White House says farm bill cost still too high

AP on Yahoo ^ | 5/6/08 | Mary Clare Jalonick - ap

[NormsRevenge]

WASHINGTON - The White House told members of Congress on Tuesday that the cost of the five-year farm bill is still too high, saying negotiators are using budget gimmicks to hide the real expense.

The cost of the almost $300 billion bill and the amount of subsidies directed toward wealthy farmers remain the major sticking points between the White House and both Democratic and GOP negotiators. President Bush has threatened to veto the legislation.

Negotiators are weighing reports from congressional budget experts on what the bill would cost under several scenarios. They are now considering eliminating some government payments to those who make more than $750,000 in farm income annually, according to two people familiar with the negotiations who requested anonymity because they are not authorized to speak publicly.

That would be closer to the White House's proposal on limiting the subsidies. The Bush administration originally proposed a cap for those who make more than $200,000 in average annual farm income, but has signaled that it could accept a limit of $500,000.

Negotiators last week proposed eliminating some subsidies for all of those who make more than $950,000 in farm income, a proposal that was swiftly rejected by the White House.

Georgia Sen. Saxby Chambliss, a Republican, said he heard from the White House on Tuesday with the complaint that the bill was still too costly.

Negotiators reached an agreement last month on how to pay for $10 billion over 10 years in extra spending for the massive bill, but the White House is now arguing that agreement would result in an even higher cost, Chambliss said.

White House spokesman Scott Stanzel said the spending argument was not new.

"For quite some time, we've said that the accounting gimmicks and budget tricks greatly inflate the overall cost of the bill," he said.

Chambliss said he would work to override the bill if the White House vetoes it. The Georgia senator has long been a proponent of higher subsidies as Southern cotton and rice farms cost more to operate.

"We've known all along we'd have to make some changes and we've made significant changes," he said.

North Dakota Sen. Kent Conrad said the White House is making up its own rules, and negotiators will continue to rely on congressional budget scores. He said a veto override would be "a tough mountain to climb."

Negotiators said they would continue discussions with the White House on Wednesday and strive to find ways to save money.

Two-thirds of the bill would pay for food stamps, and negotiators have allocated more than $10 billion in extra dollars for nutrition programs. The legislation would also increase grants to fruit and vegetable farmers and boost conservation programs that are designed to protect the land.

[Cold Heart]

Must have more ethanol, need ethanol/s

[doc1019]

I was raised on a farm many years before subsidies were even a twinkle in any politician’s eye. Back in the day, either a farm made it or it didn’t, just like any other business. Why, oh, why do we need farm subsidies today? Do away with them and let farmers make a living like the rest of us.

Flame away. ;-)

[NormsRevenge]

The closest we ever had to subsidies was farm or land conservation banks,, they paid ya to leave acreage fallow. I remember a few plots in our area that would sit for a year or two or more, a lot of that is now developed. I still have a farmer or two left back home in the family,, not like it used to be tho.

Participaion in a land bank was voluntary and as you mentioned, more money could likely have been made off of it by planting some sort of crop but laying fallow also allowed the soil to recharge a bit. Back then, this was in the 50s and 60s, soil conservation was a big thing for farmers, and still is.

It made for some good fowl and game hunting especially with wooded areas around.

[clodkicker]

Spending on nutrition programs would total about 400 billion over 10 years, accounting for about 70% of the total cost of the farm bill. Direct payments to farmers will total about 5 billion per year.