 |
| Duane A. Lienemann Unl Extention Eduator, |
That last part raises concerns to me on options
for farmers wanting to exit from the average crop revenue protection program
(ACRE). Since the original rule was that a farm signed into ACRE must stay
enrolled in ACRE, does this extension force farmers to stay enrolled through
2013? Also the supplemental revenue assistance payments (SURE) status is
unclear at this time for 2012 and 2013. There are a lot of questions obviously
and wondering why we can’t have the usual 5 year plan. Let’s see if we can
dissect it and see what it does give us, or what it takes away, and perhaps why
the extension.
Unable to pass a new 2012 Farm Bill
because of disagreement over the level of government spending on food stamps
entitlement through the Supplemental Nutrition Assistance Program (SNAP) and
crop insurance, lawmakers gave the nod instead to extending certain measures of
the 2008 Farm Bill, which officially expired at the end of September, now will
be valid through September 30 of 2013. Much of the challenge from the extension
comes from a problem highlighted in the 2008 farm bill. There were 37 programs
in that legislation that didn't have a "budget baseline" to carry
forward after Sept. 30, 2012. The one exception is the Supplemental Revenue
Assistance Program, or SURE, which was not reauthorized.
Unfortunately, the Farm Bill extension
measure will provide only discretionary funding authority, no mandatory
spending, for a number of programs like: organic ag research and extension
initiative, specialty crop research initiative, beginning farmer and rancher
development program, and the SNAP employment and training programs, as well as
nutrition education and obesity prevention grant program. Many of those
programs were renewed, but without any money.
It seems that our livestock producers have
been neglected over the years by the farm bill. However, there may be some good
news for our livestock producers, but I wouldn’t hold my breath. It should be pointed out that disaster programs were
authorized in the bill, but get this – It is not with any mandatory
funding. Discretionary levels were set
with funding for certain programs that must come through the appropriations
process. Those programs include: $80 million for livestock indemnity payments;
$400 million for the livestock forage assistance program; $50 million for
emergency assistance for livestock, honeybees and fish farmers; and $20 million
for the tree assistance program. It did prevent dairy subsidies from reverting
to 1949 levels. Without the fix, the government would be required to buy milk,
driving up dairy prices to levels mandated by the 1949 law which would have doubled
milk prices to consumers when the current program ran out.
One thing that surprised me was that the
agreement reauthorizes direct payments for 2013, which most thought were
history. Farmers may also score some significant tax victories in legislation
designed to avert the fiscal cliff. Chief among them are provisions renewing
write-offs for equipment purchases and permanent exemptions that spare moderate
farm estates from federal tax. One major surprise was a renewal of Section 179
and bonus depreciation rules that have allowed higher-income farm operations to
shelter incomes in recent years. The bill extends 50% bonus depreciation
through the end of 2013. It also hikes Sec. 179 deductions to the old 2010/2011
level of $500,000 for 2012 and 2013. Without the change, Sec. 179 would have
been $139,000 for 2012 and reverted back to $25,000 in 2013.
But many people involved with farming,
ranching and agribusiness see the package as riddled with flaws, such as
cutting funding for specialty crops and organic provisions, and new important
programs for beginning farmers and ranchers, and failing to outright provide
money for much-needed disaster relief programs that have already expired.
Others point out that many smaller, targeted programs that invest in proven
strategies to create rural jobs, revitalize rural communities and initiatives
to foster a new generation of family farmers and ranchers were completely left
out of the final farm bill extension. The twelfth hour deal also prevents
farmers and ranchers from being able to improve soil and water conservation
through enrollment in 2013 in programs like Conservation Security Program, Grassland
Reserve Program, and Wetlands Reserve Program which are not reauthorized, even
though enrollment in CRP would be maintained at 32 million acres.
Many believe that this extension in many
ways is little more than a stop-gap
measure. A short-sighted, temporary fix
that ultimately provides inadequate solutions, leaves our farmers and ranchers
crippled by uncertainty, and fails to provide disaster aid for our livestock
farmers. It pushes agriculture aside instead of creating a comprehensive
five-year farm bill which farmers need to figure on business procedures, and
would have been better served. We are in the BCS Bowl season, but it seems more
to farmers that this Farm Bill is the current political football game that is
being played, at the expense of agriculture. I believe we will see a lot of posturing
and fighting over the next 9 months before we have a real bill!
The preceding information comes from the research and
personal observations of the writer which may or may not reflect the views of
UNL or UNL Extension. For more further information on these or other topics
contact D. A. Lienemann, UNL Extension Educator for Webster County in Red
Cloud, (402) 746-3417 or email to: dlienemann2@unl.edu or go to the
website at: http://www.webster.unl.edu/home
No comments:
Post a Comment