'Farm Bill Deal Remains Elusive After Weekend Negotiations'
(CQ Today) -- A long weekend of negotiations left House and Senate lawmakers still searching Tuesday for a deal on a new five-year farm bill. Negotiators had hoped to have the final version of the measure (HR 2419) pretty much wrapped up by Feb. 17, but according to staff members from the House and Senate Agriculture committees, members are still at odds on several points, with no predictions as to when an agreement is likely to emerge. At issue is how much Congress should authorize for farm subsidies, nutrition supports, conservation initiatives and other Agriculture Department programs the farm bill covers. The Bush administration has said that both the House-passed version of the bill and the Senate’s were too expensive; both drew veto threats. Last week, the House announced a new version of the bill that would require only about $6 billion in spending above the baseline over 10 years. But much of that savings came at the expense of crop subsidies, and agriculture groups balked at the number. So farm-state senators countered the House proposal with a 10-year bill that would cost about $12.3 billion over baseline. The administration rejected that proposal over the weekend. A major sticking point — for the White House and the House alike — is a $5 billion agriculture disaster fund that would help farmers through drought, flood and fire. The trust fund, which was in the Senate bill but not the House version, accounts for the dramatic differences in spending between the House and Senate proposals.
(CQ Today) -- A long weekend of negotiations left House and Senate lawmakers still searching Tuesday for a deal on a new five-year farm bill. Negotiators had hoped to have the final version of the measure (HR 2419) pretty much wrapped up by Feb. 17, but according to staff members from the House and Senate Agriculture committees, members are still at odds on several points, with no predictions as to when an agreement is likely to emerge. At issue is how much Congress should authorize for farm subsidies, nutrition supports, conservation initiatives and other Agriculture Department programs the farm bill covers. The Bush administration has said that both the House-passed version of the bill and the Senate’s were too expensive; both drew veto threats. Last week, the House announced a new version of the bill that would require only about $6 billion in spending above the baseline over 10 years. But much of that savings came at the expense of crop subsidies, and agriculture groups balked at the number. So farm-state senators countered the House proposal with a 10-year bill that would cost about $12.3 billion over baseline. The administration rejected that proposal over the weekend. A major sticking point — for the White House and the House alike — is a $5 billion agriculture disaster fund that would help farmers through drought, flood and fire. The trust fund, which was in the Senate bill but not the House version, accounts for the dramatic differences in spending between the House and Senate proposals.
