- No mas: Principal bans Spanish language in intercom announcement
- Hacking software could put ‘zombie drone army’ in user’s hands
- Support for stricter gun laws drops: poll
- 10 whales dead, 41 others stranded in Everglades
- John Boehner faces bipartisan pressure to allow gay-rights vote
- Martin Bashir resigns from MSNBC over ‘ill-judged’ comments about Sarah Palin
- Rep. Duncan Hunter: While Obama prays for Iranian change, U.S. should ready its nukes
- Best company ever? Veteran Beer Co. exists to employ vets, provide quality beer
- Iran official: Sanctions ‘utterly failed’ to stop nuclear program
- ‘Black Santa’ display at IU sparks student outrage
Crop insurance juicy target in ‘fiscal cliff’ deal
WASHINGTON (AP) — Rural lawmakers worry that $9 billion in annual federal crop insurance subsidies are an easy target for spending cuts in a “fiscal cliff” deal so they’re shopping around for a late compromise on a farm bill to protect them.
The chairmen of the House and Senate Agriculture committees already were set to make a sizable contribution to deficit reduction through a new farm bill. There were $2.3 billion in annual cuts to other farm programs and food stamps in a Senate-passed version and $3.5 billion in annual cuts in a measure awaiting House action.
But they hit an impasse this past week while trying to merge the bills into a single package. It’s the same problem confronting President Barack Obama and House Speaker John Boehner, R-Ohio, who so far are unable to come up with an alternative to the broad wave of automatic tax increases and spending cuts that begin to hit in the new year.
While cutting food stamps and other farm programs, both the Senate and House agriculture bills preserve crop insurance subsidies that cover a big portion of farmers’ losses due to bad weather. Those subsidies buoyed a strong agricultural economy even through last summer’s scorching drought. Committee leaders from both parties say farmers consistently tell them crop insurance is the program they depend on most.
But both bills also create an insurance program that would give farmers additional protection against any kind of revenue losses, such as from a drop in commodity prices. The Senate bill’s version would cost almost $3 billion annually, with the House bill a little under $1 billion.
The concern about the fate of crop insurance stems from previous efforts by the Obama White House to target the program for cuts. Obama proposed cutting the subsidies by $760 million a year in his budget proposal last February. Conservatives long have eyed the program as a pot of money that could be used for other things.
Without giving details or numbers, Obama administration officials have made it clear in fiscal cliff negotiations that they see farm programs like crop insurance as a source for savings.
“Reforming farm subsidies, very important to do, lots of room to do sensible reforms in that context. And they can raise substantial amounts of money,” Treasury Secretary Tim Geithner said on CBS “Face the Nation.”
Agriculture Secretary Tom Vilsack warned the congressional committees this past week that, if they don’t strike a deal soon, the White House and Republicans working to avert the fiscal cliff may cut farm programs that lawmakers want to protect.
“Don’t let somebody else craft the farm legislation who may not fully understand all of the implications,” he said.
Sen. Debbie Stabenow, who leads the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry Committee, agreed.
“It’s one of the many reasons we need to get a five-year farm bill done so people who don’t support crop insurance don’t come back at it and try to cut it,” said Stabenow, D-Mich.
Farmers buy crop insurance to protect against weather-related losses such as drought or flooding. Farmers pay a percentage of the premium cost and the federal government covers the rest. Companies selling the insurance also get direct subsidies from the government.
Both the House and Senate made room for the new insurance program by eliminating a different type of subsidy called direct payments, in which farmers collect money from the government whether they farm or not and regardless of prices or crop yields. Cutting that program would save almost $5 billion annually and contribute to the overall savings in the bill.
By Tom Harris and Madhav Khandekar
Bad science puts rich nations on the hook for trillions in climate liabilities
- Angry NTSB ousts railroad union from N.Y. train crash site
- Hola: Boehner prepares to push amnesty bill through House
- Kill team: Obama war chiefs widen drone death zones
- Puerto Rico caravan honoring Paul Walker ends in 6 drunken-driving arrests, 72 speeding tickets
- Apple wins facial recognition patent for iPhone 6
- Xbox One, Playstation 4 games penalize users for cursing in their own homes
- First Dog Sunny knocks down Ashtyn Gardner; Michelle Obama yanks leash
- Inside China: Nuclear submarines capable of widespread attack on U.S.
- HURT: Postal Service misses address by a whole continent
- Allen West warns Obamas backdoor gun control is moving forward
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.
Wall Street news for retail investors who want to know what's going on.
Does it take over 25 years in public service to really know what goes on in Washington?
Despite cynicism about the law, it can provide you justice, protection, and ensure your rights.