Capital Press Editorial: Farm bill must include specialty crop growers

What a difference a day makes. One day, Republicans are in charge of both houses of Congress. The next day, the Demo-crats are. With it, discussion of a new farm bill has changed course, too.

The 2002 Farm Bill, the central piece of legislation that drives many of the programs administered by the U.S. Department of Agriculture, will expire in 2007.

Whether they're Democrats or Republicans, Western farmers and ranchers will likely see that the changing of the guard in Washington, D.C., will mean even bigger changes in plans for the next farm bill.

Before the election, Republicans, including Agriculture Secretary Mike Johanns, had been headed for a wholesale rewrite of the bill. At the heart of their effort were concerns about farm subsidies and how they would factor into World Trade Organization talks on agricultural trade.

With the collapse of those talks, key Democratic members of Congress are now looking for a new farm bill that will much more closely resemble the current bill.

That in itself will expedite passage of a new farm bill.

"I see no reason we can't have the farm bill done by summer. Maybe before the August break," Sen. Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, the incoming chairman of the Senate Agriculture Committee, told National Correspondent Jerry Hagstrom late last week. Harkin said he wants the new bill to contain many of the same programs that are in the 2002 bill.

Rep. Collin Peterson, D-Minn., the incoming chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, mirrored Harkin's assessment.

He told Hagstrom that Congress could write a five-year farm bill and leave the subsidies intact because he believes the WTO's Doha talks are dead for at least five years, the life-span of a new farm bill.

Sen. Saxby Chambliss, R-Ga. and outgoing Senate Agriculture Committee chairman, said he still believes the farm bill should be changed so U.S. programs comply with World Trade Organization rulings, but his viewpoint is now in the minority.

Peterson and Harkin told Capital Press the 2007 farm bill "will look very much like the current farm bill," but there would be enough changes so the 2007 bill will be considered a "new" farm bill.

Peterson said the bill will address issues raised by Midwest corn and soybean growers and include a weather-related disaster program and a bigger energy title.

Peterson recently visited Washington state to talk with farmers who raise specialty crops. They echoed the sentiments of many West Coast farmers when they told him they felt largely ignored in the current farm bill. Though he represents a state that relies on program crops such as corn and soybeans, Peterson told them he has an open mind.

"We understand that if specialty crop groups come in with proposals that show they can enhance agriculture, then we're for it," he told the Capital Press. "But funding won't be based on volume. It will be that we need programs that make sense."

Of course, "make sense" is a variable term in Congress, but with the new leadership going on the record as supporting a variation of the current farm bill, the agriculture industry must press the members of their local congressional delegation to make sure any changes will be improvements.

One much-needed improvement is inclusion of provisions that address the concerns of specialty crop producers, which are ignored under the current farm bill.