Last month, the House of Representatives passed its version of the Farm Bill. This chart highlights how the House bill responds to priorities for the Northeast. It identifies some gaps between what’s proposed and what advocates are seeking for our region. The Northeast priorities are detailed in
The Northeast Farm Bill Agenda.
The chart is organized according to the three main priority areas in the Agenda. It is not an exhaustive list of all the bill’s provisions. Nor does it address some major reforms and other issues that many of us care about and have been working on such as commodity subsidies, payment limitations, competition, socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers, research and education.
|
|
I. Economic Development and Farm Viability |
|
Program |
The good
|
The gaps |
|
Value-Added Producer Grants |
Proposes $30
million annual mandatory spending for
Value-Added Producer Grants; includes a focus on small and
medium size farms. |
Still
insufficient funding level (half the current level) to meet
need. |
|
New
Economic Development Programs |
a) Creates a
preference within the Business and Industry Loan Program
for guaranteed loans for local and regional food processing and
distribution infrastructure; b) provides $20
million discretionary funding for a new Rural
Entrepreneurs and Micro-Enterprise Loan Program that offers
grants, loans, education and assistance to rural entrepreneurs;
c) authorizes Healthy Food Urban Enterprise Development
Program provides grants for feasibility studies for the
establishment of processing and distribution facilities; d)
establishes a new board to make planning and innovation grants
to certified Regional Investment Boards. |
Does not
include new proposed programs: a) Farm and Ranch
Profitability Program; b) Community-based Entrepreneurial
Development Program; or c) Rural Entrepreneurship,
Education and Enterprise Facilitation Program |
|
Inter-state Shipment of Meat |
Permits
states with meat inspections programs identical to Federal
regulations to ship meat and poultry products to other states.
|
The new
legislation would require state inspection programs to adopt the
exact standards (rather than “at least equal to) for inspection,
re-inspection, and sanitation currently found in federal law.
This raises concern for its impact on smaller-scale processors.
|
|
Dairy |
Extends the
MILC dairy payment program at current level. |
No proposed
increases in the production cap or target price. |
|
Specialty
Crops |
Creates new
Title: Horticulture and Organic Agriculture; allocates
total of $1.6 billion for specialty crops, including $215
million for research, $365 million over 5 years (mandatory)
for block grants to states, and $25 million for fresh produce
safety grants. |
|
Organic
|
Provides
mandatory $22 million/5 years for National Organic Cost
Share Program; minimum $15 million a year in
mandatory funding for Organic Agriculture Research and
Extension Initiative; authorizes Organic Conversion
Assistance Program at $50 million;
$3 million mandatory over 5
years for the Organic Production and Marketing Data
Collection program. |
|
|
Rural
Energy for America Program
|
Previously
named Renewable Energy and Energy Efficiency Program
(Section 9006) authorizes loans, loan guarantees, and grants to
purchase and install renewable energy systems and improve energy
efficiency. Increases mandatory funding to $500 million
over 5 years. Includes Forest Biomass for Energy to address
feedstock and other issues in use of woody biomass. .
|
|
|
Crop
Insurance |
Creates
process to improve coverage for organic producers.
|
No provision
to strengthen/reform Adjusted Gross Revenue (AGR and
AGR/Lite) insurance programs that provide insurance for
diversified farms; organic coverage issues not sufficiently
clarified. |
Other
|
a) Provides
beginning farmer loan program reforms; mandatory $15
milllion/year for Beginning Farmer and Rancher Development
Program); provides mandatory $15 million/ year for
socially disadvantaged farmers and ranchers (Section 2501);
requires assessing varying definitions of “rural” to
better target rural development funds. |
|
|
II. Conservation |
|
Program |
The good
|
The gaps
|
Environmental
Quality
Incentives Program |
Funding is
increased by $5.4 billion (42 percent) over the next 10 years,
and $1.9 billion (31 percent) over the next 5 years. |
|
|
Cooperative Conservation Partnership Initiative |
Creates new
program; proposes 90% of funding be awarded at the state level
(which fosters states’ ability to decide conservation
priorities). |
|
|
Conservation Security Program |
|
Funding
reduced by $4.8 billion over 10 years; no new sign-ups until
2012; significant program modifications (e.g., eliminates three
tiers and eliminates payments except for enhancement payments).
|
|
Farm and
Ranchland Protection Program (FRPP) |
Increased
to $300 million/year in mandatory funding; makes several
key reforms to program, including elimination of federal
property interest. |
Lack of
agreement on Federal-state process to determine impervious cover
limitations. |
|
Agricultural Management Assistance
|
Continues
AMA at $20 million/year in baseline mandatory funding
targeted to Northeast states; 50% distributed through NRCS, 40%
through RMA and 10% for organic cost-share. |
Funding for
organic cost-share still does not meet demand; additional
$20 million/year included in "contingency funding".
|
|
Regional
Equity |
Increased
from $12 million to $15 million/state/year. |
|
|
Conservation Innovation Grants
(CIG) |
Within EQIP,
provides increased funding for CIG, including $5
million/year Comprehensive Conservation Planning pilot
program for the Chesapeake Bay, and $5 million/year
for outreach to specialty crop and organic producers. |
|
|
Forestry
|
Includes $17
million in annual mandatory funding for Healthy Forests Reserve
Program (HFRP). |
Eliminates
Forest Land Enhancement Program which was funded at $100 million
mandatory in current farm bill. Does not include option
for permanent easements in HFRP. Does not include Community
Forest and Open Space Conservation Program.
|
|
Other |
Establishes
Regional Water Enhancement Program at
$60 million annually to address
water quality and quantity problems in targeted areas, including
the Chesapeake Bay. Provides for new Chesapeake Bay Program
for Nutrient Reduction and Sediment Control at $150 million
over five years.
Proposes $5
million/year for new Outreach Grants to Specialty Crop and
Organic Producers. |
|
|
III. Food and Nutrition |
|
Program |
The good |
The gaps |
|
Food
Stamps |
Increases
allocation to $4 billion over five years for food stamps and
other nutrition spending. Increases mandatory funding for The
Emergency Food Assistance Program (TEFAP) to $250 million per
year. |
Needs
additional $1.6 billion to fully fund nutrition safety net
improvements. |
|
Farmers
Market Promotion Program |
Increases to
$35 million in mandatory spending over 5 years; expands
renamed Farmers Marketing Assistance Program activities to
include use of EBT systems at markets. |
Proposed
funding level does not meet high demand for the program. |
|
Senior Farmers Market Nutrition Program
|
Increases to
$15 million/year mandatory funding, with $20-$75million
discretionary over the life of Farm Bill. |
|
|
Fresh
Fruit and Vegetable Programs
|
Increases to
$70 million per year and expands to all states for school
purchase of fruits and vegetables; increases to $75 million/year
for DOD Fresh Program; increases required expenditure for
fruits, vegetables and nuts through Section 32 purchasing.
|
|
|
Community
Food Projects
|
Provides $30
million/year discretionary, with expanded purposes.
|
Eliminates
mandatory funding ( at $5 million per year), which the
Program has had for the past ten years 2002-2007). |
|
Procurement and Geographic Preferences |
Allows
geographic/local preference and increased flexibility for USDA
food program purchasing as no-cost provision. |
|
|
Nutrition
Education |
Authorizes
new Nutrition Education and Promotion Initiative to Address
Obesity, a grants program at $10 million/year for five years. |
|
|
Other |
Recommends
that various federal agencies work together to assess "food
deserts" and develop recommendations to eliminate them. |
|
|