|
Fertilizer Institute exec cites Farm Bill politics, legislative continuances |
|||
|
By MONETTE TAYLOR | South Central Texas Edition |
|||
August 1, 2002 -- After hearing a presentation from a goverment relations expert, ag producers may not want to get too comfortable with the new Farm Bill 2002. Ford West, senior vice president, government relations, with the Fertilizer Institute in Washington, D.C., told the attendees of the recent Southwestern Fertilizer Conference in San Antonio, details about the 2002 Farm Bill and what can be expected over the next couple of years, one of which will be a presidential election year. "We have a hard time in Washington coming up with a definition of a family farmer," he said in regards to who is affected by such legislation. Since 1933, family farmers have been involved in 19 different Farm Bills. "The 2002 Farm Bill is being advertised as the most lucrative and expensive farm bill in U.S. history ... in reality, we're talking about 2 million farmers in America, less than 2 percent of the population ... we probably have 300,000 farmers who produce 85 to 90 percent of everything produced in the United States," said West. The current farm bill deals with about 1 billion acres of agriculture production, across the states, and an average yield of corn is 137 bushels per acre. Earlier farm bills, such as the one in effect in the 1940s, dealt with production that was about 34 bushels an acre. Concerning the farm bill and food prices, West reminded the conference-goers that America enjoys the cheapest food in the world. "Probably, the unspoken benefit of agriculture to our economy is the amount of money it leaves us for other disposable income items, which other countries do not have .... We only spend about 8 percent of our disposal income on food. It is the lowest of any nation in the world," he stated. In reviewing the 1996 Freedom to Farm Bill, West said it provided maximum flexibility for producers, and that all of that is still in place. "Basically, what they did in '96 was look at the budget deal, took all the money they had available for ag, and divided it up among the farmers and just paid it (money) to them (farmers)." The only thing different is that the payments have changed, he said. The latest farm bill is estimated to pay out $200 billion over the next 10 years, at a rate of $20 billion per year. According to West, some of the "nay-sayers" have said the bill represents $83 billion more dollars that the last, but he said that is not true. "You've got to realize that we have a farm bill every year. This is a base line." West said the biggest change to the 2002 bill is the provisions for conservation. This bill allows for a little over $17 billion to be spent in the next six years on improving grasslands and wildlife habitats. This funding, along with other programs concerning crop disasters and reduction of fertilizer use (due to ozone laws), offers producers other programs to take part in that will allow them to continue farming. West said it is expected that there will be more corn acres farmed in 2002-03 than in the past, a switch from wheat and beans by many producers. Another area of concern being addressed by the 2002 bill is a provision for ethanol studies and use. West said that there is $407 million for "improving efficiency and less on dependency on foreign oil." As for foreign trade, he said that the World Trade Organization is watching what happens with the new bill very carefully, and it could "trigger new regulations and tariffs." West reminded the audience that 96 percent of the world consumers live outside of the United States. Obviously, politics will play a big part in the next few years. West said the two parties will continue to have differences concerning steel tariffs and agriculture subsidies, according to what area of the nation the congressmen and women represent, although he said that "the farm bill is going under pressure from both sides." |
