Page 17 - Farm Bill Series_The 7 Things You Should Know

The bill, which eliminated direct payments and emphasized risk management tools and crop
insurance, was set to reduce the deficit by at least $23 billion. But it failed to gain support from
some Southern representatives on the committee.

Sources told Agri-Pulse that GOP Leader McConnell was very helpful behind the scenes in
advancing the farm bill out of committee, but was facing strong Tea Party forces both in the
Senate and at home in Kentucky. He pushed for a voice vote, but then voted “no” on a recorded
vote.

After the vote, Sens. Thad Cochran, R-Miss.; Mitch McConnell, R-Ky.; Chambliss, R-Ga.; and
Boozman, R-Ark., vowed to bring up amendments when the bill hit the Senate floor to further
protect cotton, rice and peanuts – crops which they
argued do not benefit from crop insurance.
“As we move toward a mark on the floor, I hope the
issues of rice and peanuts will be given greater
consideration,” Chambliss said during the
markup. “If enacted under the current proposal, both
peanuts and rice are going to take a huge hit.”

Stabenow assured them considerations for Southern
crops were already in the bill, including the Stacked
Income Protection Plan (STAX) for cotton, but
acknowledged that more work was needed.

“It’s not about one region over another, but it is
complicated,” she said. “We do have STAX for
cotton, a new ag risk coverage program, special Senators Debbie Stabenow and Pat Roberts
prices for rice and peanuts and new crop insurance
options. I know this is not all fully developed. We realize we’re not there yet.”

Near the end of June, Stabenow and Roberts thought they had everyone on board for final
passage of a bill that still had a few troublesome amendments. But they worked their magic and
passed a bill out of the Senate on June 21, with a whopping 64-35 margin.

Farm organizations, however, wanted to get rid of two amendments.

One, sponsored by Sens. Durbin and Tom Coburn, R-Okla., would have applied income caps on
farmers and ranchers who wished to purchase crop insurance.

The other amendment, sponsored by Chambliss, would have required farmers purchasing crop
insurance to comply with strict soil conservation erosion standards, known as cross compliance.
It’s not that Chambliss was a big fan of the idea, but he wanted to signal his dissatisfaction over
Sen. Roberts’ support for commodity price protections that were in the bill.

Back to the House

With action in the Senate, the House Agriculture Committee was eager to move quickly. But
after a conversation with Leader Eric Cantor, Lucas decided to pause on marking up the bill the
following week.
www.Agri-Pulse.com 15