Copyright 2002 Star Tribune Star Tribune
(Minneapolis, MN)
March 31, 2002, Sunday, Metro Edition
SECTION: NEWS; Pg. 22A
LENGTH:
567 words
HEADLINE:Farm
bill; Senate version has better ideas
BODY: Much as Minnesota farmers and farm lenders
need the certainty that a new federal farm bill will bring,
it's hard to be enthusiastic about the two bills that await reconciliation when
Congress returns from its Easter recess.
Both the House and the Senate have passed
farm bills that revert to policies Congress supposedly
abandoned six years ago. Instead of weaning agriculture from handouts and
letting market forces work, both bills do the opposite. They would raise
commodity subsidies to new heights, thereby encouraging overproduction and
depressing prices. They would reward megafarms, while doing comparatively little
for the small family farms that politicians talk about saving.
That said, the Senate bill takes several
small steps in a better direction _ in part due to the efforts of Minnesota
Sens. Paul Wellstone and Mark Dayton. Senate conferees should stand their ground
on each front, for each embodies an idea that ought to catch on the next time
the nation overhauls its farm policies.
The Senate's cap on crop subsidies at
$275,000 per farm seems outrageously high _ until it is compared with the
House's $550,000 cap, and current law's limit of $460,000 per producer.
Congressional willingness to send big producers boxcars of cash explains why 10
percent of recipients get two-thirds of farm subsidy money _ and helps explain
why small farms are disappearing.
The goal of stabilizing family farm
income would be adequately served by a much lower per-farm payment cap than the
Senate would allow. There is no justification for a cap any higher.
The Senate bill also takes a
wise step toward land stewardship. Until now, federal policies have rewarded
farmers who take land out of production in the name of conservation. The Senate
bill would also send checks to farmers who employ environmentally sound
techniques on land that remains in production.
Though the Conservation Stewardship
Program starts tiny in the Senate bill, the concept has big potential. It would
promote soil conservation, air and water protection, and reduction in chemical
use. Unlike crop subsidies, it would help small farms stay small. It could even
be the successor to crop subsidies as the primary means by which government
assures the survival of American agriculture during lean market years.
Conservation Stewardship should be launched this year.
The Senate conferees should also dig in
on provisions pushed by Wellstone to restrict livestock ownership by large
meatpacking firms, and to require country-of-origin labeling of meat. The
meatpacker ownership restriction, widely supported by Minnesota's independent
livestock producers, bucks a trend toward consolidation of every aspect of meat
production in the hands of a few large corporations.
Commendable features aimed at helping
beginning farmers get a toehold in a tough industry are also in the Senate bill.
It will take extra effort to establish the next generation of farmers _ and that
effort is needed now. The average age of American farmers is 54.
These Senate provisions could serve as
markers toward a new way of supporting American agriculture, in a bill that
otherwise perpetuates old, self-defeating ag policies. The one Minnesotan on the
conference committee, Seventh District Rep. Collin Peterson, should help the
Senate prevail.
Document 3 of 305. 