Congressional Quarterly reported yesterday that, “Brushing aside a presidential veto threat, the Senate on Thursday cleared a $289 billion, five-year farm bill that significantly increases nutrition spending while preserving crop subsidies.
“By 81-15, the Senate adopted the conference report on the bill. The House had taken the same step a day earlier, by 318-106.
Posted by Keith Good • May, 16, 2008 • 4:46 am Dan Morgan reported in today’s Washington Post that, “The House yesterday passed a final version of a new five-year farm bill by a vote of 318 to 106, a margin large enough to override President Bush’s promised veto of the nearly $300 billion measure.
“The bipartisan show of support came after intense lobbying by a coalition that included farm groups, anti-hunger advocates, environmental organizations and the biofuels industry. While continuing traditional farm subsidy programs, the bill increases spending on nutrition programs such as food stamps by $10.4 billion.
“Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer released a statement saying the vote ‘sends the wrong message to the rest of the country who are not experiencing the boom of the agriculture sector,’ and, ‘This bill is loaded with taxpayer funded pet projects at a time when Americans are struggling to buy groceries and afford gas to get to work.’”
Posted by Keith Good • May, 15, 2008 • 4:42 am Congressional Quarterly reported yesterday that, “Despite some last minute budgeting complications, the conference report on a massive new five-year farm bill will be filed Tuesday, setting up votes as early as Wednesday in both chambers.”
The CQ article explained that, “After almost a year and a half of negotiations, Agriculture Committee members agreed to impose some new limits on crop subsidies that they hoped would win votes and satisfy the White House. The most dramatic changes are meant to prevent wealthy farmers from collecting government dollars. People with more than $500,000 in non-farm related income would not be able to collect any subsidies, while those making more than $750,000 in farm-related income would no longer be eligible for direct payments, subsidies that farmers get no matter what.”
Posted by Keith Good • May, 14, 2008 • 4:36 am Farm Bill
Jim Snyder reported yesterday at The Hill Online that, “The long-overdue farm bill has set up a crucial election-year face-off that will have consequences for farm-state members up for reelection, and has kept busy an army of lobbyists who represent everything from chick pea growers to ethanol refiners.
“After bill negotiators announced the outlines of an agreement last week, the Bush administration vowed to veto it.
“The measure is scheduled for a floor vote in the House as early as Wednesday, although as of press time the bill had yet to be officially filed and lobbyists said a vote could slip to Thursday or later.”
Posted by Keith Good • May, 13, 2008 • 4:59 am Farm Bill
Dan Looker reported on Friday (“No doubts left on farm bill veto plans”) at AgricultureOnline that “Calling Congress’ new farm bill too expensive, trade distorting and lacking any real reform, Agriculture Secretary Ed Schafer repeated his prediction that President George W. Bush will veto the farm bill when it arrives on his desk.
“‘I have visited face to face with the President. He was very clear and very direct. He will veto this bill when he gets it,’ Schafer told reporters Friday.
“Schafer said that the bill increases subsidies at a time of record farm income, will use more tax revenue at a time of tight budgets and failed to make overseas emergency food aid more efficient by refusing to adopt an Administration proposal [pages 81-82] to allow local food purchases of up to 25% of food aid.”
(A complete transcript and audio replay of Sec. Schafer’s remarks from Friday has been posted at the USDA Online, and a FarmPolicy.com audio podcast summary of Friday’s news briefing, which also included perspective from Dep. Sec. Chuck Conner, is available here (MP3-10:37)).
Posted by Keith Good • May, 12, 2008 • 5:09 am 
Site Feed
Podcast
Email Updates