Oct 1, 2014
Home | Tools| Events| Blogs| Discussions Sign UpLogin

AgDay Blog

Dairy Talk

RSS By: Jim Dickrell, Dairy Today

Jim Dickrell is the editor of Dairy Today and is based in Monticello, Minn.

Did National Milk Get Out-Lobbied?

Feb 10, 2014

In the end, the farm bill became as much of what people didn’t want included as what finally became law.

Now that the 2012/2013/2014 farm bill debate is finally over, it’s time to look behind the curtain to see who won what and how.

Conventional wisdom is that Speaker of the House John Boehner (R-Ohio) simply would not let the House/Senate Conference Report move to the floor of the House of Representatives if it contained supply management.

"Unfortunately, the Speaker’s threat that he would not allow a vote on the farm bill containing the market stabilization program has effectively killed our proposal within the committee," conceded Jim Mulhern, CEO and President of the National Milk Producers Federation (NMPF).

In effect, to use lobbyist lingo, NMPF would have had to "roll the chairman." Overturning the wishes of a chairman of a congressional committee rarely happens, and rolling the Speaker never does. (The Republican’s inability to "roll" Nancy Pelosi, when she was Speaker of the House, is the reason we now have Obamacare.)

Lobbying by processors and farmers opposed to supply management gave Boehner additional cover. Both Senate and House agriculture committees had supply management in their reports. "So it was imperative we won the vote in the House," says Jerry Slominski, International Dairy Foods Association (IDFA) Senior Vice President for Legislative Affairs and Economic Policy.

IDFA wooed member/leaders of each of the five Democratic caucuses, claiming supply management would raise consumer milk prices at the very time billions of dollars in food stamp aid were being cut. The strategy worked, with supply management stripped out of the House bill last summer by a vote of 291-135.

But others say Boehner’s opposition meant NMPF was fighting an uphill battle from the start. They say Democratic leaders knew supply management was dead on arrival three years ago.

With supply management gone, palace intrigue switched to the margin insurance program. Sen. Patrick Leahy (D-Vt.) was in the middle of it all, say sources. The final margin insurance premiums locked into law are far different than those originally proposed, particularly for farmers shipping less than 4 million pounds of milk annually.

Also new are 25% premium discounts for the first two years of the program for the first 4 million pounds of production. These discounts were added late in the negotiations to benefit smaller farms and encourage them to sign up.

Leahy also reportedly wanted a third tier of premiums for annual milk production that exceeded 40 million pounds (2,000 cows or there about). The premiums for this insurance were much, much higher than the other categories. They were so high that most large farms probably would not have participated.

Lobbyists for NMPF and dairy organizations who wanted all sizes of farms eligible for affordable insurance had all they could handle keeping this third tier of premiums out of the Conference Report.
In the end, the farm bill became as much of what people didn’t want included as what finally became law.

You can read the latest on the farm bill here

Log In or Sign Up to comment


No comments have been posted, be the first one to comment.


Market Data provided by Barchart.com
Enter Zip Code below to view live local results:
The Home Page of Agriculture
© 2014 Farm Journal, Inc. All Rights Reserved|Web site design and development by AmericanEagle.com|Site Map|Privacy Policy|Terms & Conditions