Copyright 2001 Globe Newspaper Company  
The Boston Globe
May 22, 2001, Tuesday ,THIRD EDITION
SECTION: NATIONAL/FOREIGN; Pg. A2

LENGTH: 1024 words

HEADLINE: DOWN ON THE FARM, DISCONTENT OVER SUBSIDIES

BYLINE: By Sue Kirchhoff, Globe Staff

BODY:
POTLATCH, Idaho - Joe Anderson keeps one eye on the weather and the other on Washington, D.C., during these dawn-to-dusk days seeding wheat, bluegrass, and barley on 3,400 acres in Idaho's fertile Palouse region.

On a nearby field, a tractor puts down fertilizer and pulls up a cloud of deep, brown dust. The steady hum of activity, however, is laced with an undercurrent of anxiety. Energy and fertilizer costs are soaring. Grain prices have been so low that a quarter of Anderson's gross last year came from the federal government, not the market. Still, he lost money.

   "It's never enough, but we're thankful for what we can get" in federal aid, said Anderson, 58, on his spread just outside Potlatch, a quick blink of buildings along Highway 6. He rents most of the land he farms, and he owns about 1,000 acres on a former timber tract, part of it bought by his great-grandfather.

"We've seen what kind of troubles we can get in being so terribly dependent on [few suppliers] for energy. Maybe it's better to keep more of us in business," he said.

Idaho is hardly an isolated case as American agriculture enters its fourth season of recession. The federal government has kept growers afloat, providing a record $22 billion in aid last year alone. Congress this month approved a budget allowing an extra $5.5 billion this summer, and nearly $75 billion over the next decade as part of a new law to replace 1996 legislation that was supposed to have weaned growers from government payments.

As the price tag rises, and the House rushes to write a new farm law, specialists are asking what taxpayers have bought. Critics say current policies mainly benefit large farmers in the Midwest and South, inflate land prices, and encourage cropping practices that harm the environment.

New England is far from a casual observer. Growers of specialty crops, like cranberries and apples, who received emergency aid last year have begun lobbying for a bigger, permanent share of federal subsidies. Hit by rising imports and low prices, many want aid for marketing and conservation of environmentally sensitive land.

"The farm bill has always dealt with the major commodities of corn, cotton, soybeans, and wheat. The programs we were using were the scraps," said Jeff LaFleur, executive director of the Cape Cod Cranberry Growers Association. "It is time for the farm bill to service all of America."

Also at stake is the Northeast dairy compact, which guarantees a minimum price for milk and will expire in September unless Congress extends it. Producers in Idaho, one of the fastest-growing dairy states in the country, want to kill the Northeast agreement. And environmental groups are pushing for up to $2 billion a year to pay farmers for improved conservation, including those in New England.

US Agriculture Secretary Ann Veneman said in a recent speech that the federal government needed to provide a safety net, but she made it clear that the present system was unsustainable.

"Agriculture policy must be broader than simply writing checks when farm prices and incomes are weak," she said. Veneman questioned whether Washington should continue to provide subsidies, regardless of how large a farm is or how much its owner earns. About 90 percent of all production comes from fewer than 20 percent of farms, with incomes above $100,000. Some want to target aid to smaller producers.

The 1996 law was written at a time of robust prices - and implemented as prices and export markets tanked. It was supposed to deregulate farming: providing set, declining subsidies while ending controls on how much farmers produce. Instead, government aid made up two-thirds of income for grain farmers last year.

Many lawmakers want to replace the 1996 law with a system of subsidies that would kick in when prices are low. That may not be much cheaper. And Congress is unlikely to stop there. Cattle ranchers, for example, are asking for $2 billion a year to offset the costs of complying with environmental programs.

"We're not cushioning downward movement, we're holding things higher than in a prosperous period" during the early 1990s, said David Orden, a professor at Virginia Polytechnic Institute. Orden has suggested imposing time limits on farm aid, similar to those in federal welfare programs.

He is not the first to be frustrated by the agriculture lobby, one of the capital's most effective, which has clout that extends far beyond the 2 million Americans who live on farms. For example, farm state senators were instrumental in whittling down President Bush's proposed $1.6 trillion tax cut, worried that a tax reduction of that size would leave less funding for farm subsidies.

Agriculture is a factor as the White House recruits Republican candidates for 2002, hoping to win firmer control of the Senate, which is split 50-50 between the Democrats and the GOP. Rural states like South Dakota and Montana are among the places where Republicans have a solid shot at winning.

The issue also looms large as Bush tries to gain special trade negotiating authority from Congress. More than a third of US crops are exported.

"One of our goals in any of our pro-trade efforts is making people understand the benefits of international trade," said John Schachter of the Businesss Roundtable.

Idaho typifies the intense and sometimes contradictory politics of agriculture. The state's all-Republican delegation is one of the most fiscally conservative in Congress, but it supports increased farm aid.

Idaho license plates boast of "Famous Potatoes" - even as Washington pays farmers to bury tons of surplus spuds now piled in huge, rotting mounds in the state.

"I expect there will be a drive to see if additional resources can be found," said Republican Senator Mike Crapo, who says Congress nonetheless should try to stay within its $80 billion budget limit.

Anderson is in the crosshairs of the debate as he manages the planting, juryrigging a spare part for a balky truck. Targeting or reducing aid could hurt his family farm.

"We wouldn't last a year without it," he said.

GRAPHIC: PHOTO, A worker cleaning picked cranberries at a farm in Carver. Growers of cranberries, who received emergency aid last year, are lobbying for a bigger, permanent share of federal subsidies. / GLOBE FILE PHOTO / WENDY MAEDA

LOAD-DATE: May 22, 2001