NMPF: Dairy Security Act would have increased farm milk prices

 Resize text         Printer-friendly version of this article Printer-friendly version of this article

Milk prices for Midwest dairy farmers would have been more than $1.00 per hundredweight higher last year if the proposed federal Dairy Security Act (DSA) program had been available to them, a national dairy industry official told cooperative farm leaders gathered here Wednesday for the Minnesota-Wisconsin Dairy Policy Conference.

Jim Mulhern, Chief Operating Officer for the National Milk Producers Federation and a Wisconsin native, said a farmer with 200 cows, who purchased margin coverage at a level of $6.50 per hundredweight, would have received more than $44,000 in additional payments in 2012 under the Dairy Security Act that is now pending before Congress.

“The DSA was designed for the type of conditions we experienced last year: high feed costs and weak farm milk prices. If DSA had been in effect, dairy farmers who chose to participate in the program would have received margin insurance payments to cover increased costs and would have had to make only small reductions in milk output under DSA’s market stabilization program,” Mulhern said. “The net increase in farm revenue at the $6.50 margin coverage level would have averaged more than $2,000 per cow for the year,” he said. “This is income that would not have been received by a farmer if they weren’t in the program.”

The Dairy Security Act was approved by both the House and Senate Agriculture Committees during consideration of last year’s farm bill. The full Senate also approved the bill, but the House failed to vote on the farm bill last year, so Congress is now beginning efforts to pass a farm bill this year.

Mulhern said the Senate Agriculture Committee is expected to begin work on a new farm bill later this month, and the House Agriculture Committee likely will follow later this spring.

“I believe Congress will pass a farm bill this year, and when all the dust settles, DSA will be the dairy program in the final bill,” he said. “Congress will adopt the DSA because it is the only program that truly provides an effective safety net without busting the budget.

“The plan’s combination of affordable margin insurance and a stabilization program to quickly send production signals to producers when market prices are falling is specifically designed to protect both farmers and taxpayers,” Mulhern said.

A margin insurance-only alternative proposed by milk processors is irresponsible, Mulhern said, because it would create price-depressing milk surpluses and potentially cost billions of dollars.

“It would be terrible for our industry to enact a margin insurance-only program that guaranteed processors access to cheap milk by encouraging excess milk production, but that is exactly what some have proposed. An insurance-only program is dangerous because, by insulating producers through insurance payments, it actually prevents market signals from getting through,” he said.

Mulhern added that realistic insurance rates under a margin-only program would have to be much higher than those proposed in the Dairy Security Act in order to cover a greater portion of the cost of such a program.

“We are able to keep the insurance rates affordable under the DSA because the market stabilization program will help keep supply and demand in better balance,” he said. “Without stabilization, a margin-only program could become prohibitively expensive for small- and medium-sized producers to participate. That would be damaging here in the Midwest, and throughout the country.”


Prev 1 2 Next All



Comments (2) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

Ken    
Batavia, NY  |  April, 05, 2013 at 12:49 PM

This is not the first time the overpaid hacks at NMPF have told us that supply management would increase milk prices. Then after further scrutiny we found out that they were wrong. Why should we believe them now?

Steve    
WI  |  April, 05, 2013 at 01:30 PM

The math does not add up. In one paragraph they claim a farmer with 200 cows would have received $44,000 in payments and the very next paragraph they claim he would have received $2,000 per cow in extra payments. I guess this is the new math that is used in Washington DC. Maybe this is why our government is in such a mess because of this new accounting. The article also does not explain how much money the 200 cow farmer lost by giving a percentage of his milk away under the program. And like Ken states, why should we beleive NMPF now. There are other economists that say this lame brain program will not do anything for milk prices. The cheese plants in our state are looking for more milk. The plant we ship to is doubling in size because of demand for more cheese. They moved here from Canada because they could not expand there because of quota. Why would this country want to go down that same route?


Farmall® 100A Series

From field to feedlot, you need a tractor that can multi-task as well as you do. Case IH Farmall™ 100A ... Read More

View all Products in this segment

View All Buyers Guides

)
Feedback Form
Leads to Insight