senate agriculture committee

An odd pair of senators joined Tuesday in an assault on farm programs that will put their colleagues - none more than California's Democratic Sens. Dianne Feinstein and Barbara Boxer - in a tough spot.

Sens. Frank Lautenberg, D-N.J., and Richard Lugar, R-Ind., proposed a rebel farm bill called the Fresh Act that would replace billions of dollars in payments to farmers of a handful of crops with an insurance program that would be available free to all farmers - including the 91 percent of California farmers who receive no federal crop subsidies.

They estimate that California would by far be the biggest beneficiary of the changes, gaining an additional $7 billion in federal aid over five years, mainly for environmental, research, and pest and nutrition programs.

But it would come at the expense of the state's heavily subsidized cotton and rice farmers and the cluster of seven states in the Midwest and South that get most of the $7.5 billion that will be spent this year on subsidies for corn, cotton, rice, wheat and soybeans.

The plan is expected to save so much money that it could finance a veritable liberal dream list.

Billions of dollars would be diverted to food stamps and fruit and vegetable purchases in school food programs. Money would be freed for conservation easements to preserve farm land from suburban sprawl and a host of other environmental programs. Aid for organic farms and locally based food purchases, research for fruit, nut and vegetable crops, and rural development would rise.

The changes would also bring farm programs into compliance with world trade treaties, and still trim $3 billion from the deficit.

Feinstein and Boxer have yet to take a position on the Fresh Act, or the farm bill the Senate Agriculture Committee is expected to vote on Wednesday. That $286 billion bill, which would authorize farm programs for the next five years, maintains traditional subsidies, creates a new $5 billion "permanent disaster" fund that would mostly benefit the same crops that get money now and increases environmental and nutrition programs.

Lugar said he has discussed his bill with Boxer and Feinstein.

Both face "very complex groups in their state so I've not pressed on the issue," Lugar said. "They're hearing from a good number of constituents who have very diverse points of view, as I understand it. How they will finally at the end of the day come out on all this, only you can divine, but they're listening. They're very, very knowledgeable about it."

Lautenberg and Lugar bypassed the Senate Agriculture Committee, which Lautenberg said is set to "give us the same farm bill they've given us every year that gives huge payments to a handful of farmers that grow a handful of crops."

New Jersey is the nation's largest producer of blueberries and cranberries, which like California's specialty crops, do not receive crop subsidies.

Lautenberg said farm income and grain prices are near record highs, yet commodity interests are still demanding subsidies from the federal government.

"It doesn't make sense," Lautenberg said. "We want to scrap a broken, wasteful system."

A galaxy of reform groups, ranging from overseas development advocates such as Oxfam to poverty groups, environmentalists and budget hawks, are throwing their weight behind the Fresh Act. Physicians and hospitals have become increasingly vocal, drawing links between rising obesity and farm programs.

"Why is it that 1 in 3 children born in the U.S. today will develop diabetes at some point?" said Neal Barnard, president of the Physicians Committee for Responsible Medicine and a nutrition research physician at George Washington University. "Why does the U.S. have epidemics of diet-related disease and rank, believe it or not, 38th in life expectancy? A big part of the reason is that subsidized livestock feed, subsidized dairy products and federal commodity programs make greasy cheeseburgers and sausage pizza artificially cheap and especially plentiful in schools and food assistance programs."

Bay Area physicians have been especially active lobbying Boxer and Feinstein.

Dr. Seth Ammerman, a pediatrician specializing in adolescent care at Stanford University and medical director of a nutrition clinic for poor youth at Lucile Packard Children's Hospital in Palo Alto, said he and other physicians are alarmed by the dramatic rise in childhood obesity and the enormous health complications and costs that accompany it.

"We are subsidizing a lot of foods that end up as cheap fast food and school lunches that are essentially unhealthy," Ammerman said. Most people have ignored past farm bills, but "now we realize how important good nutrition is to good health, and as we're seeing all these adverse health consequences for children and adolescents from poor diets ... people are finally making the connection that (the farm bill) affects the entire United States, not just farm states."

Even though only about 150,000 commercial farms operate in the nation, with commodity growers clustered in just a handful of states, Lugar and Lautenberg face an uphill struggle in the Senate.

Lugar said like-minded reformers failed in the House because traditional farm program supporters bought off critics by sprinkling extra money for nutrition, environmental programs and speciality crops, while preserving the subsidies - much the same process that is going on now in the Senate Agriculture Committee.

"Very rapidly, those around the table on the Agriculture Committee added in $3 billion, $4 billion, $5 billion, $6 billion - whatever it took - to satisfy the groups," Lugar said.

Jim Lyons, vice president for policy at Oxfam America, agreed, saying Congress has moved from providing buyouts for dairy, tobacco and peanut farmers to "buy-offs" of reform groups as outside opposition to crop subsidies has swelled.

Nonetheless, Scott Faber, a former lobbyist for Environmental Defense now at the Food Products Association, said this year many Democrats are "very disappointed with the bill" emerging from the Senate Agriculture Committee," and could vote it down.

Lugar said he expects to have support from the Bush administration, which has issued a veto threat against the House version of the farm bill that passed in July. It is similar to the legislation expected from the Senate committee.




Rebel farm bill would help state, but puts Boxer, Feinstein in bindSan Francisco Chronicle, USA
- Oct 24, 2007
- 3 hours ago
Feinstein and Boxer have yet to take a position on the Fresh Act, or the farm bill the Senate Agriculture Committee is expected to vote on Wednesday. ...
Related Articles ?
clipped from Google - 10/2007
Deal to allow interstate sales for small meat processorsDesMoinesRegister.com, USA
- Oct 24, 2007
- 7 hours ago
The deal is to be included in a farm bill that the Senate Agriculture Committee will take up today. Iowa is one of 27 states with its own inspection program ...
Related Articles ?
clipped from Google - 10/2007
Senate must fund conservation needs, advocates sayDelta Farm Press, USA
- Oct 24, 2007
- 1 hour ago
... such as his own Conservation Stewardship Program, in the 2007 farm bill he was scheduled to present to the Senate Agriculture Committee today. ...
clipped from Google - 10/2007
Why You Should Care About the Farm BillNPR
- Oct 24, 2007
- 14 hours ago
The Senate Agricultural Committee takes up its version of the bill this week, and it is expected to take a somewhat different tack. Agriculture Committee ...
clipped from Google - 10/2007
More news results ?

Blog posts


Rebel Farm Bill Would Do Away With Subsidies 12 hours ago
Feinstein and Boxer have yet to take a position on the Fresh Act, or the farm bill the Senate Agriculture Committee is expected to vote on Wednesday. That $286 billion bill, which would authorize farm programs for the next five years, ...
o
Despite postponement of a press event today hailing tomorrow's Senate Agriculture Committee's markup of the farm bill and a rival press event touting a reform minded bill, signs are that the farm bill that emerges from the committee ...

Yet at the behest of industrial farming interests, the Senate Agriculture Committee sees fit to propose that this "phone book" information should receive a new exemption from the Freedom of Information Act. ...


Web results


U.S. Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition & Forestry
Deals with farming, food programs and forest resources. Provides compilations of agricultural law, as well as status of legislation and opening statements ...

clipped from Google - 10/2007
Senators of the Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee ...
Link to Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, U.S. Senate -text- scenes of. Photo: Tom Harkin, Ranking Democratic Member Tom Harkin, (D-IA) ...

clipped from Google - 10/2007
United States Senate Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition and ...
4.1 Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, 1829-1857; 4.2 Chairmen of the Senate Committee on Agriculture, 1863-1884; 4.3 Chairmen of the Senate ...

clipped from Google - 10/2007
Tom Harkin: HARKIN TO BE NAMED CHAIRMAN OF SENATE AGRICULTURE ...
"I am very excited to once again take the helm of the Senate Agriculture Committee," Harkin said. "Over the next two years, we have a great opportunity to ...

ure overlapped with areas covered by other committees and were often referred to those committees instead of the Agriculture Committee.[4]

Following a debate over the necessity of various committees to have need of the services of a dedicated clerk, a Special Committee was formed to investigate ways to "reduce the number and increase the efficiency of the committees."[5] On February 17, 1857, the Special Committee submitted a plan of reorganization for the committees that did not include the Agriculture Committee. During a special session of the Senate, on March 5, 1857, the Senate approved the Special Committees recommendations and the Committee on Agriculture was dissolved.[6]

In 1862, the country was embroiled in the Civil War, a large influx of immigrants was occurring and the nation was moving towards industrialization. That year, President Abraham Lincoln signed the Organic Act recreating the Department of Agriculture.[7]

It became the Committee on Agriculture and Forestry in 1884, a reflection of the growing importance of forests to the country's needs.[8] It was renamed again to the Committee on Agriculture, Nutrition, and Forestry in 1977. Nutrition was added to the name after the Food and Agriculture Act of 1977 directed the Department of Agriculture to "conduct more human nutrition research, establish a national nutrition education program and develop a system to monitor