Ag Department taking a hands-on approach to new Farm Bill design

By KARI KRAMER | East Texas Edition

July 21, 2005 - The U.S. Department of Agriculture is taking a hands-on approach in designing the next Farm Bill legislation.

The USDA is sending Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns on the road to spearhead a nationwide Farm Bill Tour.

The tour kicked off July 7, in Nashville, Tenn. More than 400 people attended the event. The forum, hosted by Johanns and media personality, Orion Samulson, was designed to let audience members voice their suggestions for the next Farm Bill. In addition, those watching the forum, live, on RFD-TV out of Nashville, were able to telephone and give comments to Johanns on live television.

Johanns expressed enthusiasm about the forums, and hoped that through attending the forums, calling in, and sending emails, that those affected by the current Farm Bill would voice their suggestions.

"The president and I realize you have tremendous in-sight into the impact that policies drawn up in Washington have," Johanns told the crowd in Nashville.

"The Farm Bill impacts America's entire ag community, no one is left out in terms of the impact. So, the entire community should have a say in what the Farm Bill is all about," he said.

The forum was the first of many; the next forums will be held in North Dakota, Minnesota, and Wisconsin. Then, Johanns said, he plans to head to California. He vowed to visit all regions of the country before the end of the tour.

USDA has structured the forums around six questions.

• "How should farm policy address any unintended consequences and ensure that such consequences do not discourage new farmers and the next generation of farmers from entering production agriculture?"

• "How should farm policy be designed to maximize U.S. competitiveness and our country's ability to effectively compete in global markets?"

• "How should farm policy be designed to effectively and fairly distribute assistance to producers?"

• "How can farm policy best achieve conservation and environmental goals?"

• "How can federal, rural, and farm programs provide effective assistance in rural areas?"

• "How should agricultural product development, marketing and research-related issues be addressed in the next Farm Bill?"

Most of the remarks at the July 7 forum were in support or opposition to existing policies. Others offered general comments, unrelated to the six questions and the Farm Bill.

Several opinions were dished out in the two-minute limit from the audience members and callers who included farmers and ranchers, state agriculture commissioners, a variety of USDA employees from field offices across the country, and FFA and 4-H members. With a wide variety of audience members, it was apparent that requests for the next Farm Bill were not all one-size-fits-all.

"These are very complex pictures and you look at it very carefully. What may be a tremendous assistance to one person, is not helping another person," said Johanns. "That's the whole idea here, how do we make farm policy work for agriculture?"

The first policy segment focused on the challenges young or new farmers and ranchers face when entering the agriculture sector. FFA and 4-H representatives all expressed the need for greater technology for the youth preparing to enter the production sector.

The primary concern was based on the existence of the "Death Tax." Several taking part in the forum explained the difficulty the tax creates for children attempting to take over farms. In addition, many said that to pay the tax, portions of land were often sold, thus decreasing the size of the farm.

Johanns voiced support for the abolition of the "Death Tax" and assured the audience that President Bush also supported that measure. Johanns said many people believe the "Death Tax" has little impact on the lives of Americans. He argued that belief and added, "You don't have to travel in rural America very far to find the impact."

In addition, the <I>Kelo v. New London<I> case was mentioned. An FFA member in the audience said the outcome of the case, that allows property seizures for economic development, was a discouraging hurdle for those planning a future in agriculture. She questioned how anyone could expect producers to work hard to purchase and cultivate land that could be so easily taken away.

The competitiveness of U.S. agriculture in global markets was then addressed. The issue sparked some interest. Tim in Minnesota said that the playing field needs to be level between the United States and foreign markets. "We cannot compete farmer against nations," he said. He and others felt that foreign nations increased subsidizing was hurting the U.S. market, creating the necessity for increased subsidies in the United States, which is undesirable. Along that line, it was expressed by many that most farmers would prefer to get their money directly from the market, instead of the government.

Trade barriers were debated. A Tennessee producer said, "Focus not on free trade but on fair trade."

Others shared his view that while several countries are given access to the U.S. markets, many of those same countries have various restrictions or bans that keep U.S. products from entering their country or becoming a viable part of the market.

In response to the third question, participants complained that many farm program payments are distributed to the wrong parties. As an example, Edwin in El Campo, Texas, said, that in many cases payments are given to landowners, not the tenant who produces the crop. In addition, he said that the disbursement of these payments to landowners creates higher land prices, and many people are buying land without putting a farmer on the land.

An FSA employee from Georgia backed Edwin. "I feel like these payments should be made to the actual producer," she said.

Also discussed was the fact that many benefits are distributed based on past and present production. Some felt that created disproportionate competition, while encouraging large operations to expand and increase production - all resulting in lower prices and farm incomes.

Following that, the crowd was asked to comment on the conservation agenda that should be tied to the next Farm Bill. Many communicated their support of current conservation-based programs such as the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP). Others expressed support for conservation in general, but added that conservation efforts and regulation should be practical.

Joy Philippi, president-elect of the National Pork Producers Council, addressed the secretary and summarized what numerous participants had expressed. "Virtually all regulation increases our production costs -- farm policy should include only regulations that are science based, cost effective; it needs to be something that is producer practical, while socially acceptable," she said.

It was also communicated that the U.S. agriculture sector be given the opportunity to be a major player in the production of alternate fuels. Samulson noted that critics question why someone would want to use perfectly good products for fuel. Johanns responded.

"I tell them, we're going to grow corn in abundance, we're going to grow soybeans in abundance, and I'd rather get my energy out of America than out of the Middle East any day of the week," the secretary said, to the tune of applause.

Rural development was a popular topic. Forum participants credited the decline of family farms to high prices, taxes, and higher land values that have resulted from the competition of developers who can pay more for land. Some felt that rural development was in a sense being forced, and that by stabilizing existing rural communities, natural balanced rural development would occur. Still, no specific suggestions were offered.

Lastly, innovation and market opportunity solutions were probed. Few audience members commented. The few comments were centered on providing technical assistance to farmers to help them compete and secure a food supply.

The forum was the first of its kind, so while participants sometimes had trouble keeping to the format, Johanns said he was impressed with the involvement of the participants.

"My belief is that with this body of information that we're going to be building nationwide, that we may be the first administration, in quite some time, that actually may put in a Farm Bill," he said. "I will guarantee that these forum meetings across the nation will be very helpful to me."

Information about the Farm Bill of 2007 and the Farm Bill Tour can be found at www.usda.gov/farmbill. The site also allows visitors to answer the six questions, and provides upcoming tour dates. Not all tour dates have been announced. For those who would like to mail their comments, the address is Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns, Farm Bill Forums, 1400 Independence Ave. SW, Room 116A, Washington, D.C., 20250-3355.