Farm Bill Forum At National Pheasant Fest
It was plenty cold this morning in St Paul, but that didn’t keep an over-flow crowd from showing up at the Farm Bill Forum at National Pheasant Fest. Provisions in the bill will have a direct affect on how many of the people in the audience manage their land, and on their pocketbooks. They also care about conserving and protecting wildlife habitat, it’s no accident that the two provisions of the Farm Bill expected to be talked about today have to do with conservation, and with policies towards bio-fuels, especially ethanol.
The new Farm Bill has been passed by both the House and Senate, what remains is to get the two versions reconciled and the final bill voted on. Members of the panel, therefore, represented the House of Representatives, the Senate, and the administration. Minnesota Senator Amy Klobuchar, a member of the Senate Agriculture Committee, was in the audience.
The members of the panel held a brief huddle before sitting down, no doubt engaging in the usual veiled threats and hints of blackmail that traditionally accompany this type of event:
The panelists then sat. Dave Nomsen (left), Pheasants Forever VP of government and Chuck Conners (right), Acting Secretary of Agriculture at one table:
Senator Tom Harkin (left), Chair of the Senate Agriculture, Nutrition and Forestry, and Representative Collin Peterson, (right), chair of the House Agriculture Committee at the other:
They then got down to the topic at hand. Everyone gave a few opening remarks, starting with Secretary Conner, who congratulated Pheasants Forever on twenty-five good years, then thanked Rep Peterson, and Senators Harkin and Klobuchar for their work on the bill (assume from here on that everyone started their remarks with a round of congratulations and thank-you’s.) Conner added that he’d worked on five previous farm bills, thought this one could be the best.
Senator Harkin expressed concern that Conservation Reserve Program Land (CRP) was being lost to market demand for corn and wheat. he put in a plug for expanding the Conservation Security Program, changing the rules over CRP to not allow land in the program to expire in five years, and took a shot at the administration for using accounting gimmicks to puff up its numbers on proposed conservation spending.
Collin Peterson stressed that the bill needs to be passed by March 15 in order to avoid current programs expiring, and emphasizing his wish to avoid a Presidential veto. He said that the main disagreement is over amount of spending, with both the Senate and House at higher numbers than the White House. The range is 8.5 to 12 billion or so, a small number in the context of the entire federal budget.
Dave Nomsen the took over as panel moderator. He expressed his belief that the overall Farm Bill was very good, differences were minor, and Congress should get on with passing it.
Chuck Conner then re-iterated that the CRP and CSP programs couldn’t compete with what farmers can make planting on good farm land, that the programs need to more and more be targeted at the right type of land.
There was supposed to be a question and answer period after the Forum discussion, but they ran over-time and cut the questions short. Which turned out to be OK because they spent the last twenty minutes on the topic I would have asked about if I could, whether or not there was going to be money available for more research into alternatives to corn for then production of ethanol.
Turns out the topic was right near the top of their list. Harkin, Peterson, and Conner all talked extensively, and what emerged was the Bill takes a two-pronged approach, with money available for both growers of alternate bio-fuel crops, such as switchgrass, and builders of processing plants. The caveat is that both pieces need to be in place, manufacturer and supplier, before funding becomes available. Plus farmers would be working on CRP land, so the crops would have to be managed for the benefit of wildlife. Collin Peterson emphisized, and Harkin agreed, that more research needs to be done, and that it would be about five years before they expected ethanol to be made from the cellulose of a plant like switch-grass.
They did have time for one question, a reporter from Grand Forks asked if the process of setting up a conference committee and making a deal would take too much time. Everyone expressed their confidence that would not be a problem and that the bill absolutely had to be passed by both the House and Senate no later than March 15th.
All in all, it was an informative session, and good to know that government can still function in a way that gets people involved and keeps them informed as to what’s going on.
Posted on 20th January 2008
Under: National Pheasant fest, alternative fuels, conservation, politics | 1 Comment »














