U.S. lawmakers to wrestle with food stamp cuts in farm bill

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

U.S. Senate and House negotiators, who will begin working on a compromise farm bill on Oct. 30, face a major fight over proposed deep cuts in food stamps for the poor.

The leaders of the House and Senate Agriculture committees jointly announced the first meeting of a conference committee, made up of 41 members of the House and Senate who will hammer out differences in the Senate and House bills.

Food stamps are the paramount issue. The Republican-controlled House wants stricter eligibility rules that would save $39 billion over 10 years, about 10 times the cuts proposed by the Senate.

Other provisions that the conferees will wrestle with include requiring conservation practices of farmers, spending more on federally subsidized crop insurance and making the richest farmers pay more for insurance.

Food stamps constitute the major U.S. domestic anti-hunger program. At last count 47.8 million people, made up mostly of children, the elderly or disabled, received benefits averaging about $4.37 a day.

To have any chance of passage in both chambers, the final version of the farm bill probably will propose cuts of $8 billion to $12 billion, said the National Sustainable Agriculture Coalition, which represents small farms.

The bills would cut conservation spending by around $6 billion and increase spending on federally subsidized crop insurance by up to $10 billion over a decade.

House Agriculture Committee Chairman Frank Lucas, who heads the conference committee, opposes Senate provisions that would tighten rules for subsidies for farmers, require farmers to practice conservation to qualify for crop insurance subsidies and make the wealthiest 1 percent of growers, with more than $750,000 adjusted gross income, pay more for the insurance.

Conference committees typically need several weeks of work, much of it in private, to write a final version of a bill. A farm lobbyist said congressional staff already have resolved minor differences in noncontroversial sections of the bill.



Comments (3) Leave a comment 

Name
e-Mail (required)
Location

Comment:

characters left

PS    
Iowa  |  October, 24, 2013 at 09:21 AM

I reject socialism on the farm. No matter what income a farmer has, if he spends his own money to put in a crop, he needs to be able to buy affordable crop insurance on same terms and conditions as other farmers. Other disaster premiums for flood insurance do not depend on income nor do Coal subsidence insurance policies; tyhey depend on risk not income.

PA    
PA  |  October, 24, 2013 at 11:25 AM

PS, if you want to reject socialism, then you are in favor of eliminating all government subsidies for crop insurance completely. All farmers will need to pay the market-based rate for that risk. Is this what you are saying?

Pan    
Iowa  |  October, 24, 2013 at 10:46 PM

Gross income does not equal wealth. Those who receive governmental subsidies should be expected to contribute something in trade whether it be enhanced conservation activities or less insurance subsidies (farmers) or work for food stamps, welfare or unemployment benefits.


Mycogen® brand Silage-Specific™ Corn Hybrids

No other company has more experience with silage than Mycogen Seeds. Mycogen® brand TMF corn silage hybrids are bred specifically ... Read More

View all Products in this segment

View All Buyers Guides

)
Feedback Form
Leads to Insight