Farm bill timeline murky | Only one farmer safety net? | Dairy policy awaits USDA decision | Higher CRP maximum acres | Crop insurance tweaks
— Timing of the new farm bill changes frequently. It is a parlor game relative to guessing when the farm bill will be up for a final vote in the House and Senate. The timeline is particularly murky when one views recent farm bill action, or inaction. House Ag Chairman Mike Conaway (R-Texas) initially said he wants a new farm bill in place by the end of this year, but recently has noted it could take into the first quarter of 2018. The Senate has suggested it wants to finish a bill by the end of the year, with Sen. Chuck Grassley (R-Iowa) saying his talks with farm bill leaders signal a bill “by Christmas” this year. However, with funding needs growing for requested changes to the 2014 Farm Bill, some are upping their odds of significance impasse among some key farm-state lawmakers. If so, they say, there could be a need for a one-year extension of the current farm bill in order for a new farm bill to be completed later. The later-rather-than-sooner timeline argument usually points to what Sen. Debbie Stabenow (D-Mich.) will do during the farm bill debate. “If she does not get what she wants,” one veteran farm bill watcher said, “she will make that an issue in her upcoming re-election” and thus “the farm bill timeline would linger.” Stabenow is the ranking member on the Senate Ag panel.
— ‘All-in’ farm bill. That phrase may have several meanings relative to a new farm bill. One is the call for all farm and commodity groups and farm-state lawmakers to work together for a timely, successful bill. Another is the suggestion by some to include an “all-in” safety net that would combine both Ag Risk Coverage (ARC) and Price Loss Coverage (PLC) features that would mean farmers would have only one safety net option. But the all-in safety net program proposal would likely face opposition from some commodity groups and lawmakers who continue to favor the two different program options (ARC, PLC) that they want tweaked during the coming farm bill debate.
What few observers know is that the ‘all-in’ safety net concept was put on the table during the 2014 Farm Bill negotiations during inside Ag panel discussions. It was rejected. No major commodity or farm group pushed it at the time, similar to the current situation. However, some farmers during the current farm bill listening sessions have noted the complexity of the 2014 Farm Bill and going the one-route blended safety-net approach could be one response to the farmer criticism.
— Key dairy policy ruling awaits a USDA decision. Some lawmakers are waiting to see whether USDA’s Office of General Counsel signs off on pulling milk products out of a livestock insurance policy, thereby eliminating any cap for dairy products in an insurance policy along the lines of a proposal from the American Farm Bureau Federation. That new program would have to be approved by the Federal Crop Insurance Corporation (FCIC). If that occurs, it would make farm-state lawmakers’ job easier relative to making adjustments to the 2014 Farm Bill’s Margin Protection Program (MPP).
— A higher CRP acreage maximum. The current maximum acres for the Conservation Reserve Program (CRP) is 24 million acres. Some lawmakers want a higher maximum of a few more million acres. Budget offsets for that to occur could bring some reforms to the program, such as revising CRP rental rates on a more timely basis, restricting some whole-farm or other ground program access once those current CRP acres are up for program renewal, and moving some of those and other acres into the Grassland Reserve Program.
— Crop insurance tweaks may be pushed in farm bill debate. While no major changes are likely for the popular crop insurance program once lawmakers finish farm bill specifics, some tweaks to the program could be proposed. One possibility is to alter some of the current subsidies provided to farmers to encourage them to “buy up” higher levels of crop insurance coverage. Corn and soybean farmers frequently buy up to the 80% to 85% level, while other crop producers find such action too expensive. That is why some lawmakers want to alter the subsidy percentages. Corn and soybean producers and their lobby groups would be expected to fight any such move, noting those other crops are frequently grown in more risky areas. Meanwhile, several amendments regarding means testing and other crop insurance proposals are expected to be made on the House and Senate floor.
