Here's a good way to lose an election: Raise the cost of food in the middle of an economic downturn. But key Democrats won't rule out doing that if they are at an impasse with President Bush on a new farm bill.
Congress has until March 15 to send Bush a farm bill that he will sign into law or else lawmakers will have to pass another extension to the 2002 farm bill. Without that extension, a permanent 1949 law takes effect that will require the U.S. Department of Agriculture to increase price supports for several commodities, including milk, corn and wheat.
The biggest impact on consumers would likely be in the dairy case. Under the 1949 law, farmers would be guaranteed at least $28 per hundred pounds for milk, a 40 percent increase over current market prices.
The law also would allow the government to restrict production of wheat and cotton.
The chairman of the House Agriculture Committee, Minnesota Democrat Collin Peterson, said the 1949 law would be so unpalatable to the Bush administration that he's considering allowing it to take effect if the president insists on vetoing whatever farm bill Congress sends him.
Peterson admitted that the White House believes he's bluffing.
"Is this leverage?" Peterson said recently. "Sure, but it's also something I'm willing to live with." He said he would rather activate the 1949 law than give the White House another short extension of the 2002 farm bill.
His Senate counterpart, Iowa Democrat Tom Harkin, said activating the 1949 law "is a real possibility" though he doesn't support the idea.
Harkin suggested Congress could adjust the subsidy rates in the 1949 law and wait for Bush to leave office. But he didn't explain how Congress could get changes to the 1949 law enacted if lawmakers can't get a new farm bill past Bush.
Ed Schafer, who took over as agriculture secretary last week, said he doesn't know whether Peterson is bluffing but that it would be a "very serious situation" if the 1949 law were to take effect. Schafer said the Agriculture Department is researching the law's potential impact.
The problem for Peterson and Harkin is that they have a limited amount of political leverage they can use against the White House, in part because commodity prices are so high that farm groups have not been clamoring for passage of a farm bill.
Most farm groups, including the American Farm Bureau Federation, have stayed out of the back and forth over the 1949 law.
Mary Kay Thatcher, a lobbyist for the American Farm Bureau Federation, is pessimistic about the chances of finishing the farm bill by March 15, given that there is no agreement on how to fund the bill. The administration has threatened to veto any bill that is funded through new tax revenue.
"It will be very difficult to get done by March 15, very difficult," she said.
It would be no easier for Democrats to explain why they raised the price of milk by 40 percent to keep from cutting the cost of a farm bill.Des Moines Register
