Congressional Subcommittees have been debating and voting on major elements in the 2007 Farm Bill. Most recently, Members expressed a preference for extending the 2002 legislation with minor modifications instead of beginning anew. As Members return home for the Independence Day recess and the August vacation period, farmers will have the opportunity to express their positions. But first, you have to formulate an opinion and that might be easier said than done.

There are numerous issues pending in the Farm Bill debate, and you don’t have to be knowledgeable on every one to be able to express your opinion. However, there are some selected issues that will get more headlines and your Member of Congress will want your ideas. Farm policy economist Carl Zulauf at Ohio State University has assembled a list of key policy questions that will be important to most Cornbelt farmers. Some of those include:

Commodity programs:
1) Should farm programs focus on (1) enhancing farm income or (2) helping farmers manage
price/revenue risk? (Farm income is enhanced with payments that have been criticized by taxpayers and our trading partners, yet have kept many operations afloat. The alternative to per-bushel payments are revenue programs that are designed with payments that bolster the combination of price and yield, not just bushel prices.)
2) Should the direct payment program be redesigned as a “green payments” program? More broadly, should direct payments be reduced, even eliminated; with the $5.2 billion in annual spending redistributed among other programs? (Farmers are currently receiving 28¢ for corn, 44¢ for soybeans, and 52¢ for wheat in the form of a direct payment per bushel. Similar payments are issued for other program crops, but a contrasting viewpoint is to use the money for other areas, such as conservation, rural development, research, etc.)
3) Should permanent disaster assistance be authorized? Currently, disaster assistance is authorized on an ad hoc basis. (Disaster programs are approved by Congress almost every year to help compensate for drought, flood, or pestilence. The contrasting view is to use the money to help build a better crop insurance program and allow farmers to manage their own risk of production.)
4) Should the farm insurance program be brought into the Farm Bill? Historically, insurance has been addressed in separate legislation. (Currently, crop insurance programs will be reviewed and revised in two years, since that program is offset from the Farm Bill. A contrasting view is to include it in the Farm Bill debate.)
5) Should the restriction on planting fruits and vegetables by farm program recipients (e.g. corn and soybean producers) be eliminated to comply with a WTO ruling? If “yes,” what assistance should be enacted for fruit and vegetable (more broadly, specialty crop) producers? (Recent Farm Bills have prevented the planting of fruits and vegetables on base acres for program crops, something that the WTO opposes and would force a change. Would you want more freedom in what you planted, and what would current fruit and vegetable producers have to say about the increased competition?)
6) What should be the limits on farm payments? (With the recent public debate over the amount of money every farm operation and every farmer receives, there will be stronger calls for lower limits, and even implementing a means test that would eliminate some higher income farmers.)

Conservation
1) Should the criteria used to decide which areas and/or farmers receive funds from farm environmental programs be based on (1) the highest environmental benefits or (2) be distributed equally across U.S. farm land? (Early CRP contracts accepted nearly any acreage that was deemed highly erodible. However, recent regulations calculate formulas for environmental benefits that will eliminate some farms from any consideration.)
2) Under what conditions, if any, should Conservation Reserve Program land be opened up to growing crops used for cellulose-derived ethanol? (The demand for food and fuel has put a potential pinch on acreage, and the CRP is seen as a safety valve to allow production of biomass crops that could be used for ethanol production. Do you favor using the CRP for crop production?)

Trade
1) Should Congress act in advance to address programs that may conflict with multilateral trade agreements or maintain them as negotiating positions/tactics? (This reverts to the debate over whether the Farm Bill or the WTO should be negotiated first. As it is now, the WTO debate is floundering, while the Farm Bill debate is progressing. Our trading partners who caused a dismantling of the Cotton Program and threatened the same for corn and soybeans are watching to see what is included in the Farm Bill. Should typical programs be included that encourage production, or should agriculture be supported that will not encourage production and lower the value of commodities in the world market?)

Energy
1) How will jurisdictional issues between the agricultural and energy committees in the House of
Representatives and Senate affect what is written in the Farm Bill? (Recent energy legislation has established goals for ethanol and biodiesel production that did not take into account any farm programs that affect crop production. Should energy issues be included in the Farm Bill or can they be separately addressed?)
2) Should funding be directed at research that increases yields of crops, such as corn, switchgrass, etc.? (While current ethanol production goals are calling for increased production of corn, how does this impact the critical trade issue?)
3) What share of research funding should go to cellulose-based energy? (If federal research investments are directed toward conversion of switchgrass, miscanthus, and other biomass into ethanol, does that detract from the use of corn and will that threaten the demand for corn?)

Summary:
The Farm Bill debate goes far and wide, and covers many more questions that can be feasibly addressed here. However, there are critical issues to be decided on farm program payments and how they are determined, payment limitation issues, the impact of trade and energy legislation on farm programs, and numerous conservation issues that need to be refined. Farmers need to create their positions on the issues and communicate those to their Member of Congress prior to the approval of the Farm Bill, which needs to be completed before the start of the new federal fiscal year in October.