Negotiations over the potential costs of the farm bill continue with the House of Representatives sending a second proposal to senators over the weekend that would boost spending on the bill potentially up to $10 billion above the budget baseline over the next decade.
"It's my understanding that proposal was $8-$10 billion over the baseline," said Sen. Charles Grassley, R-Iowa, speaking to Midwest agricultural reporters Tuesday morning.
Talks about money have heated up in the past week after the House Agriculture Committee members offered a proposal to the Senate that was $6 billion above the farm-bill baseline costs over 10 years. The House proposal was backed by Bush administration officials who had agreed to the dollar figure. Senators countered on Friday with a proposal $12.3 billion above baseline. The Senate plan had backing of agricultural groups that balked at the original House proposal.
Grassley is a key player in the farm-bill talks as one of the designated Senate conference negotiators and also as a ranking member of the Senate Finance Committee. Given the way the talks have gone, Grassley said he expected the farm will would likely settle on a bill that would be about $9 billion above the budget baseline over 10 years. The baseline for the farm bill set by the Congressional Budget Office is $280 billion over five years and $597 billion over 10 years.
"I think it's real easy to compromise at $9 billion above benchmark," Grassley said.
Right now, a short-term extension of the 2002 farm bill is set to expire March 15. Grassley said Congress generally responds to such deadlines, and he doesn't think anyone wants to see agricultural policy revert back to the 1949 permanent law.
"Everybody's got a desire to get a bill done, and of course the March 15 deadline will keep everybody's feet to the fire," Grassley said.
Staffers for Senate Finance Committee Chairman Max Baucus, D-Mont., have held informal meetings with House Agriculture Committee Chairman Collin Peterson, D-Minn., to explain how the Finance Committee put together its tax package together.
"I am looking forward to more formal talks this week so we can continue to move forward," Grassley said.
April Slayton, a spokeswoman for Peterson, declined to confirm whether a specific counter-proposal had been offered by the House Agriculture Committee. Slayton did say she thought that there were ongoing "back and forth" talks. All talks are informal right now because the House and Senate are both on break for Presidents Day until next Monday.
Final figures on payment limits for commodity programs or income eligibility are not being discussed at the present time, Grassley said. Still, payment limits would likely be settled through informal talks instead of during official conference negotiation with the House. Changes to payment eligibility would likely not happen until a dollar figure on the farm bill is agreed to, he said.
"That's paramount to reach an agreement on that," Grassley said.
Other controversial items that will likely have to be settled through negotiations include the competition provisions for livestock in the Senate farm bill. Another proposal generating controversy and needing negotiations is the Bush administration's position that farmers should have to give up beneficial interest of their commodity when they lock in a price for a loan-deficiency payment, Grassley said.DTNAg
