Republican was
not saying “no” to any House farm bill this summer. Instead, they said the
majority leader wanted to “push the pause button” and allow time for some
assessment of the political situation.
Indeed, top House Republicans appear caught
by surprise by the progress made in the Senate on its farm bill, having assumed
it would collapse amid the typical partisan fighting. Instead a deal was
reached Monday night allowing for orderly votes, and the measure has steadily
advanced to a point where Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) predicted passage
will be completed Thursday.
The crop insurance industry suffered a series
of setbacks in narrow votes Wednesday. But in both cases, the results add to
the “reform” image boasted by proponents. And the bill now boasts over $24
billion in 10-year savings and on a 59-40 vote Wednesday, it rolled over a
conservative attempt to recommit it to committee.
Lucas said the changed House schedule is
driven too by the fact that floor debate is scheduled next week on a $19.4
billion Agriculture Department appropriations bill that touches on farm
programs. After his meeting with Cantor, the chairman agreed that it made sense
then to have his committee members on the floor in what could become a preview
of the whole farm bill debate.
“Many antagonists from both ends of the
spectrum will go after it,” Lucas told POLITICO. “They’ll view the Ag
appropriations bill as a miniature farm bill. I’m of the opinion that the
Agriculture Committee has to be all hands on deck to work with the
appropriators.”
“It’s my hope that we will move shortly after
we come back” after the holiday, Lucas said. “You can say that the chairman indicated
come hell or high water the Agriculture Committee will do its work.”
While Lucas has always bet himself on Senate
passage, he sees major shortcomings to the safety net the Senate bill provides
for farmers, especially from the South.
In a brief interview, he said he is confident
that pressure will build for House floor action, but as the chairman, he also
feels compelled to produce a bill that can stand as an alternative five-year
plan.
“If I don’t do my work, the only document
that exists is the Senate-passed bill,” Lucas told POLITICO. “Then I’m leaving
a bunch of people exposed for the next five years, and I will not let that
happen.”
“I know that the farm bill has always been
probably one of the lesser issues of priority for many folks in the House,”
Lucas said. “But it’s my opinion that with the Senate completing its work, with
the House Ag committee soon to complete its work, the focus of the agriculture
and rural community of America is going to be on the floor and this thing will
build momentum all on its own.”
While not addressing floor time, a Cantor
spokesperson also confirmed the leader’s expectation that a committee markup
will proceed in July.
“Given that the Senate is still in the
process of finalizing their farm bill and the House is considering Ag approps
next week,” she said, “it is our understanding that the committee will move
forward with a markup following the July 4th recess.”
Wednesday’s Senate debate on crop insurance
dealt with two priority issues for those wanting more reform in the current
farm program: soil conservation and payment limits.
On a 52-47 vote, senators adopted an
amendment by Sen. Saxby Chambliss (R-Ga.) that would require farmers getting
premium subsidies to again meet conservation compliance rules—just as they now
do for commodity subsidies. Crop insurance was first exempted in the mid-90’s
as part of an effort then to encourage more producers to enroll. But
environmentalists argue that the program is so much bigger now –and the
commodity title smaller— that this exception weakens anti-erosion efforts.
In a second series of votes, senators
approved the first real payment or income limits on the premium discounts paid
for by the government in support of crop insurance.
These subsidies cover on average about 62
percent of the cost, and the amendment, offered by Sens. Tom Coburn (R-Okla.)
and Majority Whip Richard Durbin (D-Ill.), would cut this by 15 percentage
points in the case of producers with an adjusted gross income of $750,000 or
more.
The estimated 10-year savings are $1.2
billion and number of producers impacted is a small percentage of the total
nationally. But it is a foot in the door for those who want still tighter
limits. And critics warn that if wealthier farmers drop out of the crop
insurance program, it could add to the costs of the risk pool and impact
smaller farmers with less income.
Sen. John Thune (R-S.D.) made this argument
but failed on a 44-55 vote to win his amendment, delaying implementation of the
Coburn-Durbin cap, which was then adopted easily 66-33.
At one level, the three crop insurance losses
were a defeat too for Kansas Sen. Pat Roberts, the Republican floor manager and
a great champion for the industry.
At each turn, Roberts loudly but cheerfully
warned senators they would have to spend another two weeks hiding in their
offices from irate farmers, aggravated by the added paperwork and meddling with
their insurance. By the time of the last vote, he was up to six weeks.
“Don’t spend six weeks hiding in your
office!” Roberts yelled. “Vote no!”
But they didn’t— by larger and larger
margins.
Original Article Here
No comments:
Post a Comment