Ag Policy Blog
Chris Clayton DTN Ag Policy Editor

Friday 01/03/14

Cantor Sees Farm Bill, WRDA on Early House Agenda

House Majority Leader Eric Cantor laid out in a memo Friday to House Republicans his proposed legislative agenda as the House returns to session on Tuesday.

The Virginia Republican's agenda starts out with another attempt to deal with Obamacare, mainly by making sure information is secure and protected from security breaches. Cantor indicated there will likely be more hearings on the healthcare law.

Cantor also indicated he expects work to continue toward agreements with the Senate on both the farm bill and the Water Resources Development Act. Both pieces of legislation are in the midst of conference talks. "These two conference reports represent new ideas on how government programs should work and as soon as they are ready for consideration, I expect to schedule these in the House," Cantor stated.

Cantor's main work on the farm bill thus far has been to hit "the pause button" while helping split the legislation into two pieces last summer.

Cantor also indicated the House could attempt to reform the way EPA manages the Comprehensive Environmental Response Compensation and Liability Act, or CERCLA. In general, the legislation is more commonly known as the "Superfund" used for cleaning up major environmental contamination. Cantor praised legislation that "reduces red tap inhibiting job creation and keeps our environment healthy."

With no specifics, Cantor also indicated legislation could come forward in the next few months on trade and immigration.

Follow me on Twitter @ChrisClaytonDTN.

Posted at 2:03PM CST 01/03/14 by Chris Clayton
Comments (15)
Good Grief Wes.
Posted by melvin meister at 6:24AM CST 01/04/14
How many decades have we had of politicians targeting the largest and wealthiest farmers in the country with cash and insurance benefits of the greatest value. These mindless government farm programs have been a major factor in depopulating rural America of smaller farmers. In order to level the playing field for all farm businesses, all farmers are equally deserving of government benefits of comparable value. It is time for politicians to stop harming smaller farmers by depriving them of the government benefits they award the wealthiest and most profitable farms. Stop taking money from the taxpayer and better yet give all farmers the same equal benefit of $0. Removing masses of smaller farmers from rural America and replacing them with just a few monster farm operations is not a step in food security for the nation. Politicians pontificate how government farm programs are all about food security for the nation, but choose to ignore those financially harmed by this mindless government targeting of the largest benefits to the wealthiest and most profitable.
Posted by W Kuster at 8:22PM CST 01/05/14
Wes;please read some farm bill history and you will find that most farmer removal was caused by BAD REPUBLICAN FARM BILLS .Ezra Taft Bensons Sliding Scale Of Parity 1952 equals .85 cent corn in 1955 Clayton Yeuters Market clearing Loan Prices at $1.67 for corn Fredom to Farm 1995 =$1.25 corn and the most costly Farm Bill ever .RFS has been the only program that gave the farmer any properity in my 65 years as a farmer and in retirement.STOP trying to comment on ag policy as you only repeat Right Wing talking points.I am 79 years old and have lived it all so I know it first hand.
Posted by melvin meister at 9:53PM CST 01/05/14
Wes - insane government spending by both parties is nothing new nor is government programs doing the exact opposite of what politicians promise and claim. To think government programs ever had anything to do with saving family farms is preposterous. See Farm Bill Recipe For Financial Ruin? By: Mike Lavender, Ag Reform Coordinator FRIDAY, JANUARY 3, 2014 As the Wall Street Journal (subscription required) noted this week (Jan. 2), negotiators cooking up a new farm bill may well blend together a mix of commodity and crop insurance subsidies that would leave taxpayers with a bad taste in their mouths. By including the most costly components of the farm bills that passed the House and Senate, the bill expected to emerge this month from a House-Senate conference committee could cost taxpayers even more than current farm programs � and ignite a trade war to boot. Here�s one recipe for financial ruin: One Scoop of Guaranteed Prices � Through its proposed Price Loss Coverage (PLC) program, the House bill seeks to lock in today�s record prices for crops such as corn and cotton in the form of statutory price guarantees. If prices fall even modestly, the cost of the program could balloon to nearly $7 billion a year � or $5 billion more a year than advertised. A Second Scoop of Shallow Loss Coverage � The Senate bill includes a new program to cover losses in revenue, called Average Revenue Coverage (ARC). Though forecast to cost about $3 billion a year, experts warn that the cost could exceed $7 billion if crop prices drop back close to their historic averages. Three Cups of Crop Insurance � Both bills increase unlimited crop insurance subsidies in three ways: by increasing coverage levels to 90 percent and by creating special, super-charged crop insurance programs for cotton and peanuts. In combination, the cost of crop insurance could total more than $10 billion a year. At time when most of us are going on a diet, farm bill negotiators could well be feasting at the federal trough. Beefing up commodity and crop insurance subsidies could eliminate most of the savings from the elimination of the long-discredited �direct� payments program. As EWG�s Scott Faber told the Wall Street Journal, Congress could wind up �replacing a discredited subsidy with a soon-to-be discredited subsidy.� And expanding commodity and crop insurance won�t only bloat our fiscal waistline. Larding up these programs might also run afoul of international trade agreements, which place a $19.1 billion annual limit on �trade-distorting� subsidies. With the cost of these trade distorting or �amber box� subsidies potentially topping $20 billion a year, the World Trade Organization may no longer consider U.S. crop insurance subsidies to be de minimis, inviting a legal challenge from our trading partners. That should make some policymakers � and business leaders � sick to their stomach.
Posted by W Kuster at 10:25PM CST 01/05/14
Do you live in Colorado, Wes? Move to a lower elevation. Will not be so smokey. Please Melvin. Do not assume Wes is a Republican. For you to state farmer removal is from bad Republican Food Bills is as goofy as most of what Wes has to contribute.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 6:42AM CST 01/06/14
�When the debate is lost, slander becomes the tool of the loser.� � Socrates
Posted by W Kuster at 7:36AM CST 01/06/14
And when one finds oneself in a deep hole, Quit digging. Unknown.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 5:35PM CST 01/06/14
Kester Calling an idiot an idiot is not slander if it is true.
Posted by CRAIG MOORE at 9:18AM CST 01/07/14
Thanks for confirming I am on target. Hogs of full feed do not want the rations reduced.
Posted by W Kuster at 10:31AM CST 01/08/14
Kester Thanks for the morning humor and for confirming my statement.
Posted by CRAIG MOORE at 8:16AM CST 01/09/14
Do any of you guys and gal proof read your comments. REALLY!
Posted by Raymond Simpkins at 10:13AM CST 01/09/14
My apologies for typo error and not proofreading. Should read "Thanks for confirming I am on target. Hogs on full feed do not want the rations reduced."
Posted by W Kuster at 1:05PM CST 01/09/14
About 1/2 of the country thinks the government owes them living costs, healthcare, retirement, and cellphones. Many farmers thinks the government should guarantee their crop investments as well as profits as well as pay for most of the costs of paying for these guarantees. Anyone who saves for their retirement is a villain and and those who pay taxes are stupid. Those who pay a lot of taxes are evil along with those who create jobs are particularly evil. How is government dependency a path to a prosperous future? Oh I forgot, being prosperous is evil.
Posted by W Kuster at 7:09AM CST 01/10/14
Sorry - should be "farmers think"
Posted by W Kuster at 5:48PM CST 01/11/14
Good grief Kuster, 7 of the 14 comments have your name at the bottom. Do you not feel just a little bit guilty? Probably not.
Posted by Bonnie Dukowitz at 7:19PM CST 01/12/14
Post a Blog Comment:
Your Comment:
DTN reserves the right to delete comments posted to any of our blogs and forums, for reasons including profanity, libel, irrelevant personal attacks and advertisements.
Blog Home Pages
February  2016
   1 2 3 4 5 6
7 8 9 10 11 12 13
14 15 16 17 18 19 20
21 22 23 24 25 26 27
28 29               
Subscribe to Ag Policy Blog RSS
Recent Blog Posts
  • Supreme Court Halts EPA Climate Regulations on Power Plants
  • President Obama Gears up for a Final Budget to Nowhere
  • AFBF Poll: 'Chesapeake Landowners Want Local Control'
  • On Cottonseed, Oilseed and What the Farm Bill Says
  • Cruz, Clinton Win Iowa Caucuses
  • Cruz Wins Iowa GOP Caucus
  • Cottonseed Farm Program Could Be Costly
  • Ag Action in the Iowa Caucuses
  • Senators Push for DOJ Investigation on WOTUS Rule
  • Public Transparency is Increasingly Critical for Food and Agriculture
  • GOP Candidates Touch on Ag, Farm Issues in Debate
  • Ag Groups React to SOTU on Trade, Climate
  • Vilsack Talks About Cotton, Biotech Labels
  • Keystone XL Lawsuits Further Complicate TPP Politics
  • In Defense of New Dietary Guidelines
  • A Cruz Conversion on the RFS?
  • TPP Unlikely to Be Approved Before End of Obama's Term
  • DTN's Annual 2016 Policy Outlook
  • 2017 Now Target for Broader Tax Relief
  • A Long COOL Ride is Ending