(November 10, 2011) Democratic and Republican leaders on the House and Senate agricultural committees continue to work together to hammer out a farm bill, according to Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack.
“If we had the level of bipartisan cooperation in other committees and other actions of congress than we have with the ag committee, I think there is a lot more that could be done and would have be done that hasn’t been done,” he said last Thursday at the National Association of Farm Broadcasting meeting in Kansas City.
The deadline looms for the two committees to propose framework of a farm bill to the so called Super Committee.
“I’m not ready to say they are the Super Committee because they haven’t done anything yet,” Vilsack quipped.
The 12-member committee has until November 23rd to fast track a proposal, meaning it can pass the Senate with 51 votes instead of the usual 60.
“You know how difficult it has been to get 60 votes on anything in the Senate, much less the 218 votes in the House” he said.
Along with a safety net, Vilsack would like ag leaders to include conservation funding, rural development support, nutrition programs, and export promotion in their fast track legislation.
“Put that in a process that potentially requires 51 votes today as opposed to 60 votes in an election.” If they are able to get that support now, “then what we have out there is certainty during an uncertain time.”
The challenge is going to be the Title I programs with the amount of diversity of agriculture in the United States.
“What may work well for one commodity may not work so well for another commodity or group of commodities, and that’s the challenge,” he said. “But if they can figure that out, then I think the rest falls into place and they will have a lot of support for it.”
Vilsack is hoping for a better process than before when there was acrimony between the administration and Congress, including two vetoes and overrides of vetoes and other uncertainty.
“For me the key here is to insure that we do in fact have a safety net that reflects the diversity of American agriculture, and that it’s defensible to the 98 percent of the folks who do not farm,” he said.
He said a good example is crop insurance.
“The other 98 percent understand something like crop insurance because they go out and buy a car and liability insurance. They protect themselves against risks, they pay a premium, and they get protection.”
It was the direct payment program that they didn’t get. Mainly because prices were high and the checks were still in the mail. “Because they didn’t get it, it erodes the confidence of all the farmers,” he said.
FARM BILL SHOULD BE RENAMED
Vilsack said the Farm Bill should be renamed because it is about much more than that.
“It’s about research, trade, rural development, conservation. It’s about much more than farm programs. When you undermine the credibility of the farm bill, you undermine the credibility of all those programs,” he said.
“If you come up with a system that targets the help of the people that need it when they need it and helps the people most in need, people are going to say, yeah, that’s a good thing and maybe it will establish confidence in the overall system which will make it easier for us to explain why it’s important to have all the other aspects of farm policy.”
Vilsack also believes there are opportunities for simplification within the total structure of upcoming legislation.
“I can guarantee you that the conservation title will be streamlined, and that’s good news for producers,” he said. “I studied this thing for three years, 20 different programs. We don’t need 20 different programs, we need fewer programs and more flexibility, we need to empower folks at the local level to be able to work with that farmer, to craft that conservation plan and fit it into a larger watershed effort to conserve the soil and make sure the water is clean and plentiful.”
Whatever happens, Vilsack said the USDA will continue to provide the technical expertise and assistance that congress needs as they work together.
“I tell you, after spending nearly three years in Washington, anytime people are working in a bipartisan way, I want to help.”