Aug 6, 2012
Editorial: Pushing the farm bill

The U.S. Senate passed its version of the 2012 Farm Bill in late June. The agriculture committee of the U.S. House of Representatives passed its own version a few weeks later. As of press time, all concerned were waiting for the full House to vote it up or down.

Sen. Debbie Stabenow, D-Mich., talked about the farm bill and other issues July 9, during a visit to the orchard of Jim May in Sparta, Mich. Chairwoman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, Stabenow steered passage of the Senate’s version of the 2012 Farm Bill.

Stabenow also discussed the damage to Michigan fruit crops this spring, when an abnormally warm March followed by a series of spring freezes killed a huge amount of fruit, especially cherries and apples. Michigan might get 15 percent of its average apple crop and 7 percent of its average tart cherry crop, according to industry estimates.

The state government has offered disaster assistance to growers in the form of low-interest loans. So has the federal government. In addition, the Senate’s 2012 Farm Bill has other things to offer growers who have lost fruit, Stabenow said – and not just in Michigan.

The Senate moved away from traditional crop subsidies in its new bill, cutting four programs and redirecting much of that money toward crop insurance, Stabenow said.

“We believe that all farmers, regardless of whether they’re growing corn or cherries or grapes or apples, need to have access to affordable and effective crop insurance,” said Joe Shultz, an economist who works with Stabenow.

The Senate bill addresses crop insurance in three key ways. First, it gives USDA’s Risk Management Agency (RMA) the authority to expand and improve current crop insurance programs. Sweet cherries, for example, are only insured in two Michigan counties. There’s a crop insurance program for apples, but in Shultz’s opinion, producers are probably paying too much for what they’re getting. RMA should have the authority to work through such coverage problems and expand or improve access if need be, he said.

The second priority is developing new policies for crops that aren’t covered by insurance.

“How do we speed up that process of developing new policies so folks like tart cherry growers, who don’t have any policy at all, now have the opportunity to go and buy crop insurance?” Shultz said.

An incentive program would make it possible for state associations or grower groups to develop their own crop insurance policies and bring them back to USDA for approval. That would allow for the creation of guidelines tailored to producers – much faster than waiting for USDA to develop policies on its own, he said.

Thirdly, the Senate bill would allow producers without access to crop insurance to retroactively purchase 65 percent “buy-up” coverage for 2012 losses, under the Noninsured Crop Disaster Assistance Program, according to Stabenow.

Of course, the Senate provisions have to become law for any of that to happen. If passed, the House bill would be different from the Senate version, but those differences can be worked out when the two chambers put their bills together in conference committee, Stabenow said. It’s up to President Obama to sign the finished bill.

The current farm bill expires Sept. 30.

By Matt Milkovich, Managing Editor




Current Issue

On-farm AI: Water, farm, labor research guide decisions

Data collection tool expands farm management

Carmel Valley winegrapes: Parsonage Village Vineyard

IFTA Yakima Valley tour provides orchard insights

IFTA recognizes tree fruit honorees

Pennsylvania recognizes fruit industry professionals

Fresh Views 40 Under 40

see all current issue »

Be sure to check out our other specialty agriculture brands

produceprocessingsm Organic Grower