Page 30 - Farm Bill Series_The 7 Things You Should Know

reduce the number of non-farmers who could receive payments. Southerners, including Sen.
Cochran and Chairman Lucas disagreed.

Both the House and Senate measures included payment caps on certain programs, as Carl Zulauf
and Gary Schnitkey pointed out in a FarmDocdaily report on farm bill conference issues.
“Payments are denied to entities with an aggregate gross income (AGI) over 3 years that exceeds
$750,000 in the Senate bill and $950,000 in the House bill. Differences exist between the two
bills in the programs to which the AGI limit applies, with the House bill applying the limit to a
broader range of programs, including conservation programs. Last, the Senate bill, but not the
House bill, contains a provision that redefines active involvement in farming.”

3. SNAP. With the Senate cutting the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program by $4 billion
over 10 years and the House slashing almost $40 billion, the two sides started poles apart. Some
GOP members believed that the “sweet spot” to pass both chambers would be to cut $10 billion
over 10 years, rolling back $1 billion per year in savings, with Southerland’s amendment on
work requirements converted to a pilot program.

But others said that a double-digit number would still be too much for Stabenow to move
through the Senate, especially if the cuts were achieved by trimming categorical eligibility or by
embracing all of Southerland’s work requirements. Sources close to the negotiations said that if
the cuts were achieved mainly by shutting down SNAP eligibility linked to the Low Income
Home Energy Assistance Program (LIHEAP) program, known as “heat and eat,” it would be
more acceptable in the Senate. But some of those same sources differed on how much savings
would actually be achieved through LIHEAP reform, with estimates ranging from $8.7-$12
billion.

Another concern: How to get GOP conservatives, who passed a stand-alone nutrition title with
almost $40 billion in cuts, to vote for something in the $8-$10 billion range? You don’t. That
meant Rep. Peterson would have to make sure plenty of his fellow Democrats were on board.
But if the SNAP compromise cut too deep, they would bail, too.

4. Dairy. Normally, the dairy title is one of the last deals to be negotiated. But if the Senate
version prevailed in conference, Boehner might once again be reluctant to bring the farm bill to
the House floor. Boehner had consistently opposed the dairy stabilization provisions which,
along with the Dairy Security Act, were advanced by the National Milk Producers Federation.
Instead, Boehner backed the Goodlatte-Scott amendment, which removed what he and many
milk processors viewed as “supply management.”
However, the Dairy Security Act had long been one of Peterson’s top priorities. If Peterson
didn’t sign off on the conference committee agreement, there could be even fewer Democrats
willing to vote for final passage.

Earlier in the fall, Ohio State economists John Newton and Cameron Thraen suggested a re-
tooled dairy farm safety net that some said would be a potential compromise between the House
and Senate dairy reforms because it did not require a market supply program. And it scored
under $1 billion. Dubbed MILC Insurance, the economists proposed increasing eligibility of
MILC up to 4 million pounds per year and allow farms an option to choose annually between: 1)

28 www.Agri-Pulse.com