Farm groups can feel some satisfaction that this farm bill got by the House. Few others, however, are pleased. The bill could have won with broad bipartisan support but in the end just 19 Republicans joined in passing the bill because of that controversial tax measure.

People wanting more payment reforms, including the Bush administration, have already declared that the U.S. Senate now becomes the objection of their affection.

House Democrats will be able to trumpet that they passed a farm bill. Yet, they lost bipartisanship on the Agriculture Committee in one giant fatal swoop. House Democrats, while perhaps picking up some agricultural supporters, also somewhat disenfranchised some outside organizations who thought their issues would be given more respect under Democratic leadership.

House Agriculture Committee Ranking Member Bob Goodlatte, R-Va., made an interesting point criticizing the bill, saying it could have passed with 100 more votes, clearly veto-proof.

"Instead, the farm bill is limping out of the House with one of the smallest majorities that anyone can remember, encumbered by a tax increase that wasn't necessary. It didn't have to be this way," Goodlatte said.

The one point of order there is that the Bush administration didn't definitively declare that there would be any veto until the tax measure was added.

As we look to the Senate, Agriculture Committee Chairman Tom Harkin, D-Iowa, will find himself battling much of his own committee, who will back a traditional farm bill that doesn't rock any boats in commodity country. Yet, the Republicans, too, aren't going to support a tax increase. Harkin also will be trying to salvage the Conservation Security Program, which the House Agriculture Committee effectively junked.

Who can Harkin turn to? One option is the Bush administration and Secretary of Agriculture Mike Johanns. The USDA bill saves and expands CSP and offers a tighter payment limit that is more attractive to many senators than the House version. Throughout the past several months, Harkin and Johanns have sounded closer to one another on most farm-bill issues, though they have their disagreements about the virtues of sending $5.1 billion a year in direct payments to farmers.

So it wouldn't be surprising to see a Senate bill that comes out looking a lot closer to the administration's plan than the House.

Some comments on the House farm bill in the e-mail box.

American Farm Bureau President Bob Stallman said the House bill strikes a reasonable balance in allocating benefits among the nation's farming and ranching families who grow a safe and secure supply of food and fiber for America and the world. Stallman said House Ag Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., did an outstanding job as he walked a tightrope in developing this legislation in the House Agriculture Committee.

National Farmers Union President Tom Buis called the measurea good bill - saying it protects the safety net for farmers and ranchers while making significant reforms. Buis says the bill protects the safety net for farmers and ranchers while making significant reforms. Buis also points out members of Congress had todecide to either close a tax loophole enjoyed by foreign corporationsavoiding paying American taxes or feed our nation's hungry children. Buis says that was - a no-brainer.

It should be noted here that Rep. Peterson even spoke on the House floor on how unusual it is that Farm Bureau and Farmers Union both backed this bill.

Ken Cook, president of the Environmental Working Group, stated this House farm bill will be remembered as a missed opportunity for reform of federal farm policies that are broken at their core. It also represents a failure of House leadership to serve the broader needs of the nation, instead of taking their cues at every turn from the farm subsidy lobby. This bill will not bear the scrutiny of passing time. We¹re talking about mid-August, at the latest.

National Corn Growers Association President Ken McCauley, while crediting the House for defending the safety net and moving the process forward, said the corn growers are looking ahead to the Senatedebate - where NCGA is excited about the Farm Safety Net Improvement Act of 2007 introduced by Democrats Dick Durbin of Illinois and Sherrod Brown of Ohio.

National Cattlemen's Beef Association gave the bill a mixed review. There were improvements for cattlemen - such as increased funding for conservation programs and some modest fixes to the mandatory country-of-origin labeling law - but applying the adjusted gross income cap and tighter payment limitations for conservation makes many ranchers and feeders ineligible for conservation programs.

Democrats who voted no on the bill: Harry Mitchell, Ariz., Pete Stark, Calif., Henry Waxman, Calif., Melissa Bean, Ill., Michael Capuano, Mass., John Tierney, Mass., Earl Blumenauer, Ore., Jim Cooper, Tenn., Jim Moran, Va., Brian Baird, Wash., Jay Inslee, Wash., Jim McDermott, Wash., Adam Smith, Wash., and Ron Kind., Wis.

Republicans who voted yes on the bill: Vern Buchanan, Fla., Tim Johnson, Ill., Mark Souder, Ind., Ed Whitfield, Ky., Wayne Gilchrest, Md., Candace Miller, Mich., Jo Ann Emerson, Mo., Sam Graves, Mo., Kenny Hulshof, Mo., Denny Rehberg, Mont., Jeff Fortenberry, Neb., Adrian Smith, Neb., Heather Wilson, NM., John McHugh, N.Y., Robin Hayes, N.C., Walter Jones, N.C., and Randy Forbes, Va.,